This article is © Copyright 1999 Pilgrims Ltd.  The copyright owners reserve all rights to its reproduction

The ‘Bridging Strategy’: Active Use of Learners’ First Language in Second Language Teaching

By Isamu Murakami
MA Student, University of Durham
isamu.murakami@durham.ac.uk

Since I work as a non-native teacher of English in Japan, I am sometimes asked, “How much of the time do you speak English in the classroom?” or “How often do you speak Japanese in the classroom?” When I say, in answer to these questions, “I frequently use Japanese in the class room”, the responses that they give tend to be “You should try harder”, or even “Oh, no!” Also, I have heard many times language teachers in the classroom saying to the students, “Don’t speak Japanese. Speak English” or, “Japanese is not allowed in this room.” It appears that the underlying assumption behind them is ‘the less L1, the better’. I am strongly against this notion.
Although the direct methods by teachers who are native speakers of English is spreading wider than before, it is still the case that majority of second language teaching is carried by non-native teachers. In most of the cases, in public foreign language education, students in a class are monolingual and the teacher is a non-native speaker of the target language who shears the same L1 with the students. If this is the situation in which most teachers should work, we should assume this situation not as a disadvantage but as an advantage.
The fact that a teacher shares the same L1 with the students means that s/he can use it as a resource to conduct classroom teaching. Rather than abandoning the L1, as a hindrance which interferes with students’ language learning, we should try to find ways to make use of it. I would like to argue that better language learning in the EFL context can be and should be promoted by ‘bridging’ the gap between their L1 and L2, deliberately using students’ L1 as a positive resource.
It seems to me that people have been trying to apply notions arisen from the ESL central-countries to EFL peripheral-countries unrealistically, without taking into account the conditional differences existing between them. It is improper to assume that methodologies developed in the ESL context will automatically fit into an EFL situation. Language teaching methodologies in EFL conditions should be considered in their own right, and productive approaches that suit their own environment must be established, rather than accepting whatever trendy notion from the centre of the English teaching circle.
Moreover, when we think of the purpose of second language learning, abandoning students’ L1 is not only impractical but also false. Since people’s mother tongue plays a crucial role in establishing their identity, it should be neither neglected nor subordinated to any other language.
Bridging is not the way to go back to traditional Grammar-Translation Method. Use of native language should not be an excuse for not using much target language in the classroom. Bridging is rather the way towards more ‘humanistic’ language teaching, which respects learners’ mother tongue and their background culture. The ultimate goal of this approach will not to produce many ‘fake native speakers’, but to promote learners’ ability to drive the target language on the basis of their L1 identity. The skill that students in the EFL context should develop is the ability to use the target language with their L1, not without it.

2. The native speaker syndrome

As teachers’ job is to support students, we naturally have to know what our students are trying to achieve. One very commonly held belief is that a native speaker is the ideal model that language learners should aim at. This phenomenon could be termed ‘native speaker syndrome’ and it has been so powerful that it had until recently hardly ever become a source of concern.
	The dominance of the native speaker syndrome is obvious. Overt and covert evidence for this can be seen very easily. A great amount of literature concerning language teaching uses terms like “native-speaker competence”, “native-like proficiency”, or “near-native”, implying that native speakers are the target models that learners should become closer to. It is just matter of course for many teachers that the learner should aims at emulating a native speaker.
To take an example, the Japanese government started the JET Program in 1988 and it now employs about 4,500 native speakers every year, mostly from English speaking countries (99.7%) with a few exceptions from France and Germany (Ministry of Foreign Affairs 1997). It appears that the JET participant is ‘licensed’ as a language teacher by being a native speaker of English
However, this native speaker syndrome has been recently questioned. Cook (1999: 185) claims that second language teaching should stop aiming for native speakers and should stop considering L2 learners as ‘deficient native speakers’. He argues that L2 users should be viewed in their own right and that language learning would benefit from paying more attention to the L2 user rather than concentrating primarily on the native speaker, from deliberately using the students’ L1 in teaching activities and from having a positive image of L2 users.
The approaches concerned with primarily native-like performance tend to have the tenet that English is best taught ‘monolingually’. The intention behind this tenet is to encourage the learner to become closer to the native speaker of English through interaction solely in the target language, banning students’ L1 use in the classroom.
If becoming like a native speaker is the ultimate goal of second language learning, it is probably true that these monolingual approaches carried out by native speakers of English are the ideal model of language teaching. However, the most important point we should consider here is that, If, as the result of language education, all students start to speak English like native speakers and act like native speakers of English or even if they think that they have to, it is a total failure of foreign language education.
Especially, in many countries now, the learning of English is not based on the student’s decision or will but on their ‘duty’. In an EFL context, students basically have no choice but to learn English as their second language. Schumann’s Acculturation Model predicts that if a group of L2 learners thinks of itself as superior or inferior to the target language speakers, they will not learn the language very well (Schumann 1978). What often happens in the EFL context is that the learner sees English as something superior to their own language and feels it is something s/he has to, but cannot, reach. This, on the one hand, creates a few disparate learners who try to become as close to English native speakers as possible but, on the other hand, creates a strong ‘mental block’ for the majority of learners. The fact that they cannot become what they have to be makes them feel that they are some kind of ‘failure’. Unless we remove this ‘inferiority complex’, productive second language is not likely to emerge. Many teachers just do not understand this fact and take it for granted that students have to and want to learn English.
Under these circumstances, imposing the native speaker norm onto the student is simply overwhelming. It is this notion of imposing an unattainable goal onto the language learner that is preventing their learning. As Cook mentions:

