Teaching languages for specific purposes: perceptions, methodological perspectives, practical issues and challenges

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Teaching languages for specific purposes: perceptions, methodological perspectives, practical issues and challenges

Mario Pace, PhD, Associate Professor,

University of Malta

Abstract

Key words: LSP, needs analysis, adult learners, specificity, methodological perspectives.

НАВЧАННЯ МОВ ДЛЯ ОСОБЛИВИХ ЦІЛЕЙ: СПРИЙМАННЯ, МЕТОДИЧНІ ПЕРСПЕКТИВИ,ПРАКТИЧНІ ПИТАННЯ ТА ВИКЛИКИ М. Пейс

Анотація. Мовні навички стають все більш важливими в організаціях та бізнесі, які хочуть бути конкурентоспроможними на міжнародному рівні. Оволодіння іноземними мовами вважається не просто чудовим інструментом подолання прогалин комунікації між людьми з різних країн та створення міцних професійних відносин, а перш за все інструментом, що дозволяє працівникам значно покращити свої кар'єрні перспективи. Знання того, як користуватися мовою в конкретних обставинах та цілях, дає людям дуже сильну переговорну силу, особливо у світі праці. Якщо до двадцяти або тридцяти років тому спілкування іноземною мовою була важливою передумовою для небагатьох, наприклад, менеджерів чи дипломатів, то сьогодні вона набула принципового значення у всіх професійних колах. Насправді в сучасному європейському суспільстві іноземні мови та міжкультура відіграють фундаментальну роль у знайомстві з різними людьми, особливо в професійному та економічному розвитку. Це пояснює, чому сьогодні існує потреба урізноманітнити ринок мовної підготовки курсами фахових іноземних мов, будь то для туризму, для кол-центрів, бізнесу тощо, зосередившись на набутті необхідних термінологічних, міждисциплінарних та міжкультурних навичок, необхідних для конкретних робочих місць. Такі курси передбачають задоволення безпосередніх і дуже специфічних потреб студентів, які мають рушійну силу як на етапі підготовки, так і на етапі розвитку, аналіз їхніх потреб. З точки зору впровадження та методології, такі курси повинні бути повністю орієнтованими на студентів, практичними і, перш за все, застосовуватися до професійного контексту, забезпечуючи методи навчання, викладання та оцінки базових навичок чи вмінь, а не просто відповідно до особливих потреб студентів; вони також повинні відповідати специфічним вимогам професійної сфери. Це, очевидно, представляє низку проблем, які потрібно обговорити та проаналізувати як з точки зору викладачів, так і студентів.

Ключові слова: термінологія, фахові мови, фахові курси, студенто-орієнтованість, основні вміння та навички, сфера професійної діяльності.

Introduction and literature review

Over the past years, Languages for Specific Purposes (LSP) courses have grown to become one of the most prominent areas of language teaching. Such a development is not only reflected in the increasing number of universities offering post graduate degrees in LSP and in the number of such courses offered around the globe, but also by the publication of well-established international academic journals dedicated to LSP discussion as well as the organization of International conferences focusing on the latest developments and the changing scenarios of the subject in question. One of the main motives for this is the fact that today we are living in a globalized economy and consequently many people have highly specific academic and professional reasons for seeking to improve their proficiency in a foreign language in order to meet diverse communication needs. This transition towards a knowledge-based economy, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion has brought about new challenges to the development of human resources. Economic and social developments in many countries across the globe over the last decades have increasingly underlined the need for a major overhaul in professional education and training. The rapidity of technological and social change, the dramatic shifts from agrarian or industrial eras to the knowledge era and beyond, accompanied by equally dramatic changes in the nature and structure of work, have impacted on countries and economies across the world. They have placed new broad-ranging demands upon technical and vocational education to better meet the increasingly complex training needs of industry, individual learners and other key stakeholders. This has led to a greater demand for courses in LSP focusing on developing learners' communicative competence in a specific academic or practical field, be it law, natural science, technology, engineering, finance, tourism, and so forth. This is further corroborated by the fact that the occupational field is singled out as one of the major fields for language use in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR).

