2. WHAT IS ESP?
I/ THE ORIGIN OF ESP
ESP came into being because of 3
main reasons:
1- THE DEMAND OF THE POST- WORLD WAR
enormous and unprecedented
expansion of scientific, technical and
economic activities on an
international scale;
3. The Origin of ESP (cont.)
domination of technology and
commerce the role of English;
mass of people learn English, not
for pleasure, but because English
is the key to help them earn a
living;
4. The Origin of ESP (cont.)
Most importantly, the learners know
why they need English.
The Oil Crisis of 70' time and
money constraints cost - effective
courses with clearly defined goals
ESP courses “tailored” to specific
needs.
5. The Origin of ESP (cont.)
2- A REVOLUTION IN LINGUISTICS
- Traditionally: the focus was to
describe the rules of English usage,
the formal features of English
(grammar);
- Now: the focus was to discover the
ways in which English is actually used
in real communication (Widdowson,
1978).
6. An example
Look at the utterance: “It’s raining !”
What can you say about this utterance from the
point of view of traditional (focus) of linguistic
study?
10. The Origin of ESP (cont.)
- The English we speak and write vary
considerably, in a number of different ways,
from one context to the another it
should be possible to determine the features
of specific situations those features
become the ESP course .
- "Tell me what you need English for and I
will tell you the English that you need"
11. The Origin of ESP (cont.)
3- A FOCUS ON THE LEARNERS
- New development in educational
psychology ESP
- Emphasis on the central importance
of learners and their attitudes to
learning ;
12. Learners have different needs and
interests.
influence on their motivation to learn
and the effectiveness of learning
ESP COURSES RELEVANT TO NEEDS
& INTERESTS
13. II/THE DEVELOPMENT OF ESP
ESP IN THE WORLD HAS DEVELOPED
THROUGH 5 PHASES
1- The concept of special language: register
analysis
2- Beyond the sentence: rhetorical or discourse
analysis
3- Target situation analysis
4- Skills and strategies
5- A learning-centered approach
14. III/ WHAT IS ESP?
DEFINITION
Hutchinson & Waters (1987)
ESP IS AN APPROACH, NOT A PRODUCT
ESP is not a matter of teaching
"specialized varieties" of English
ESP is not just a matter of science
words and grammar for scientists, hotel
words and grammar for hotel staff etc.,
15. ESP is not different in kind from any
other form of language teaching. It
should be based in the first instance on
principles of effective and efficient
learning.
The root of the tree is still English
language teaching and English language
learning - and communication. So ESP is
an approach not a product
16. III/ WHAT IS ESP? (cont.)
" There is … no such thing as an ESP
methodology, merely methodologies that have
been applied in ESP classroom"
Hutchinson and Water (1987)
" ESP…is an approach to language learning,
which is based on learner need. The foundation
of all ESP is the simple question: Why does this
learner need to learn a foreign language?“
Hutchinson and Water (1987)
17. III/ WHAT IS ESP? (cont.)
Definition by Strevens (1988)
According to Strevens ESP has 4 absolute
characteristics and 2 variable characteristics
18. Strevens’ definition (cont.)
The 4 absolute characteristics are:
ESP is designed to meet the needs of
the learners
ESP is related in content to particular
disciplines, occupations and activities
ESP is centered in language appropriate
to those activities in syntax, lexis, discourse,
semantics – and the analysis of the
discourse
ESP is in contrast with General English
19. III/ WHAT IS ESP? (cont.)
Strevens’ definition (cont.)
Two variable characteristics are:
ESP may be restricted as to the learning
skills to be learned
ESP may not be taught to any pre-ordained
methodology
20. III/ WHAT IS ESP? (cont.)
Definition of Dudley-Evans (1997)
Dudley –Evans modified Strevens’
definition into 3 Absolute
Characteristics and 5 Variable
Characteristics
21. Definition of Dudley-Evans (1997) (cont.)
The 3 Absolute characteristics are:
1. ESP is defined to meet specific needs of
the learners
2. ESP makes use of underlying methodology
and activities of the discipline it serves
3. ESP is centered on the language
appropriate to these activities in terms of
grammar, lexis, register, study skills, discourse
and genre.
22. Definition of Dudley-Evans (1997) (cont.)
The 5 Variable characteristics are:
1. ESP may be related to or designed for
specific disciplines
2. ESP may use, in specific teaching
situations, a different methodology from
that of General English
23. 3. ESP is likely to be designed for adult
learners, either at a tertiary level
institution or in a professional work
situation. It could, however, be for
learners at secondary school level
4. ESP is generally designed for
intermediate or advanced students.
5. Most ESP courses assume some basic
knowledge of the language systems
24. III/ WHAT IS ESP? (cont.)
Note that Dudley- Evans has improved
Streven’s definition substantially by
removing the absolute characteristic that
ESP in “in contrast with General English”
and has revised and increased the number
of variable characteristics.
25. III/ WHAT IS ESP? (cont.)
Robinson (1991) gave 2 criteria and some
characteristics of ESP. The criteria are:
Goal –directed
Based on needs analysis
The characteristics are:
Specific time period time constraints
Adult learners, usually not beginners
Usually homogenous class, but sometimes not
identical students (mixed class)
Specialist language ???
26. “So, what is English for Specific Purposes? At this
stage in my career, my answer is this: ESP is
English instruction based on actual and immediate
needs of learners who have to successfully perform
real-life tasks unrelated to merely passing an
English class or exam. ESP is needs based and task
oriented. Teaching ESP is demanding, time
consuming, and different for every group of
students. ESP is a challenge for all who teach it,
and it offers virtually unlimited opportunities for
professional growth.” (Rebecca Smoak, 2003)
27. “Among the groundbreaking early insights of
ESP practitioners, perhaps most significant
was the realization that teacher intuition and
knowledge of language systems were
insufficient, and that understanding of
language use in specific contexts was essential
(Dudley-Evans & St. John, 1998; Robinson,
1991). (Diane Belcher, 2006)”