Орта білім беру мекемелерінде электронды

182 
Вестник Карагандинского университета 
UDC 378.1: 351.858
 
M.V.Vagner, M.A.Rakhmetullina
 
Ye.A.Buketov Karaganda State University 
(E-mail: marina_vagner@mail.ru) 
To the question of cultural approach in foreign language teaching 
In the article was considered and analyzed communicative competence of students formed in the learning 
process and largely determined by how the students are aware of the content of thought, their communicative 
intentions, situationally determined, as well as they freely on this basis, how they control  their speech activi-
ty in oral or written form in the field of professional communication. The issues of language, culture, intercul-
tural communication and their interaction with the teaching of foreign languages are discussed. According to 
the cognitive model there are such stages of teaching professional rhetoric as a sensitivity, operational, analyti-
cal and creative rhetoric development stages.  
Key words: EFLT methodology; teaching foreign language; language skills; cultural background; linguistic 
component; cognitive model; national spiritual heritage; language traditions; sensitivity stage.  
 
Introduction: Gradual sophistication in the «global» industry of learning and teaching English created 
a lot of new dimensions in EFLT methodology. Today no one argues that EFL should not be taught as a for-
mal linguistic system; it should be reoriented from knowledge-centered to culture-centered reflecting the so-
cio-cultural reality, where the learners are to express and develop themselves. The main idea of this approach 
is not only personality enrichment by images of modern polyphonic world and ability to master all its diver-
sity, but also the strengthening of in-depth fundamentals of the personality closely connected with the na-
tional culture and perception of universal spiritual values. 
Materials and methods: In the design of EFL education and instruction, the question arises of how 
much and what kind of attention to devote to pronunciation. This paper proposes and highlights a socio-
cultural approach to teaching EFL pronunciation in the context of FL teacher training. 
The peculiarity of teaching foreign language pronunciation (FLP) is that it takes place on the basis of 
the native language and culture, which determine the formation of FL skills and habits. «If a foreign lan-
guage is acquired more successfully in parallel with the development of the native language skills, then the 
entry to the world of a foreign culture can promote to a higher degree the learner’s personality development 
as the subject of native culture». 
Discussion: Pronunciation is always socially oriented testifying to its deep-rooted links to culture. It is 
vocalized in communication and can be considered as the voice of culture. In the process of speech acts, the 
man, interpreting and estimating spiritual experience of generations, builds up his/her individual cultural 
space «modus vivendi». This cultural space contains the system and hierarchy of values, the subjective esti-
mates, and ways of attitudinal expressions and interpretations of events. The way we vocalize our thoughts 
directly corresponds both to an immediate situation, and to the entire context of culture, its values. 
Besides, pronunciation as the vocal part of speech is most personalized; the man subconsciously con-
trols pronunciation features of speech for reaching communicative goals. Thus, pronunciation is a means of 
realization of a personal communicative intention. Pronunciation characterizes a person not only in terms of 
his/her education and origin, but also in terms of his/her self-rating and social claims, it determines what role 
he/she claims in the eyes of other people. It is an in-depth component and a sign of the man’s personality [1]. 
An FL teacher-professional should understand all this and have an ability to feel the cultural background of 
vocalic speech and to transmit it to the learners for its adequate reception and interpretation. 
No doubt, he/she should also possess perfect FLP skills permitting to understand fluent FL speech, em-
ploy various intonational styles, adapt pronunciation features according to the communicative situation, etc. 
not only on empirical, but also on linguistic basis. At the same time, he/she must be capable of pedagogically 
competent presentation of this or that language phenomenon in class: slow down, if necessary, the tempo of 
speech, increase its volume, emphasize the intonation, exaggerate the articulation providing the desirable 
educational and pragmatic effect on the learner. As we see, it presupposes a wider set of problems and as-
pects of FLP teaching, exceeding the level of simple mastering of its linguistic component. 
Is an FL teacher ready to face these new challenges in teaching of FLP according to the modern de-
mands? 