In response to this rapidly changing global marketplace, most countries recognize, more than ever before, the importance of a highly skilled, multilingual workforce. Expanding international connections in countless occupational sectors and in society at large have made knowledge of foreign languages ever so important. Foreign languages are no longer considered merely an ingredient of general education but have become a prerequisite for international communication and mobility in education, on the job, and in business. Indeed, in today's labour world, mastery in foreign languages is considered not just an excellent tool to bridge gaps but above all an instrument that enables workers to considerably improve their career prospects with several studies showing a very close connection between proficiency in languages and employability. Yet, notwithstanding the fact that today the importance of language competences for access to the labour market is undisputed, language teaching and learning for specific purposes is still a sensitive and delicate subject. The main reason for this is that due to the infinite range of language competences required in occupational contexts, varying from general competences to specialized ones, from transversal competences that cut across several trades, to those bound up with situations of occupational communication, etc, there is the risk that LSP courses end up being too generic in scope and not specific enough to the needs of the learners.

Defining LSP

This is exactly why, every time I am asked about the teaching and learning of languages for specific purposes, a multitude of questions cross my mind. And if I were to ask teachers, learners, curriculum developers, to describe briefly what they understand with the term languages for specific purposes, I am sure that most of them, if not all, would give me a different definition. At first this might seem strange and some might also argue that this is a farfetched hypothesis. However, if we were to think about it, we will soon realise that there are various and distinct aspects that might determine the way we look at the term. These include, among others, any perceptions one might have of the subject, various methodological perspectives as well as the theoretical basis made for any methodological decisions taken during the preparation of some particular course, personal experiences, issues of a practical nature, challenges and difficulties to be faced and overcome, and so on and so forth. The main reason for such a diverse spectrum of viewpoints and opinions is that the majority of the learners who opt to follow courses in languages for specific purposes are not after the acquisition of the knowledge of language skills for general communication use but have specific and sometimes immediate language needs, with the aim of developing their communicative competence in a specific academic or practical field.

So maybe the first thing we need to determine is what we understand with the term Language courses for specific purposes. According to Trace, Hudson, and Brown (2015; 2) “Language for specific purposes (LSP) courses are those in which the methodology, the content, the objectives, the materials, the teaching, and the assessment practices all stem from specific, target language uses based on an identified set of specialized needs”. Hutchinson and Waters (1987)believe that such courses imply an approach rather than a product - meaning that such language courses do not involve a particular kind of language, teaching material or methodology. On her part Long (2017) states that such courses provide curricular models for language programs that build practical language skills specific to a profession or field while Kastberg (2018) refers to them as instruments for communicating knowledge. Balboni (2000) , on his part, describes a language for specific purposes as a linguistic variety used in scientific and professional sectors with the objective of helping anyone belonging to that particular sector to communicate in the least ambiguous manner possible whereas Galova (2007; viii) states that “globalization of the world economy requires professionals and specialists in various areas to communicate effectively in foreign languages. The success is conditional on their ability to manage language and cultural barriers, i.e. on the language skills and competences with respect to their professional areas”.

It is evident from these definitions that language courses for specific purposes can be quite complex in nature, highly demanding to plan and develop, and challenging to deliver. In fact, if we were to dissect the acronym LSP, we can get a clearer picture of what it entails and what it stands for. It is made up of three components, the third of which is “purpose”. This is key to success with such courses, given that we need to understand the purpose of the course, the reason why learners have decided or have chosen to follow such a course. To do this we need to ask ourselves: Why did these learners choose to come to this course? What are the expected or desired learning outcomes of such a course? What is the target situation? The term “purpose” also refers to the `how'. How can I help these learners reach the target situation? How can I support them to reach the projected learning outcomes? Now to be able to answer such questions I need to analyze the needs of the learners. This means that the driving force, both at the preparation stage as well as in the development stage of such courses should be a needs analysis of the learners who might need the course for work purposes, for travel purposes, for personal enrichment purposes, and so on. For this reason, the starting point should always be an analysis of the learners' needs, objectives and expectations for the course. This includes forming a list of preferences of what the learners want and need to learn, as far as language and content are concerned, and of how they would like to learn them. This is by no means an easy task given that in the same group individuals may vary considerably in age, education level, motivation, aptitude for languages, learning difficulties, work experience, opinions, self-discipline, etc. It therefore includes getting to know their knowledge and proficiency in the language, their past work experiences (especially in countries where the target language is spoken), their expectations from the course together with any expectations from the part of their employer or sponsor, as well as their cultural and linguistic backgrounds.