“If students and teachers see L2 learning as a battle that they are fated never to win, little wonder they become dispirited and give up. L2 learners’ battle to become native speakers is lost before it has begun.” (Cook 1999: 204)

3. English as a Global Language

English is unique in many aspects. No other language has achieved the status that English now has. The point is not whether this English expansion is good or bad but the fact that a ‘vehicle’ that enables international communication is now highly required and necessary. If we did not have English, then we would definitely need another language to fill its place. The question we have to ask here is not which language should be the world language but in what way this international language should be taught.
Recognising the reality that most existing languages are dying out in the shadow of globalisation, it is obviously not the case that all people who use the world language should adapt to the norms of the region from where the host country’s language originally comes. Expansion of a world language should not be the crusader that destroys local cultures and languages. Rather, “English as a foreign or second language should work alongside local languages and culture in harmony” (Prodromou 1999: 4). 
If one purpose of English language teaching is to create a ‘vehicle’ for extra-national contact without threatening the local culture and language, then ‘international intelligibility’ is prior to ‘native-likeness’. The native speakers’ language is not necessarily the most intelligible as an international language. Considering the fact there will be far more L2 users of English than L1 English speakers, it is very likely to happen in the near future that native speakers of English will have to learn how to speak an internationally intelligible English, which is quite different from the original, for the purpose of extra-national communication.
Another thing that language teaching in the 21st century should provide is the insight of cultural relativity. Rather than imposing the target culture as something students need to attain, language learner can realise that neither the target culture nor their own culture is a rational invention through learning a foreign language in comparison with their own mother tongue. While they are finding out what the target language is like, they will also find what their own language and culture are. They can learn the fact that culture is a social convention rather than the absolute truth. They can learn the fact that there are lots of more possibilities to their society and to their thinking. This awareness will foster their tolerance towards cultural diversity, and in this sense second language learning can really be an ‘eye opener’.
The expansion of English as a global language is hard to resist. Therefore, language teachers must be highly sensitive about the methodology to teach the language. People, especially foreign language teachers, can easily become ‘linguisists’ without being aware that they are. It is just like many people were ‘racist’ without any awareness or intention. There is no doubt in the 21st century that the world will continue to become smaller and smaller. To cope with this situation, we must either create a universally standardised conception to which everyone has to stick to, or foster a good deal of tolerance of uncertainty (Grundy 2000). I strongly believe that the latter is more productive and healthy, and, hence, is the way we should go.

4. Sample Exercises

What follows are sample exercises of Bridging, which involve both learners’ L1 and L2.

Sample exercise 1
	Double-line reading (or listening)	
Preparation	Prepare a reading (or listening) material both in L1 and L2.
	
Procedure	1.	Start with the L1 version. Ask students to read the material and discuss in L1
2.	Collect the L1-material and provide the L2 version.
3.	Ask them to read the same content, this time in L2.
4.	Let students discuss the content in L2.
5.	Help students if necessary, using CLL technique*.

*CLL technique = a method used in Community Language Learning (Curran 1976): (1) a student says what s/he wants to say in L1: (2) the teacher alter it to L2: (3) the students repeat it.

Sample exercise 2
	Bilingual video	
Preparation	Nowadays, mass media often provides bilingual programs and films whose commentary you can freely change from one language to another. Find one and record it.	
Procedure	1.	Watch the video in the class first in L1.
2.	Switch the voice and show the same video this time in L2.
3.	Do some questions-answers.
4.	Turn the TV back to front. Provide the L2 sound only, asking students to imagine the picture.
5.	Turn off the volume and provide the picture only, asking them to imagine the voice.
6.	Discuss in L2 what they have learned.
7.	Help students if necessary, using CLL technique.
8.	Encourage students to practice this with a TV at home.

Sample exercise 3
	Inter-lingual debate	
Preparation	Prepare a controversial topic to promote a debate.	
Procedure	1.	Make two groups to conduct a debate about the topic.
2.	Tell one group to support a certain position toward the topic and tell the other group to support the opposite position.
3.	Allow one group to speak the L1 to express their opinion. Allow L2 for the other group.
4.	Debate.
5.	In the middle of the debate, change the language of each group.
6.	Debate again.
7.	Discuss the situation of the L2 speaker and the feeling of not being able to express fully what they want to say.

