Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 52 a 55.

Communicating successfully in another language means shifting frames of reference, shifting norms, shifting assumptions of what can and cannot be said, what might be considered ambiguous, what should be explicit and what ought to remain tacit, and so on. In other words, using another language effectively involves more than vocabulary and structures; it involves thinking differently about language and communication.

The question is, how can we begin to understand another way of thinking, how can we be sensitized to different cultural frames, when we are in a classroom in Nebraska, Nairobi, or New South Wales? One answer, I will argue, is by reading, writing, and discussing texts. By examining the particular ways in which language is used to capture and express experiences, we not only learn a great deal about the conventions of the language, but can also begin to glimpse the beliefs and values that underlie the discourse.

The basic message is a simple one: academic language teaching must foster literacy, not only in terms of basic reading and writing skills, but also in terms of a broader discourse competence that involves the ability to interpret and critically evaluate a wide variety of written and spoken texts. Preparing students to communicate in multiple cultural contexts, both at home and abroad, means sensitizing them to discourse practices in other societies and to the ways those discourse practices both reflect and create cultural norms. I here argue that this kind of literacy is essential to real communicative ability in a language, and is therefore an indispensable goal in our efforts to prepare future generations for the challenges associated with the increased internationalization of many aspects of our society.

(Richard Kern, Literacy and language teaching. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 52 a 55.

Communicating successfully in another language means shifting frames of reference, shifting norms, shifting assumptions of what can and cannot be said, what might be considered ambiguous, what should be explicit and what ought to remain tacit, and so on. In other words, using another language effectively involves more than vocabulary and structures; it involves thinking differently about language and communication.

The question is, how can we begin to understand another way of thinking, how can we be sensitized to different cultural frames, when we are in a classroom in Nebraska, Nairobi, or New South Wales? One answer, I will argue, is by reading, writing, and discussing texts. By examining the particular ways in which language is used to capture and express experiences, we not only learn a great deal about the conventions of the language, but can also begin to glimpse the beliefs and values that underlie the discourse.

The basic message is a simple one: academic language teaching must foster literacy, not only in terms of basic reading and writing skills, but also in terms of a broader discourse competence that involves the ability to interpret and critically evaluate a wide variety of written and spoken texts. Preparing students to communicate in multiple cultural contexts, both at home and abroad, means sensitizing them to discourse practices in other societies and to the ways those discourse practices both reflect and create cultural norms. I here argue that this kind of literacy is essential to real communicative ability in a language, and is therefore an indispensable goal in our efforts to prepare future generations for the challenges associated with the increased internationalization of many aspects of our society.

(Richard Kern, Literacy and language teaching. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 52 a 55.

Communicating successfully in another language means shifting frames of reference, shifting norms, shifting assumptions of what can and cannot be said, what might be considered ambiguous, what should be explicit and what ought to remain tacit, and so on. In other words, using another language effectively involves more than vocabulary and structures; it involves thinking differently about language and communication.

The question is, how can we begin to understand another way of thinking, how can we be sensitized to different cultural frames, when we are in a classroom in Nebraska, Nairobi, or New South Wales? One answer, I will argue, is by reading, writing, and discussing texts. By examining the particular ways in which language is used to capture and express experiences, we not only learn a great deal about the conventions of the language, but can also begin to glimpse the beliefs and values that underlie the discourse.

The basic message is a simple one: academic language teaching must foster literacy, not only in terms of basic reading and writing skills, but also in terms of a broader discourse competence that involves the ability to interpret and critically evaluate a wide variety of written and spoken texts. Preparing students to communicate in multiple cultural contexts, both at home and abroad, means sensitizing them to discourse practices in other societies and to the ways those discourse practices both reflect and create cultural norms. I here argue that this kind of literacy is essential to real communicative ability in a language, and is therefore an indispensable goal in our efforts to prepare future generations for the challenges associated with the increased internationalization of many aspects of our society.

(Richard Kern, Literacy and language teaching. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 47 a 51.