To the question of cultural approach… 
Серия «Педагогика». № 2(78)/2015 
183 
The attempt to tackle this problem has been made in an elective course «EFL Professional Teaching 
Rhetoric», which was taught for the fourth-year students of the Department of the English Language 
at International Kazakh-Turkish University. In this course, we tried to implement the cognitive model of FL 
pronunciation acquisition, transferring cognitive operations from the native language to EFLP acquisition 
and taking into account 
 national spiritual heritage; 
 language traditions; 
 communicative individualities formed in the native language 
 pedagogically significant teaching skills. 
According to the cognitive model we defined the first stage of teaching professional rhetoric as 
a sensitivity stage, when the students do not yet imitate the teaching communicative behavior. They learn to 
see meaning in speech sounds patterning and respond to its modifications: they form an image of pronuncia-
tion style of the teacher, the outline of pronunciation system in action [2]. 
By this time the students have already subconsciously acquired communicative images of professional 
teaching rhetoric in L1 through their experience in class as students and teaching assistants. They have al-
ready gained some individual L1 communicative experience and have a store of images, concepts, 
knowledge of acceptable communicative behavior in class and in a variety of culture bound situations. Thus 
they have already formed their communicative imagination in L1. We just help them to shape and develop 
awareness of it by the so-called sensory attack. 
After this the students are shown some fragments from the well-known American films: «Dead Poets 
Society», «Teachers», «Clueless». Each fragment is followed by the teacher’s questions highlighting various 
rhetorical parameters of the professional speech. 
 How do Math and Chemistry teachers introduce their subjects? 
 What phonostylistic characteristic do they use to make their speech imposing and effective? 
 What does Mr.Keeting want to achieve? 
 How does he achieve the effect of his speech being arresting, thrilling, absorbing for the students. 
Why are the students carried along by his speech? 
 What’s the difference between the teaching communicative behavior of the Science and Humanities 
teachers? Are they opposed? How is this opposition characterized in phonological terms? 
 Do they differ in intonation, timber or tempo? How does the timber of their voice different? 
 What makes the voice of the Math and Chemistry teachers more categorical, imperative, patronizing? 
 What makes the voice of the Literature teacher sound persuasive, echoing, challenging, genuinely 
concerned, powerful and emotional? 
 What shouldn’t the teacher do to sound unpleasant and boring? 
The students don’t try to imitate teaching rhetoric yet; they just describe it from different angles an-
swering the questions. They collect more and more images of teaching communicative behavior in class, and 
gradually develop their own cognitive instruments sizing up this or that teaching rhetoric and style. The pre-
sented authentic materials are redundant and diverse to ensure the students’ sufficient accumulation of cul-
ture-bound communicative images [3]. 
The polyphonic images of various samples of teacher’s L1 and FL communicative behavior are stored 
to be later used as patterns for the communicative behavior in class. 
The second stage is operational, where the students generalize and verbalize the accumulated commu-
nicative images. Here the students imitate the discussed and acquired subconsciously patterns of the teach-
ers’ communicative behavior. Now they develop the ability to empirically assess and approximate the EFL 
speech authentic parameters, shaping their individual instruments of FL phonological analysis, specifying 
FLP characteristics for phonologically, socially and culturally acceptable performance in class. The students 
at this stage are given scripts of the fragments they have seen and asked to perform the following tasks trying 
their best to imitate the speech pragmatic characteristics of the teachers from the films [4]. 
 Read the teacher’s speech samples observing the melody and intonation style. Try your best to 
demonstrate the same pragmatic characteristics of their speech. 
 Read a phrase and then say it without reference to the text using adequate gestures and mimics. 
If the students do not feel confident at the second stage, they are offered to watch and to comment on 
the film fragments again. 