In actual fact, as Basturkmen (2010) points out, the needs analysis in LSP courses usually refers to an entire course development process, in which the language and skills that the learners will use in their target professional or vocational workplace are identified and considered in relation to the present state of knowledge of the learners, their perceptions of their needs and the practical possibilities and constraints of the teaching context. Such information is then used in determining and refining the content and method of the LSP course. The needs analysis process involves a number of steps, namely, (i) analyzing the target situation in order to identify what should the learners ideally know and for which tasks and situations the target language will be used; (ii) analyzing the discourse to be used in such situations; (iii) analyzing the learners' linguistic current situation; (iv) analyzing any learner factors that might help or hinder the learning process, like levels of motivation, perceptions they might have etc; (v) analyzing the teaching context to identify any factors that might affect the course, like whether it will be in-house, the number of participants, time frames, etc.

This can be done in various ways. The most common method would be an interview or a questionnaire, but it could also be done by means of a check list, by means of a meeting or a series of meetings with the employees, the employer and the sponsor prior to the start of the course, or else by means of a writing task or an initial test. Observation skills are also fundamental at this stage. The teacher needs to watch out for any particular behavior or action that might be indicative of the learner's motivation or the lack of it in class. I consider this stage as fundamental since the needs of a learner studying, for example, a foreign language for scientific or technological purposes are totally different from those of another learner studying for medical purposes or legal purposes, or financial purposes.

This does not mean, however, that the teacher has to blindly serve the perspective of one side of the needs analysis. The teacher has to always keep in mind the learners' best interest, meaning that a critical component should always be present in any course, helping the learners not simply to acquire the notions and competences required for their career but also why and how such competencies can be used in their everyday life and how these can be used to acquire further specific information. Even because we all know that, what I call “everyday language knowledge” is often taken to be fundamental to enable a speaker to become an active member of any specific professional community. For this reason, the scope of LSP should not be exclusively subject to the professional profile of its user, but should also target their level of general competence in the target language as this is very often decisive for their exclusion or inclusion in the everyday informal interactions within the community. foreign language competitive professional

This brings us to the second component of the term LSP, which is `specific'. And whereas I consider the third word of the acronym - `purpose' - as being key to success, this second word is the most challenging, the most demanding but at the same time the most motivating and which gives you most satisfaction. In fact, one of the main characteristics of LSP courses is that every course is unique as far as its contents, syllabus design and methodology are concerned given that each course is perceived on its own merits. This implies that such courses cannot be taught according to any pre-ordained methodology. Rather than talking about a subject to be taught we need to think of which approach to adopt and this implies flexibility on the teachers' part, negotiating with the learners how best to reach their objectives and the learning outcomes. In other words, I, as a teacher, need to understand the requirements of the particular trades, occupational domains or professions and I have to be willing to adapt to these requirements. I have to understand the context in which the language will be used as well as any specialist concepts and terminology, and this, in turn, implies the need for specific training, tailor-made courses and teaching the practical use of the target language. It is a known fact that language in different situations varies and therefore as a teacher I have to tailor make not just the curriculum and the methods, but above all the materials to be used for each and every individual course in accordance to its specific context and centered on its appropriate language skills and discourse. And when we speak about specificity, it is very important to distinguish between LSP courses with a wide-angled, generic design and those with a narrow-angled specific design. The former usually present sets of skills that are quite generic in nature and that can easily be transferred from one occupation or profession to another. On the other hand, in narrow angled specific design courses, the contents presented are more specific and focus exclusively on one particular work place or environment. The latter type of course design makes it practically impossible to either find suitably published material or to use a particular textbook without the need for supplementary material. This leaves very little choice for the teachers but to provide the material for the course themselves or ask the learners themselves to provide the teaching material. This involves not just keeping abreast with the vast selection of published material and adapting it, where possible, to the learners' needs, but very often it implies developing a self-produced resource bank of authentic materials. In fact, one of the key characteristics of LSP courses is that teachers and learners make use of authentic texts and tasks, preferably provided by the learners themselves from the workplace or their respective professional sector. The biggest advantage of using “authentic” texts is that although they were not written for language teaching and learning purposes, they certainly demonstrate `real' language use. The specificity of such courses also varies depending on whether the training takes place upstream of employment or in direct relation to a job, or in the workplace itself. A distinction can therefore be made between LSP courses providing access to employment, courses for retaining one's job and those aimed at career progression.

The third word, or rather the first word in the acronym is `language' or `languages'. Foreign language proficiency is crucial for younger generations of workers to succeed today. In the global marketplace that we now live in, languages have become crucial across all sectors. From law to finance, from tourism to technology, and from marketing to administration, most businesses today need linguists not just to permit communication across the globe but also to understand different cultural realities and needs. In the world of work, language skills are becoming always increasingly important in organisations and businesses who want to remain competitive on an international level. This is highly recommended even in the Report from the thematic working group "Languages for Jobs" European Strategic Framework for Education and Training (ET 2020) which states that the demand for foreign languages and communication skills is steadily rising on the European labour market. In order to reduce the gap between offer and demand of language skills and to increase the motivation of learners, the experts of the group encourage the development and dissemination of new methods of teaching languages which are more learner- focused, practically oriented and more applied to professional contexts.

