Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T14:41:54.686Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - The L in TBLT

Analyzing Target Discourse

from Part II - Tasks and Needs Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2021

By
Michael H. Long
Edited by
Mohammad Javad Ahmadian  and
Michael H. Long
Mohammad Javad Ahmadian
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
Michael H. Long
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, College Park
Get access

Summary

In the first part of a task-based needs analysis, a variety of sources of information and methods of obtaining that information are used to identify the target tasks for a particular learner group or learner type. The second part, the focus of this chapter, involves the collection of genuine samples of the spoken or written language used to perform those target tasks successfully, and analysis of the samples (i.e., analysis of target discourse), to produce one or more archetypal models. In elaborated or modified elaborated form if learners’ second language proficiency requires it, new, task-relevant language –– the L in TBLT –– is selected for incorporation into pedagogic tasks, and then learned, and to the extent possible, taught.

Keywords

Learner grouplearner typetarget discoursegenuine inputsimplified inputelaborated inputmodified elaborated input
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Task-Based Language Teaching , pp. 151 - 172
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Further Reading

Granena, G. (2008). Elaboration and simplification in scripted and genuine telephone service encounters. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 46(2), 137–66.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2015). Analyzing target discourse. In Long, M. H., Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 169–204.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2020). Optimal input for language learning: genuine, simplified, elaborated, or modified elaborated? Language Teaching, 53(2), 169–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Connell, S. P. (2014). A task-based language teaching approach to the police traffic stop. TESL Canada, 31(8), 116–31.Google Scholar
Oh, S.-Y. (2001). Two types of input modification and EFL reading comprehension: simplification versus elaboration. TESOL Quarterly, 35(1), 69–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

References

Bartlett, N. D. (2005). A double shot 2% mocha latte, please, with whip: Service encounters in two coffee shops and at a coffee cart. In Long, M. H., ed. Second language needs analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 305–43.Google Scholar
Borro, I. (2020). Enhanced incidental learning of formulaic sequences by Chinese learners of Italian. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Portsmouth.Google Scholar
Brown, J. D. (2009). Foreign and second language needs analysis. In Long, M. H. and Doughty, C. J., eds. Handbook of language teaching. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 269–93.Google Scholar
Brown, J. D. (2016). Introducing needs analysis and English for specific purposes. New York and London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cathcart, R. (1989). Authentic discourse and the survival English curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 23(1), 105–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaudron, C. (1982). Vocabulary elaboration in teachers’ speech to L2 learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 4(2), 170–80.Google Scholar
Farshi, N. and Tavakoli, M. (2019). Effects of differences in language aptitude on learning grammatical collocations under elaborated input conditions. Language Teaching Research. DOI: 10.1177/1362168819858443Google Scholar
Gilabert, R. and Castellvi, J (2019). Task and syllabus design for morphologically complex languages. In Schwieter, J. W. and Benati, A., eds. Cambridge handbook of language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 527–49.Google Scholar
Granena, G. (2008). Elaboration and simplification in scripted and genuine telephone service encounters. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 46(2), 137–66.Google Scholar
Hillman, K. (2021). Effects of different types of auditory input on incidental vocabulary learning by L2 Japanese learners. Unpublished PhD dissertation in second language acquisition. College Park, MD: University of Maryland.Google Scholar
Hillman, K. and Long, M. H. (2020). A task-based needs analysisfor US Foreign Service Officers, and the challenge of the Japanese celebration speech. InLambert, C. and, Oliver, R., eds. Using tasks in diverse contexts. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, pp. 123–45.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1983a). Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5(2), 177–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1983b). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 126–41.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2005). Methodological issues in learner needsanalysis. In Long, M. H., ed. Second language needs analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 19–76.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2009). Methodological principles in language teaching. InLong, M. H. and Doughty, C. J., eds. Handbook of language teaching. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 373–94.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2015). Analyzing target discourse. InLong, M. H., Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 169–204.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2018). Needs analysis. InChapelle, C., ed. The concise encyclopedia of applied linguistics. 2nd ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2020). Optimal input for language learning: genuine, simplified, elaborated, or modified elaborated? Language Teaching, 53(2), 169–82.Google Scholar
Long, M. H., Lee, J., and Hillman, K. (2019). Task-based language learning. InSchwieter, J. W. and Benati, A., eds. Cambridge handbook of language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 500–26.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. and Ross, S. (1993). Modifications that preserve language and content. In Tickoo, M., ed. Simplification: Theory and application. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre, pp. 29–52.Google Scholar
Malicka, A., Gilabert Guerrero, R., and Norris, J. M. (2019).From needs analysisto task design: Insights from an English for specific purposes context. Language Teaching Research, 23(1), 78–106.Google Scholar
O’Connell, S. P. (2014). A task-based language teaching approach to the police traffic stop. TESL Canada, 31(8), 116–31.Google Scholar
Oh, S.-Y. (2001). Two types of input modification and EFL reading comprehension: simplification versus elaboration. TESOL Quarterly, 35(1), 69–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scotton, C. M. and Bernsten, J. (1988). Natural conversations as a model for textbook dialogue. Applied Linguistics, 9, 372–84.Google Scholar
Serafini, E. J., Lake, J. B., and Long, M. H. (2015). Needs analysis for specialized learner populations: Essential methodological improvements. English for Specific Purposes, 40, 11–26.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. H. and Coulthard, M. (1975). The English used by teachers and pupils. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Taborn, S. (1983). The transactional dialogue: Misjudged, misused, misunderstood. ELT Journal, 37(3), 207–12.Google Scholar
Van den Branden, K. (2016). The role of teachers in task-based language education. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 164–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1989). Against comprehensible input. The Input Hypothesis and the development of L2 competence. Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 95–110.Google Scholar
Williams, M. (1988). Language taught for meetings and language used in meetings: Is there anything in common? Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 45–58.Google Scholar
Yano, Y., Long, M. H., and Ross, S. (1994). The effects of simplified and elaborated texts on foreign language reading comprehension. Language Learning, 44(2), 189–219.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×