M.V.Vagner, M.A.Rakhmetullina 
184 
Вестник Карагандинского университета 
The third stage is analytical where the students further specify the acquired communicative images at 
the basis of conscious phonological analysis of the professional teaching rhetoric. Here the future EFL teach-
ers train to be consciously aware of the phonological modifications of the teacher’s speech and to make 
comments on these modifications in linguistic terms. Assessing various pragmatic characteristics of the pro-
fessional teaching rhetoric they learn to control their speech and to adjust it to the pedagogical situation in 
class. Their tasks would be as follows: 
 Comment on your fellow-student’s reading from the point of view of teaching methodology. Assess 
the phonological and socio-cultural characteristics of the speech. 
 How would you instruct your students to read this text accordingly? What phonostylistic parameters 
would you draw their attention to? 
The fourth-year students are already quite capable of assessing phonological characteristics of speech, 
so this stage could be incorporated into the second stage. The point is to make sure that the students are con-
fident in analyzing the phonological characteristics of the given speech fragments and know how to monitor 
them for the desired pedagogical and rhetoric effect. 
The last stage is creative rhetoric development achieved by spontaneous activation of the accumulated 
images and their adjustment to the individual communicative means. This stage is aimed to demonstrate how 
the students can make use of their teaching rhetoric as speech pragmatics, how they can manipulate various 
forms of speech effects. They are asked to prepare a short fragment of the teacher’s speech (5–7 phrases): 
 Speak persuasively about the necessity to learn English. 
 Motivate the students to read the text about Britain. 
 Encourage the students to do the homework. Make them be interested in making stories about their 
hobbies, school, etc. 
 Present the grammar theme conveying personal involvement. 
 Challenge the students giving them a test (a difficult task, etc). 
 Inspire the students to dramatize a dialogue. 
 Explain giving examples how to use The Present Simple Tense. 
 Instruct the students how to do the exercise (filling in the blanks). 
Performing these tasks the students develop the ability to operate the entire parameters of pronunciation 
system using communicative imagination. If they successfully coped with these and previous tasks, they are 
offered to prepare a lecture on teaching rhetoric with examples, where they can sum up their knowledge and 
skills to monitor and adjust their speech to various socio-cultural situations. 
By the end of the course the students develop their individual instruments of EFLP acquisition and in-
struction, sufficiently develop their communicative imagination and professional rhetorical skills. The course 
proves to be effective allowing to implement the dialog of cultures in the process of EFL teacher education 
and providing the gradual growth of the overall EFL teacher’s proficiency. 
Culture and language are means of collective co-existence and social practice kept in the memory of the 
society that is created by the people during the centuries. Cultural awareness helps people to become more 
understanding and tolerant of behaviors which are different from their own. 
Difference between cultures causes some misunderstandings in the interactive communications between 
a foreigner and a native-speaker. Millions of people travel around the world and they all need to communi-
cate in some way. They need to acquire not only linguistic competence but cultural awareness as well. Cross-
cultural investigations can provide materials that assist language learners to deal with the problems of un-
known environments. The native speaker puts in language his world vision, mentality, and the relation to 
other people in cross-cultural dialogue, and the non-native speaker receives that vision. “It is clear that there 
is a difference between the native and the non-native speakers’ focus when they evaluate an oral discourse. 
The former focuses on the vocabulary related to the cultural and social factors. On the other hand, the latter 
lacks the ability to consider such factors. This is one of the major problems of the non-native speakers both 
at production and comprehension level [5]. 
The significance of teaching culture in and through language teaching has been recognized and widely 
discussed over the last two centuries. As research and practice have progressed over these years, the defini-
tion of culture and the relationship between language teaching and culture have been defined and redefined. 
Regarding the relationship between culture and language teaching, there are at least two main viewpoints: 
the static and the dynamic views. The earlier models including Brooks (1975) or Nostrand (1974) among 
others, tended to view culture as unvarying and composed of discrete, concrete facts that can be taught and 