The teaching of English as a Lingua Franca

An inexorable trend in the use of global English is that fewer interactions now involve a native speaker. Proponents of teaching English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) suggest that the way English is taught and assessed should reflect the needs and aspirations of the ever-growing number of non-native speakers who use English to communicate with other nonnatives. Understanding how non-native speakers use English among themselves has now become a serious research area.

Different priorities in teaching English pronunciation, for example, have been defined. Teaching certain pronunciation features, such as the articulation of ‘th’ as an interdental fricative, appears to be a waste of time whereas other common pronunciation problems (such as simplifying consonant clusters) contribute to problems of understanding. Such an approach is allowing researchers to identify a ‘Lingua Franca Core’ (LFC) which provides guiding principles in creating syllabuses and assessment materials.

Unlike traditional ESL (English as Second Language), ELF focuses also on pragmatic strategies required in intercultural communication. The target model of English, within the ELF framework, is not a native speaker but a fluent bilingual speaker, who retains a national identity in terms of accent, and who also has the special skills required to negotiate understanding with another non-native speaker. Research is also beginning to show how bad some native speakers are at using English for international communication. It may be that elements of an ELF syllabus could usefully be taught within a mother tongue curriculum.

(David Graddol, English Next. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 47 a 51.

The teaching of English as a Lingua Franca

An inexorable trend in the use of global English is that fewer interactions now involve a native speaker. Proponents of teaching English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) suggest that the way English is taught and assessed should reflect the needs and aspirations of the ever-growing number of non-native speakers who use English to communicate with other nonnatives. Understanding how non-native speakers use English among themselves has now become a serious research area.

Different priorities in teaching English pronunciation, for example, have been defined. Teaching certain pronunciation features, such as the articulation of ‘th’ as an interdental fricative, appears to be a waste of time whereas other common pronunciation problems (such as simplifying consonant clusters) contribute to problems of understanding. Such an approach is allowing researchers to identify a ‘Lingua Franca Core’ (LFC) which provides guiding principles in creating syllabuses and assessment materials.

Unlike traditional ESL (English as Second Language), ELF focuses also on pragmatic strategies required in intercultural communication. The target model of English, within the ELF framework, is not a native speaker but a fluent bilingual speaker, who retains a national identity in terms of accent, and who also has the special skills required to negotiate understanding with another non-native speaker. Research is also beginning to show how bad some native speakers are at using English for international communication. It may be that elements of an ELF syllabus could usefully be taught within a mother tongue curriculum.

(David Graddol, English Next. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 47 a 51.

The teaching of English as a Lingua Franca

An inexorable trend in the use of global English is that fewer interactions now involve a native speaker. Proponents of teaching English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) suggest that the way English is taught and assessed should reflect the needs and aspirations of the ever-growing number of non-native speakers who use English to communicate with other nonnatives. Understanding how non-native speakers use English among themselves has now become a serious research area.

Different priorities in teaching English pronunciation, for example, have been defined. Teaching certain pronunciation features, such as the articulation of ‘th’ as an interdental fricative, appears to be a waste of time whereas other common pronunciation problems (such as simplifying consonant clusters) contribute to problems of understanding. Such an approach is allowing researchers to identify a ‘Lingua Franca Core’ (LFC) which provides guiding principles in creating syllabuses and assessment materials.

Unlike traditional ESL (English as Second Language), ELF focuses also on pragmatic strategies required in intercultural communication. The target model of English, within the ELF framework, is not a native speaker but a fluent bilingual speaker, who retains a national identity in terms of accent, and who also has the special skills required to negotiate understanding with another non-native speaker. Research is also beginning to show how bad some native speakers are at using English for international communication. It may be that elements of an ELF syllabus could usefully be taught within a mother tongue curriculum.

(David Graddol, English Next. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 47 a 51.

The teaching of English as a Lingua Franca

An inexorable trend in the use of global English is that fewer interactions now involve a native speaker. Proponents of teaching English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) suggest that the way English is taught and assessed should reflect the needs and aspirations of the ever-growing number of non-native speakers who use English to communicate with other nonnatives. Understanding how non-native speakers use English among themselves has now become a serious research area.

