English for Specific Purposes

The field of English for specific purposes (ESP), which addresses the communicative needs and practices of particular professional or occupational groups, has developed rapidly in the past forty years to become a major force in English language teaching and research. ESP draws its strength from an eclectic theoretical foundation and a commitment to research-based language education which seeks to reveal the constraints of social contexts on language use and the ways learners can gain control over these. In this chapter, I will briefly point to some of the major ideas and practices that currently influence ESP, focusing on needs analysis, ethnography, critical approaches, contrastive rhetoric, social constructionism, and discourse analysis. I then go on to look briefly at some of the effects ESP has had on language teaching and research, arguing that it has encouraged teachers to highlight communication rather than language, to adopt a research orientation to their work, to employ collaborative pedagogies, to be aware of discourse variation, and to consider the wider political implications of their role. Together these features of ESP practice emphazise a situated view of literacy and underline the applied nature of the field.

[1]  Eli Hinkel,et al.  Culture in Second Language Teaching and Learning , 1999 .

[2]  D. Wilkins,et al.  Communicative Syllabus Design , 1980 .

[3]  Paul A Prior,et al.  Writing/Disciplinarity: A Sociohistoric Account of Literate Activity in the Academy , 1998 .

[4]  J. Flowerdew,et al.  On the Notion of Culture in L2 Lectures , 1995 .

[5]  D. Horowitz.  What Professors Actually Require: Academic Tasks for the ESL Classroom , 1986 .

[6]  Ken Hyland,et al.  6. GENRE: LANGUAGE, CONTEXT, AND LITERACY , 2002, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics.

[7]  Louis Trimble.  English for science and technology , 1985 .

[8]  K. Hyland,et al.  Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing , 2001 .

[9]  Alastair Pennycook,et al.  Vulgar Pragmatism, Critical Pragmatism, and EAP. , 1997 .

[10]  M. Stubbs.  Text and corpus analysis , 1996 .

[11]  Ann M. Johns,et al.  Text, Role and Context: Developing Academic Literacies , 1997 .

[12]  M. Bakhtin,et al.  Speech genres and other late essays , 1986 .

[13]  P. Strevens,et al.  The Linguistic Sciences And Language Teaching , 1964 .

[14]  Joseph Harris,et al.  The Idea of Community in the Study of Writing , 1989 .

[15]  Ann M. Johns,et al.  The New Rhetoric of Genre: Writing Political Briefs , 2001 .

[16]  Greg Myers,et al.  Writing biology : texts in the social construction of scientific knowledge , 1990 .

[17]  Adrian Holliday,et al.  Appropriate Methodology And Social Context , 1994 .

[18]  J. Milton,et al.  Qualification and Certainty in L1 and L2 Students' Writing , 1997 .

[19]  Ken Hyland,et al.  Specificity revisited: how far should we go now? , 2002 .

[20]  John M. Swales,et al.  Research Perspectives on English for Academic Purposes: EAP-related linguistic research: An intellectual history , 2001 .

[21]  B. Latour,et al.  Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts , 1983 .

[22]  M. Mulkay,et al.  Opening Pandora's Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientists' Discourse , 1984 .

[23]  Eija Ventola,et al.  Writing scientific English: overcoming intercultural problems , 1992 .

[24]  John M. Swales,et al.  Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings , 1993 .

[25]  David Bartholomae,et al.  Inventing the University , 2005 .

[26]  John M. Swales,et al.  Other Floors, Other Voices: A Textography of a Small University Building , 1998 .