To the question of cultural approach… 
Серия «Педагогика». № 2(78)/2015 
185 
learnt. Liddicoa (2002) maintains that this static view of culture does not recognize the link between lan-
guage and culture. It merely transmits cultural information to learners and ignores the constantly developing 
nature of culture. This view treats cultural knowledge as either facts or artifacts. Students are expected to 
learn information about a country or people, their lives, their history, their institutions, or their customs or 
about the cultural icons these people have produced, such as their literature, their art, their architecture, or 
their music. A result of this orientation is that the cultural component becomes self-contained and is often 
very remote from the language itself. Moreover, the cultural component may be further separated from lan-
guage by being taught and presented in the students' first language rather than in the target language. Alt-
hough there may be some place for cultural facts in a languages curriculum, it is more important to study 
culture as a process in which the learner will eventually engage rather than as a closed set of information that 
he/she will be required to recall [6]. 
By contrast, the more recent models see culture as a dynamic and variable entity. The dynamic view of 
culture requires learners to actively engage in culture learning, rather than only learn about the cultural in-
formation of the target culture in a passive way. They are encouraged to view cultural facts as situated in 
time and space and variable across time, regions, classes and generations (Crawford & McLaren, 2003). In 
Liddicoa’s (2002) view, culture is seen as sets of variable practices in which people engage in order to live 
their lives and which are continually created and re-created by participants in interaction. These cultural 
practices represent a contextual framework that people use to structure and understand their social world and 
communicate with other people. As such, culture is not about information and things; it is about actions and 
understanding. In order to learn about culture, it is necessary to engage with the linguistic and non-linguistic 
practices of the culture and to gain insights into the way of living in a particular cultural context. Cultural 
knowledge is not therefore a case of knowing information about the culture; it is about knowing how to en-
gage with the culture. It is important that the scope of culture learning move beyond awareness, understand-
ing and sympathy, and begin to address the ways in which culture learning will be practiced by learners. Cul-
tural knowledge is, therefore, not limited in its use to a particular task or exercise, but instead it is a more 
general knowing which underlies how language is used and how things are said and done in a cultural con-
text. As such, it resembles very closely other types of language knowledge. The dynamic view of culture also 
requires learners to have knowledge of their own culture and an understanding of their own culturally-shaped 
behaviours. 
This major transformation in perspective has also been characterized by conceptual shifts from culture-
specific to culture-general models of intercultural competence. Culture-specific learning refers to the acquisi-
tion of knowledge and skills relevant to a given «target culture», i.e., a particular culture group or communi-
ty. Culture-general learning, on the other hand, refers to knowledge and skills that are more generalizable in 
nature and transferable across cultures. This body of knowledge includes, among other things, the concept of 
culture, the nature of cultural adjustment and learning, the impact of culture on communication and interac-
tion between individuals or groups, the stress associated with intense culture and language immersions (cul-
ture and language fatigue), coping strategies for dealing with stress, the role of emotions in cross-cultural, 
cross-linguistic interactions, and so forth. Culture-general skills include the capacity to display respect for 
and interest in the culture, the ability to be a self-sustaining culture learner and to draw on a variety of re-
sources for that learning, tolerance and patience in cross-cultural situations, control of emotions and emo-
tional resilience, and the like (Lustig and Koester, 1996, Kelley and Myers, 1995). 
Now let’s examine various views proposed by different educators and scholars in respect to the rela-
tionship between culture and language teaching. Seelye (1976) claims that learning a language in isolation of 
its cultural roots prevents one from becoming socialized into its contextual use. Seelye (1976) maintains that 
knowledge of linguistic structure alone does not carry with it any special insight into the political, social, re-
ligious, or economic system [7]. 
According to Rivers (1981) the focus must be on both appropriate content and activities that enable stu-
dents to assimilate that content. Activities should encourage them to go beyond fact, so that they begin to 
perceive and experience vicariously the deeper levels of the culture of the speakers of the language. 
Kramsch (1993) sees culture as a fifth language skill besides the usual four skills of listening, speaking, 
reading, and writing. Out of those considerations, Kramsch develops a concept that she terms looking for 
third places. Rather than simply adopting the target culture, Kramsch explains that a third place emerges, a 
place that “grows in the interstices between the cultures the learners grew up with and the new cultures he or 
she is being introduced to” She points out that at the intersection of multiple native and target cultures, the 