Sample exercise 4
	Embodied expressions	
Preparation	Prepare some computers on which students can work, if they are available. If not, use dictionaries.	
Procedure	1.	Make groups and let them work on a corpus. Ask them to find some expressions which include a part of the human body – for instance “from hand to mouth” – both in L1 and L2.
2.	Let them compare L1 expressions and L2 expressions and see how they are similar and different.
3.	Discuss where these similarities and differences originate.

Sample exercise 5
	What we don’t have	
Preparation	Same as sample exercise 4.	
Procedure	1.	Work with students and find L2 words which students cannot find an equivalent word in their L1.
2.	Discuss why there is not an equivalent. 

Sample exercise 6
	Inter-cultural sales engineer	
Preparation	Record an advertisement from domestic TV.	
Procedure	1.	Watch the ad with the whole class in L1.
2.	Make groups.
3.	Ask the groups to dub the commercial in L2; not to translate the actual sentences but to sell the product abroad.
4.	Ask each group to demonstrate their idea with the picture of the advertisement.
5.	After seeing every group’s work, discuss which ad will sell the product best and why.	

Sample exercise 7
	Information Transfer	
Preparation	None	
Procedure	1.	Make pairs.
2.	Ask one student from each pair to draw a picture.
3.	Ask the students to convey the information from the pictures in their L1.
4.	Ask the other students of the pairs to draw a picture according to what their partner said.
5.	Tell students to compare the two drawings and see how much information has been transmitted.
6.	Try the same procedure in L2.
7.	Discuss what they found with the whole class.	

Sample exercise 8
	Bilingual Diary	
Preparation	Ask students to prepare a notebook for keeping a ‘learning diary’.	
Procedure	1.	Ask students to write the first entry about their language learning in 5sentences. 
2.	Encourage students to use at least one L2 word in the 5 sentences.
3.	Collect the diaries and respond to them in the same style or with a little more L2.
4.	Gradually increase the amount of L2, from one word to two words, three words, then one sentence, two sentences, three sentences and so on.
5.	Increase the amount of the L2 in your response.
6.	Finally all sentences will be in L2; then encourage students to write more than 5 sentences.
7.	If you are a native speaker of L2, not L1, respond to the students in the opposite fashion. Use one word of the student’s L1 at first and gradually increase the amount of L1 as you learn it. Eventually your entry will be entirely in their L1.	
5. Conclusion

The native speaker model is and will continue to exert a strong ‘authority’ in language teaching circles. But I would like to argue that it is more important for students to be proud of what they are and what they do. In the Bridging Strategy the teacher and students together make many mistakes and non-native like utterances. It is not a failure that they do not speak English the same way as a native speaker does. It merely means they are different. The will to be different is more precious than being close to the authority. The Bridging students may not achieve a high score in a TOEFL examination since they do not learn the correct language. Instead, they learn the will to go with mistakes, the will to deviate, and the will to love themselves.
The Bridging Strategy is for teachers who work in monolingual background foreign language teaching situation. It can apply to both non-native speaker teachers who share the same L1 as the students and native speaker teachers who are willing to learn their students’ L1. It is much easier for those who speak the target language as their mother tongue to just stick to using the target language and believe it is the ideal methodology. However, such teachers certainly maintain attitudes that demotivate students.
Language teachers must not simplistically focus on learners’ target language acquisition. A good language teaching is not merely a way to produce many native-like English speakers but a way that promotes better individuals, better societies and a better world. This may sound impossible and too much for language teaching; however, a good second language teaching will promote learners who can stand in the international, intercultural, interracial societies which are emerging in this century. Through helping the learner to become a more flexible, open-minded, self-aware, autonomous individual, it will promote better relationships among people, better societies, better nations, and indeed a better world. A better world will be created not by military forces, dogmatic cannons, political agreements or highly developed technologies but by each individual’s better understanding of ‘self’. In this sense, I personally believe “language” has the power to change the world.
Next sentence is a line extracted from a film called Dead Poets’ Society:

"No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world."

References

Cook, V. (1999). Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL 	Quarterly, 33: n2: 186-209

Curran, C. (1976). Counseling-Learning in Second Languages. Apple River, Ill.: 	Apple river Press.

Grundy, P. (1999). Meanings of an EFL so-called applied linguist on the role of 	anxiety in ‘The good, the bad and the loony’ debate. IATEFL TT SIG 	Newsletter, Issue 3: 23-25.

Prodomou, L. (1999). The great globe itself: Shakespeare, ELT and global issues. 	IATEFL Issues, October-November: 2-5.

Schumann, J.H.  (1978). The acculturation model of second language acquisition. In 	R. C. Gingras (Ed.) Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language 	Teaching. Arlington: Center for Applied Linguistics.