One must keep in mind however, that when we talk about LSP courses we are speaking about adult learners and quite often such learners are highly motivated to acquire a set of vocational skills to access employment or to progress further in their career, but are much less motivated to improve their language competencies that are so necessary in today's world. Such learners are often reluctant to return to studying languages, which they may well associate with negative memories from their school years due to various reasons like, for example, not finding them appealing to their interests, seeing them as not being relevant to their lives and future careers, lack of modern equipment, etc. Furthermore, they often find it difficult to transfer the language skills they have acquired from the classroom to the workplace. It seems as though they are unaware of the possible benefits of embedding, integrating or contextualising language skills in professional education and training and how this can give them a cutting edge at the workplace and on the job. Indeed, by embedding or integrating language skills within specialised contexts, it is possible to create courses that are much more attractive to learners in professional domains as well as being more effective in equipping them with the basic skills they require for the workplace.

Such courses, in line with the occupational field singled out in the CEFR as one of the major fields for language use, should provide a method of learning, teaching and assessing skills or abilities in the target language, according to the particular needs of the learners and the specific requirements of the professional domain. In very practical terms this implies that such language courses need to be totally learner-focused, practically oriented and applied to professional contexts.

Challenges and Practical Issues

This obviously presents a number of challenges which need to be discussed and analysed from both the educators' and the learners' point of view. The emphasis should not be on how much language one gets to know but rather on what can one do with the language learnt. From the learners' point of view, this implies making connections between new knowledge and experiences they have had, with real-world contexts and knowledge they have already mastered. From the educators' point of view, it implies that they should strive to help learners understand linguistic concepts and forms in a situated and contextualized form - transforming simple things like food preparation, tools, technology, work related emails, etc. into potential language teaching tools. This is by no means an easy task. As I have already mentioned, such courses need to address the immediate and very specific needs of the learners involved, which in turn should serve as the basis for informed curriculum practices, such as syllabus design, materials development and instructional design. This is crucial, given that the needs of a learner studying, for example, in a French for the hospitality industry course are totally different from those of another learner studying French for the agribusiness industry or, let's say, engineering. Even language courses for employees within the same employment sector may vary considerably given that the language skills required may vary significantly. Just to give an example, learners from the hospitality industry who work in back offices would most probably need specific reading and writing skills in the language/s being studied- reading and understanding the contents of emails and replying to them; writing various letters of a different nature, be it a letter of complaint, of protest, of acceptance; taking minutes of an important meeting, etc. On the other hand, those working in front offices would most probably need to focus more on speaking and listening skills, although even here this might vary according to the nature of their job and the sector in which they work or would like to work.

All this means that, to be able to perform a holistic needs analyses, the language teacher also requires to gain a knowledge of the respective professional sector. Having a realistic knowledge about the needs and expectations of the sector is essential for a successful curriculum design, making the cooperation between the educational institution and the employment or vocational or academic sector of crucial importance. The advantage offered by such a job- oriented approach is that it enhances the use of a profession-bound, purposefully designed methodology that gives the teacher clear clues as to what are the factual, most relevant and linguistically servicing ingredients that a learner might utilise for an effective and fast acquisition of a profession-oriented linguistic corpus. This implies that the teachers, besides fulfilling the role of curriculum designers, also have to design their own assessment measures that they are to use with their learners, which in turn have to be verified for quality assurance purposes.

All this has serious ramifications on the role of the language teacher, whose main role would be to help, to facilitate communication in class, to provide the tools for the learners to develop and acquire the skills they need and not to teach the rules of agribusiness or the regulations of the financial sector. The role of the language teacher is to equip the learners with tools and strategies that will empower them in a world where s/he is only one of the many providers, or sources, of language exposure and communicative practice. In other words, the language teacher is to provide the learners with the necessary linguistic tools to be able to apply the concepts, interpret them, and above all communicate in the target language, not just with the particular jargon characteristic of that specific occupational context but also with the language of everyday informal talk, that allows them to communicate effectively regardless of the occupational context.

This is quite a challenging task even because, as already pointed out, in the same group individuals may vary considerably in education level, their competence in the target language, work experience etc. And unlike general purposes language courses, where the curriculum, the course design and the contents to be taught are often driven by theory alone, in LSP courses, not only are these designed according to the specific context and the particular subset of tasks required in order to meet the specified needs of the learners, but even lesson topics and content range are limited in number as they are subject to rigorous selection and dictated by the learners' requirements. Nonetheless, the way language operates in discourse should not be ignored when defining LSP. From this perspective, the use of language requires contextual analysis which is fundamental to determine the meaning of terms according to the respective field or discipline. By way of example, if we take, for instance, the word “reception”, in a language course for the hospitality industry it usually refers to a formal party at which important people are welcomed. In a language course for hospitality with front office people, it refers to the place where people go to upon their arrival at a hotel. In a language course for academic purposes, the same word usually refers to the way in which people react to something written or published like in the phrase, for example “Her first book got a wonderful reception from the critics”. On the other hand, in a language course for technological purposes, the word reception would refer to the degree to which mobile phone, radio, or internet signals are strong and clear. Having said this however, LSP cannot be considered as an abstract language system, but it works through its use in everyday oral and/or written texts and from a pedagogical point of view, when implementing corpora we need to do so through the lens of its functioning in discourse. For this reason, it is extremely important that when texts referring to a discipline or field which is common to learners enrolled in a specialized language program are presented, we do not simply present them as specialized texts of professional knowledge but also as an illustration of the use of everyday language.

This is not easy given that in LSP courses, the learner is seen as a language learner engaged either in academic, professional or occupational pursuits and who uses the target language as a means to carry out those pursuits. Unlike in a general language course situation, where learner goals are generally linguistic (such as, the ability to use a wide range of grammatical structures), in an LSP course it is understood that the learner would want to achieve `real world' objectives, or rather objectives requiring specific linguistic competencies. For example, learners following a French-for police personnel course may want to `complete personal record forms' appropriately or `interact with people' in ways that reduce misunderstandings. In this situation, language development is seen as the means to the ends but not as the end in itself, and the learners can easily become de-motivated by language course content that does not appear directly relevant to their real world objectives. This explains why the LSP teacher/course developer needs to find out what the language-based objectives of the learners are in the target occupation or academic discipline and ensure that the content of the LSP course works towards them, however within a wide as possible context of language use.

Methodological Perspectives

For these reasons, I strongly believe that LSP courses should have a threefold framework design. The first part should consist of an individual theoretical component of learning, which should include, among other things, revising or teaching basic grammar notions and rules, becoming familiar with the most common terminology, introducing the kind of language the learners will encounter and use in their place of work and in their profession. The second part should consist of an individual practical component of learning, where, in collaboration with various companies in the specific field, each course participant is assigned a number of open-ended, supervised `hands on' tasks which can be performed at his/her own level. The third part of the framework should provide the learners the possibility to work in teams, pairs or groups - classroom discussions, role plays, etc. It is important to note that, given the possible heterogeneity of the groups, most of the tasks assigned, both on an individual level as well as in teams or group work, are to be open- ended and the learners should be free to adapt them according to their needs and abilities. Furthermore, specific learning outcomes should be set at the start of each component, essentially describing what the learner is expected to be able to do as a result of each learning activity. It is imperative for the course participants to know the anticipated outcomes that derive from the instruction given and the subsequent learning that takes place in classrooms, workshops, or even in precincts outside of schools, colleges or universities. Among the most important benefits of such a model of LSP courses one can mention the emphasis on the practical relevance between language learning and the workplace, the development of a strong community support for languages, the collaboration between the educational institution and the work place, the acquisition of transversal skills, the collaboration between educational institutions, employers and sponsors and the provision of real life examples of language in context.

As the saying goes, all this is easier said than done! And for the above to be achieved, cooperation and collaboration are crucial. Educational Institutions together with employers, sponsors and specialised workers from the particular professional domains need to come together to plan and design a holistic course of studies in accordance to the requirements of the specific professional practice. Such courses should enhance teaching quality and proliferate learner numbers opting for LSP courses. Needless to say that, although such interdisciplinary co-operation is not easy to achieve given that there might be many people involved and too many trades to relate to, with the right backing from authorities and a strong conviction from all concerned, such much-needed cooperation is not only desirable but doable. As stated in the VET4EU2 position paper on European Union policy after 2020 on Vocational and Educational Training (2019:19) the way forward is “integration of this cooperation into hybrid education involving companies and educational providers” given that “education and training provide something that increases when it is shared” (p.20).

Unfortunately, in comparison to general language teacher education, LSP teacher education has received much less attention. In fact, in many countries, this growing popularity and increase in demand of LSP courses has not been adequately met with an increase in training for the teaching of such courses for both qualified and newly appointed teachers, with the result that most teachers end up teaching LSP courses without the required pedagogical knowledge and skills. Although the teaching of foreign languages in general and the teaching of foreign languages for specific purposes have several aspects that are common, there exist two main divergences, namely: (i) the learners and the reason why they are learning the subject and (ii) the aim of instruction. In fact, in LSP courses, the teacher is not the primary knower of the content of the material to be taught in class, given that very often the learners are experts in their respective professional context, meaning that the teacher needs to make the most of the students' knowledge of the content in order to generate communication inthe classroom. To be successful, the teacher has to adopt the position of the consultant who has the knowledge of communication practices while negotiating with the learners on how best to explore these practices to reach the desired learning outcomes. This means that while a general language teacher deals mainly with methodological considerations, the LSP teacher is assumed to go beyond methodology anddevelop a “researcher” disposition toward his/her career. In other words, pedagogical training for LSP teachers should not only focus on such skills like classroom management, discipline, handling of various groups of learners, teacher-learner interaction, lesson preparation, curriculum design, which are all fundamental in the teaching profession. The teaching of languages for specific purposes requires a shift in perspective and adjusted approaches to boost effectiveness. For this reason, training should focus more on flexibility in teaching and teacher listening skills, the careful selection of published material and the adaptation of relevant, authentic teaching material, which ideally is to be provided by the learners themselves, according to the needs and levels of the same learners, while emphasizing the importance of their taking interest in the learners' professional activities and the level of risk they are ready to take in their teaching. Such training the necessary tools, frameworks, and principles of course design from one course to another so as to apply them to new material pertinent to the professional domain in question and to overcome the challenges of designing communicatively appropriate and effective methods of assessment of languages in specific purposes contexts.

Conclusion

Research today shows that languages require a new market, and that language teaching and learning must go well beyond formal schooling, which does not necessarily provide the best context to motivate students to learn languages. In practical terms this means that we need to move away from teaching to use the language to actually using the language to carry out tasks and actions in specific situations that are relevant and pertinent to the learners' lives. It is only by using real-world settings as a basis for task-based and technology-assisted language learning that as teachers we can equip the learners with skills to integrate the acquisition of professional knowledge and related language skills at the same time. This implies reconciling the professional dimension of training with that of linguistic training whilst producing a valid paradigm for the teaching of languages for professional purposes. Indeed, the 3 main characteristics that distinguish LSP from other branches of language teaching and learning are the specificity of language use, the contexts of use and the learners' needs as applied to pedagogical practices. And as the demand for such courses continues to increase, it is of vital importance that researchers, employers, and educators continue to converge and collaborate. Only in this way can we formulate and offer LSP courses that create a strong, unified, sustainable professional language education system that is complete and that delivers the much needed linguistic skills for learners, employers and communities to flourish.

References

1. Trace, J., Hudson, T., & Brown, J. D. (2015). An overview of language for specific purposes. In J. Trace, T. Hudson, & J. D. Brown, Developing Courses in Languages for Specific Purposes (pp. 1-23) (NetWork #69) [PDF document]. Honolulu: University of Hawaii. doi: http://hdl.handle.net/10125/14573

2. Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987).

English for Specific Purposes: A Learner- Centered Approach. Cambridge:Cambridge

University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9780511733031

Long, Mary K. (ed.) (2017). Language for courses should seek to help teachers be able to transfer Specific Purposes:Trends in Curriculum

Development. Georgetown University Press, 2017. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1ps3169.

3. Kastberg, Peter. (2018). "Languages For Special Purposes As Instruments For Communicating Knowledge". Languages for Special Purposes, edited by John Humbley, Gerhard Budin and Christer Lauren, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 2018, pp. 26-44. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110228014-002.

4. Balboni, P. (2000). Le microlingue scientific-professionali. UTET, Torino.

5. Galova, D. (Ed). (2007), Languages for Specific Purposes. Searching for Common

Solutions. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

6. Basturkmen, Helen. (2010). Developing Courses in English for Specific Purposes. Palgrave Macmillan.

7. http://ec.europa.eu/languages/policy/strat egic-framework/documents/languages-for-jobs- report_ en.pdf

8. Position paper on European Union policy after 2020 on Vocational and Educational Training by the European VET providers associations cooperating in VET4EU2. (2019).

Размещено на Allbest.ru