M.V.Vagner, M.A.Rakhmetullina 
186 
Вестник Карагандинского университета 
major task of language learners is to define for themselves what this 'third place' that they have engaged in 
seeking will look like, whether they are conscious of it or not. 
According to Brown (1994) culture is deeply ingrained part of the very fiber of our being, but language 
the means for communication among members of a culture is the most visible and available expression of 
that culture. And so a person’s world view, self-identity, and systems of thinking, acting, feeling, and com-
municating can be disrupted by a change from one culture to another. In a word, culture is a way of life. It is 
the context within which we exist, think, feel and relate others. It is the «glue» that binds a group of people 
together. It can be defined as a blueprint that guides the behavior of people in community and is incubated in 
family life. It governs our behavior in groups, makes us sensitive to matters of status, and helps us to know 
what others expect of us and what will happen if we do not live up to their expectations. Thus, culture helps 
us to know how far we can go as individuals and what our responsibility is to the group. Brown (1994) main-
tains that a language is a part of a culture and a culture is a part of a language. He believes that the two are 
intricately interwoven so that one cannot separate the two without losing the significance of either language 
or culture. As a result, cultural competence is an integral part of language learning, especially in foreign lan-
guage learning [8]. 
Similarly, Tang (1999) propounds the view that culture is language and language is culture. He suggests 
that to speak a language well, one has to be able to think in that language, and thought is extremely powerful. 
Language is the soul of the country and people who speak it. Language and culture are inextricably linked, 
and as such we might think about moving away from questions about the inclusion or exclusion of culture in 
foreign language curriculum, to issues of deliberate immersion versus non-deliberate exposure to it. 
Nida, a well-known linguist and translation theorist, also made some brilliant points concerning the re-
lationship between language and culture. Nida (2001) held that culture is the totality of beliefs and practices 
of a society; nothing is of greater strategic importance than the language through which its beliefs are ex-
pressed and transmitted and by which most interaction of its members takes place. 
Language and culture exist in each individual person. That individual is a thinker, a creator, a transmit-
ter of the culture, he is the part of the society, and he uses the language for communication with other mem-
bers of this society where he is supposed to be understood as they belong to the same community. But the 
indispensable condition of realization of any communication is that a speaker and a listener should have a 
mutual knowledge of realities or the background knowledge as a basis of a language interaction to under-
stand each other. A «Language world picture» gives a non-native speaker the opportunity to realize the im-
plicit meaning of the vocabulary through explicit meaning, to understand cumulated unconscious cultural 
information via background knowledge, to investigate cultural values via communicative process, to synthe-
size interrelation and interaction of the culture and the language [9]. 
The language major should be structured to produce a specific outcome: educated speakers who have 
deep translingual and transcultural competence. Advanced language training often seeks to replicate the 
competence of an educated native speaker, a goal that postadolescent learners rarely reach. The idea of 
translingual and transcultural competence, in contrast, places value on the ability to operate between lan-
guages. Students are educated to function as informed and capable interlocutors with educated native speak-
ers in the target language. They are also trained to reflect on the world and themselves through the lens of 
another language and culture. They learn to comprehend speakers of the target language as members of foreign 
societies and to grasp themselves as Americans — that is, as members of a society that is foreign to others. 
They also learn to relate to fellow members of their own society who speak languages other than English. 
This kind of foreign language education systematically teaches differences in meaning, mentality, and 
worldview as expressed in American English and in the target language. Literature, film, and other media are 
used to challenge students' imaginations and to help them consider alternative ways of seeing, feeling, and 
understanding things. In the course of acquiring functional language abilities, students are taught critical lan-
guage awareness, interpretation and translation, historical and political consciousness, social sensibility, and 
aesthetic perception. They acquire a basic knowledge of the history, geography, culture, and literature of the 
society or societies whose language they are learning; the ability to understand and interpret its radio, televi-
sion, and print media; and the capacity to do research in the language using parameters specific to the target 
culture. 
Communication within a common culture, or intercultural communication, covers communication be-
tween people who share a commonality of experience, knowledge, and values. Intercultural relations are 
founded on such factors as shared heritage, gender association, religious affiliation, class distinction, and the 
like. People in this group may see the world in highly similar ways and may share a common value system. 