Different priorities in teaching English pronunciation, for example, have been defined. Teaching certain pronunciation features, such as the articulation of ‘th’ as an interdental fricative, appears to be a waste of time whereas other common pronunciation problems (such as simplifying consonant clusters) contribute to problems of understanding. Such an approach is allowing researchers to identify a ‘Lingua Franca Core’ (LFC) which provides guiding principles in creating syllabuses and assessment materials.

Unlike traditional ESL (English as Second Language), ELF focuses also on pragmatic strategies required in intercultural communication. The target model of English, within the ELF framework, is not a native speaker but a fluent bilingual speaker, who retains a national identity in terms of accent, and who also has the special skills required to negotiate understanding with another non-native speaker. Research is also beginning to show how bad some native speakers are at using English for international communication. It may be that elements of an ELF syllabus could usefully be taught within a mother tongue curriculum.

(David Graddol, English Next. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 43 a 46.

English as a Lingua Franca

A number of researchers have studied conversations in English as a Lingua Franca and have noted a number of somewhat surprising characteristics, including:

• Non-use of third person present simple tense -s (She look very sad).

• Interchangeable use of the relative pronouns who and which (a book who, a boy which).

• Omission of articles where they are mandatory in native-speaker English.

• Increasing of redundancy by adding “inexistent” prepositions (We have to study about…, The article treats of…).

• Pluralisation of nouns which are considered uncountable in native-speaker English (informations, staffs).

The evidence suggests that non-native speakers are not conforming to a native English standard. Indeed they seem to get along perfectly well despite the fact that they miss things out and put things in which they ‘should not do’. Not only this, but they are actually better at ‘accommodating’ - that is, negotiating shared meaning through helping each other in a more cooperative way - than, it is suggested, native speakers are when talking to second language speakers (Jenkins 2004). In other words, non-native speakers seem to be better at ELF communication than native speakers are.

(Jeremy Harmer, The practice of English language teaching. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 43 a 46.

English as a Lingua Franca

A number of researchers have studied conversations in English as a Lingua Franca and have noted a number of somewhat surprising characteristics, including:

• Non-use of third person present simple tense -s (She look very sad).

• Interchangeable use of the relative pronouns who and which (a book who, a boy which).

• Omission of articles where they are mandatory in native-speaker English.

• Increasing of redundancy by adding “inexistent” prepositions (We have to study about…, The article treats of…).

• Pluralisation of nouns which are considered uncountable in native-speaker English (informations, staffs).

The evidence suggests that non-native speakers are not conforming to a native English standard. Indeed they seem to get along perfectly well despite the fact that they miss things out and put things in which they ‘should not do’. Not only this, but they are actually better at ‘accommodating’ - that is, negotiating shared meaning through helping each other in a more cooperative way - than, it is suggested, native speakers are when talking to second language speakers (Jenkins 2004). In other words, non-native speakers seem to be better at ELF communication than native speakers are.

(Jeremy Harmer, The practice of English language teaching. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 43 a 46.

English as a Lingua Franca

A number of researchers have studied conversations in English as a Lingua Franca and have noted a number of somewhat surprising characteristics, including:

• Non-use of third person present simple tense -s (She look very sad).

• Interchangeable use of the relative pronouns who and which (a book who, a boy which).

• Omission of articles where they are mandatory in native-speaker English.

• Increasing of redundancy by adding “inexistent” prepositions (We have to study about…, The article treats of…).

• Pluralisation of nouns which are considered uncountable in native-speaker English (informations, staffs).

The evidence suggests that non-native speakers are not conforming to a native English standard. Indeed they seem to get along perfectly well despite the fact that they miss things out and put things in which they ‘should not do’. Not only this, but they are actually better at ‘accommodating’ - that is, negotiating shared meaning through helping each other in a more cooperative way - than, it is suggested, native speakers are when talking to second language speakers (Jenkins 2004). In other words, non-native speakers seem to be better at ELF communication than native speakers are.

(Jeremy Harmer, The practice of English language teaching. Adaptado)