ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics - Volume 161, Issue 1, 2011

This paper investigates how foreign language learners use discourse markers (such as so, well, you know, I mean) in English speech. These small words that do not contribute much, if anything at all, to the propositional content of a message but modify it in subtle ways, are often considered among the last elements acquired in a foreign language. This contribution reports on close scrutiny of a corpus of English-spoken interviews with Belgian native speakers of Dutch, half of whom are undergraduates majoring in Commercial Sciences and half of whom are majoring in English Linguistics, and sets it off against a comparable native speaker corpus. The investigation shows that the language learners exhibit a clear preference for “operative discourse markers” and neglect or avoid “involvement discourse markers”. It is argued that in learner speech the former take on functions typically fulfilled by the latter to a greater extent than in native speech, and that in some cases the learners revert to a code-switching strategy to cater for their pragmatic needs, bringing markers from Dutch into their English speech. Finally, questions are raised as to the place of such pragmatic devices in foreign language learning.

As today’s students need to be motivated by “triggers and rewards” to acquire new contents, and 80% of the structures learnt are lost in less than 24 hours, learners need to encounter newly taught structures several times in a relatively short time span, in various ways and al ways in significant and different contexts (Gijselaers, 2007; Cervero & Pichardo Castro, 2000; Schmitt, 2000). In other words, learning materials should “trigger” language learning by repeating the new structures several times in different contexts in a short time span.

However, many course books do not apply these principles (Maciel, 1997; Veraghtert, 2004), and neither do the course materials we analysed in the context of the present study (Buyse, 2008).

In this paper, we will clarify these principles and their possible effect on vocabulary and grammar acquisition by presenting their implementation in a number of LSP courses and their correlation with student performances.

This paper reports on a field study of language needs in a rather extreme area of contemporary business communication, i.e. between the Dutch-speaking Low Countries and mainland China. Interviews within the Dutch-speaking business community dealing with China, as well as case-study research in Flemish and Dutch small-and-medium-sized enterprises have yielded a model of the business sequence within this particular trade setting. The paper highlights language-specific requirements in each phase of that sequence, drawing attention to the role of written and spoken language, culture, Chinese, English and the translation from one into the other. However, an additional form of discourse has come to the forefront. I will zoom in on this key language, which in simplistic terms is all too frequently labelled as being English, and surmise that it has turned into an asset for business communication rather than a source of misunderstanding. Although this paper is not intended to be normative, it equally commands attention with respect to language situations in the area of business, which supposedly condition didactic issues, by considering varying language and cultural features, discussed in the light of tuition policies.

Cross-cultural studies (Hofstede, 1984, 1991, 2001; Hall, 1959, 1976) posit that Mexico is a more collectivistic and high context culture than the United States of America and therefore it could be claimed that Mexicans will communicate and perceive professional communication in a different way than US Americans. In contrast, professional communication and social (psychology) studies argue that in order to communicate in a truly intercultural way it is necessary to go beyond the frame of cultural dimensions, since shared professional and educational frameworks could override the impact of cultural differences in professional settings. While empirical evidence so far has shown mixed results, the results of this article provide additional evidence to support the view that the two cited cultural dimensions have been overridden, since the Mexican (N=280) and US American (N=300) student samples showed a rather similar perception of professional dialogues in a monocultural as well as in an intercultural communication setting. A shared framework of knowledge and skills, the impact of the new media and technologies, the virtual and real intercultural encounters between Mexicans and US Americans, their shared educational level, and the fact that nearly all of the Mexican participants reported to speak English as a foreign language and that a majority of the US American participants reported to speak Spanish as a foreign language, could explain, at least for the studied samples, the observed convergence.

With the advent of the Bologna reforms, English-medium education has become increasingly popular in economics and business studies. This paper is a work-in-progress report of the authors’ PhD projects, which both focus on English-taught programmes at Austrian business faculties. In the first section the studies are placed in a broader research context by identifying external forces that have triggered the rise of English-medium instruction in the European higher education context. This includes a discussion of how the Bologna reforms paved the way for more content teaching through a non-domestic language and why this language is usually English. Subsequently, a conceptual framework for this teaching approach is proposed and the question is addressed as to which term is most appropriate for this particular setting: CLIL, EMI or ICLHE? Based on these considerations, the different varieties of English-medium teaching at university and their underlying criteria are identified. Moreover, the research questions and strategies aimed at contributing to a clearer and more nuanced understanding of English-taught business education are outlined. The final section concludes with targeted outcomes and demonstrates the practical relevance of the anticipated results.

Increasingly, English is becoming the dominant language of business education. The reasons are well known: internationalization, globalization, and the desire to prepare students for the business environment in the coming decades. This paper speculates about the impact of English-medium instruction in business education on the nature of English proficiency, the nature of the content learned, and the perspective for business practice. Firstly, students can learn content effectively through a foreign language, and have been doing so for centuries. However, with English-medium instruction in a non-English-speaking environment, the growth in language competences in English may rather lie in specific skills, with the acceptance of ‘fossilized’ language use, reduced accuracy and less nuanced communication, even if CLIL approaches are adopted. Secondly, regarding the impact on content learning, it is possible that the learning itself may be relatively unaffected, but if both students and staff have a less accurate and less nuanced competence in English, the expressive competences may be affected. Thirdly, a language imposes its own perspectives on the world. Business education through the medium of English may engender an English filter on students’ perspectives on business practices and communication. This paper suggests that this matters.