To the question of cultural approach… 
Серия «Педагогика». № 2(78)/2015 
187 
Within the confines of a shared, general culture, communication has the greatest probability for success, if 
success is defined as a message being understood in the manner in which it was intended [10]. 
In an educational setting, the desire for effective communication at regional and global levels must arise 
first from the hearts and minds and choices of individual administrators, individual teachers, and individual 
students. You may be saying, or thinking, «What can I do about any of the world's problems or about barriers 
to effective cross-cultural communication? 
Culture assimilators comprise short descriptions of various situations where one person from the target 
culture interacts with persons from the home culture. Then follow four possible interpretations of the mean-
ing of the behaviour and speech of the communicators, especially those from the target culture. Once the stu-
dents have read the description, they choose one of the four options they think is the correct interpretation of 
the situation. When every single student has made his choice, they discuss why some options are correct or 
incorrect. The main thrust of culture assimilators is that they are good methods of giving students under-
standing about cultural information. 
Cultural problem solving is yet another way to provide cultural information. In this case, learners are 
presented with some information but they are on the horns of a dilemma, so to speak. For example, in ana-
lyzing, a TV conversation or reading a narrative on marriage ceremonies, they are expected to assess man-
ners and customs, or appropriate or inappropriate behaviour, and to employ various problem-solving tech-
niques [11]. 
Indisputably, conventional behaviour in common situations is a subject with which students should ac-
quaint themselves. For instance, in the USA or the United Kingdom, it is uncommon for a student who is late 
for class to knock on the door and apologize to the teacher. Rather, this behaviour is most likely to be 
frowned upon and have the opposite effect, even though it is common behaviour in the culture many students 
come from. Besides, there are significant differences across cultures regarding the ways in which the teacher 
is addressed; when a student is supposed to raise her hand; what topics are considered taboo or «off the 
mark»; how much leeway students are allowed in achieving learner autonomy. 
Cultural competence, i.e., the knowledge of the conventions, customs, beliefs, and systems of meaning 
of another country, is indisputably an integral part of foreign language learning, and many teachers have seen 
it as their goal to incorporate the teaching of culture into the foreign language curriculum. There is a relation-
ship between language and culture. 
Foreign language learning is comprised of several components, including grammatical competence, 
communicative competence, language proficiency, as well as a change in attitudes towards one’s own or an-
other culture. 
Alongside linguistic knowledge, students should also familiarize themselves with various forms of non-
verbal communication, such as gesture and facial expressions, typical in the target culture. 
Language is, or should be, understood as cultural practice, then ineluctably we must also grapple with 
the notion of culture in relation to language. 
The role of literature in the foreign language classroom is great. Among four skills (reading, writing, 
speaking, and listening), culture can best find its expression through the medium of literature. Culture should 
be our message to students and language our medium. The teaching of culture should become an integral part 
of foreign language instruction [12]. 
And how is friendly interaction between teachers and students and among students most effectively fos-
tered? Mutual understanding and mutual respect are two keys to successful ineraction. 
But we must realize that teachers are the experts in the classroom, they are the ones whose opinions 
should carry the most weight, their voices should be heard most frequently in the classroom. 
Yet, in a very real sense, out students are also experts at language study. They are experts by virtue of 
their long years of exposure to a wide variety of teachers and methods and textbooks and contexts. Because 
all students can speak with authority about their own experiences in language study, their voices deserve to 
be heard, as well. What do students think about their language programs? What have been their disappoint-
ments, their triumphs? What improvements in language study would they like to see implemented? What do 
they value most highly, both in class and out of class? [3]. 
o have better results we can: 1 — adapt our foreign language teaching at the national level to the 
frameworks and standards articulated by the Council of Europe's language policy and activities which are a 
planning instrument that provides a common basis and terminology for describing objectives, methods and 
approaches, skills and practices in language teaching; 2 — use innovative technologies and media which 
provide interaction with speakers of other languages. We need specific research on how technology can be 

M.V.Vagner, M.A.Rakhmetullina 
188 
Вестник Карагандинского университета 
best used to increase students' proficiency in other languages. The Internet and specialized databases for in-
formation retrieval is of special importance. Teachers try to develop successful strategies using television 
programs, films, computer games, and music videos; 3 — activate interaction and collaboration with 

жүктеу/скачать 4,99 Mb.

Достарыңызбен бөлісу: