Article Review

A Critical Look at the Communicative Approach (1) and (2)

(Michael Swan)

Reviewed by San Shwe Baw*

A lengthy discussion by Michael Swan guage according the situation and relation-
on the strengths and weaknesses of the ship of the speakers, is regarded as the real
Communicative Approach is really insight- goal of teaching. Communicative ability
ful. Bringing some confusions resulting from largely depends on the teaching of commu-
the mistaken conception of the Communi- nicative skills, which cannot be transferred
cative Approach to light, the author not only from the mother tongue. Language is better
provides us with theoretical justification for understood through developing the skills of
his belief in language teaching, but also sug- adjustment and negotiation between the
gests better ways of exploiting any approach speakers. Classroom discourse is made to
__
old or new. The core of his argument will correspond as closely as possible to real-
be divided into three parts in this report for life use of language. By incorporating no-
the sake of clarity; namely, (I) Communica- tions, functions and strategies into its sylla-
tive Approach as asserted by its proponents, buses, the Communicative Approach
(II) Critical examination of the Communi- teaches meaning systematically.
cative Approach and (III) Effective teach-
ing through an integrated approach. II. Critical examination of the Commu-
nicative Approach
I. Communicative Approach as As-
serted by Its Proponents The Communicative Approach is full of
assertions about language use and language
The Communicative Approach is well learning, which are not factually tenable. The
aware of the two levels of meaning in lan- belief that understanding contextual mean-
guage: propositional meaning and functional ing requires special training results from mis-
meaning, the former being the structural and understanding between thought and lan-
lexical meaning and the latter situational guage. The fact that a child may interpret
meaning. The concept of “appropriacy”, the sentence “Your coat’s on the floor” as
which involves appropriate choice of lan- one asking him to pick it up indicates that

______________________________
*Asst. Prof. San Shwe holds B.A. (English), the Institute of Eduction, Rangoon; Advanced
Diploma in ELT, Leeds University, UK; and M.A. (TESOL), St. Michael’s College, U.S.A. Currently he
is working as a lecturer at the IELE of Assumption University. Six of his ELT articles have so far been
published in America __ three by the English Teaching Forum and three by Essential Teacher, a quar-
terly for members of TESOL. He is the Supervising Editor of ABAC Journal.

ABAC Journal Vol.31 No.3 (September-December 2011) pp.63-69 63

San Shwe Baw

he gives some thought to its lexical meaning required to convey these meanings can be
in line with the situation s/he is in. There is worked out. A sensible teaching programme
no other knowledge involved. The argument is one in which eight or so syllabuses (func-
about “usage” and “use”, therefore, has little tional, notional, situational, topic, phonologi-
relevance to foreign language teaching. cal, lexical, structural, skills) are systemati-
There is no denying the fact that lan- cally integrated. It is, therefore, essential to
guage items used to express a certain situa- consider both semantic and formal accounts
tion need to be appropriate and suitable for of the language when deciding what to teach
__
the purpose. But the Communicative Ap- the former helping to teach stereotyped
proach over generalizes the concept of language and the latter creative language.
appropriacy and presents it as if it applied As far as methodology is concerned, the
to the whole language and all of language Communicative Approach attempts to make
teaching, without properly considering that all the activities as much life-like as possible
this concept is more to do with the teaching by using authentic materials, which can be
of lexis. considered as a methodological improve-
The Communicative Approach does not ment. But other types of discourse like rep-
recognize positive effects of the mother etition, structural drills etc. should also be
tongue on the foreign language learning. So encouraged to a certain extent though they
it is assumed that normal communication seem to have no immediate “communica-
skills such as prediction, guessing and ne- tive” value. A basic concept in contempo-
gotiating meaning are required to be taught rary methodology is that of “information
anew to the foreign language learners. In gap”. The information conveyed through
fact, what the learners need to know are the exercises, however, should have rel-
lexical items, plus something about the sub- evance and interest for the students. Using
ject matter, and the speaker or writer. both scripted and authentic material at dif-
With its syllabuses emphasizing notions, ferent points in a language course is also
functions and strategies, the Communica- desirable as each has positive contributions
tion Approach does not consider the ques- towards learning.
tion of “form” even when necessary, turning As mother tongue plays a pivotal role
a blind eye at the students’ need to be struc- in the process of learning a foreign language,
turally competent. the English-only approach cannot be re-
garded as foolproof. By systematically in-
III. Effective Teaching Through an In- tegrating semantic and formal syllabuses (i.e.
tegrated Approach Structural, notional/functional, phonological,
etc), a good teaching model should consist
Several different meaning categories of four stages; namely, (1) finding out what
and several different formal categories need learners need to know, (2) finding out what
to be taken into consideration in order to they know already, (3) subtracting the sec-
decide what to teach a particular group of ond from the first and (4) teaching the re-
learners. Once lists of meaning have been minder.
gathered, structures, words and expressions

64
 A Critical Look at the Communicative Approach (1) and (2)

EXAMINING INTO THE CRITI- found the originators of the Communicative

CISM OF THE COMMUNICATIVE Approach. Basing their argument on the fact
APPROACH by Michael Swan that a language item takes various meanings
in various contexts, the proponents of the
Michael Swan stated that the Commu- Communicative Approach criticized those
nicative Approach is rich in assertions about of the Structural Approach for teaching only
language use and language learning, liken- the propositional meaning. It was when they
ing its characteristic to leaves falling in au- claimed that any utterance in a given situa-
tumn. But, unlike many people who are tion could be specified by rules, which they
wont to let these assertions pass unchal- believed teachable, they found themselves
lenged with an automatic habitual nod, he open to criticism. Even big shots like Wilkins
had the courage to speak his mind in his or Widdowson could not make it clear what
articles “A critical look at the communica- forms the teaching of such rules might take.
tive approach (1) and (2)”. His critical On the other hand, Swan was quick enough
evaluation of the communicative approach to expose that soft target, which, indeed,
against the much less popular structural ap- was staring us in the face all the time. He
proach is so frank and thought-provoking claimed that those who were in favour of
that one cannot help thinking about his dis- teaching the second kind of meaning (i.e.,
cussion pro and con after reading his ar- the communicative value that utterances
ticles. Indeed, the two articles have cov- actually have in real-life exchanges) were
ered many important issues relating to En- people who misunderstood the distinction
glish language teaching, providing readers between thought and language because they
from the teaching profession with food for were not aware of the significance of the
thought. mother tongue in learning a foreign language.
The first of his two articles examines Swan, in my opinion, was right in viewing
some of the more theoretical ideas underly- that a foreign language teaching syllabus
ing the communicative approach, whereas should not include the teaching of the sec-
the second one deals with more pedagogi- ond type of meaning. To support his argu-
cal aspects of the approach. It was tactful ment, let us look at the word “yes”. Short
of the author to have begun his argument and simple as it might look, it can mean, in
with the concept of having two levels of one case, showing agreement, willingness
meaning in language __ a concept adopted etc, raising a question in the other (i.e. out
by the Communicative Approach. It may not of curiosity to someone approaching one
have been by accident that he put forward unexpectedly) or a response to someone
that issue as the first point to be criticized. calling one’s name. The word “yes” can still
He must have been fully convinced from the take on various meanings in various con-
beginning that this concept was the easiest texts. It is doubtful whether there would ever
for him to make people see its fallibility be an end if all the meanings of a language
clearly. In fact, the idea of a “double level item in various situations were to be taught.
of meaning” is built around some truth, and As Swan had pointed out, our experience
it is this element of truth that seemed to con- and common sense have already equipped

65
San Shwe Baw

us with a facility to deal with these matters. ful than by taking any other means.
We also have had enough exposure to simi- Regarding the teaching of skills and
lar processes of interpreting language while strategies, Swan criticized the teaching of
struggling to pick up our mother tongue and such comprehension skills as predicting,
even after acquiring it. guessing and negotiating meaning as unnec-
Swan did not deny the importance of essary, citing that these skills can be trans-
“appropriacy” in language learning, but con- ferred from the mother tongue. I do not re-
sidered the assertion that it is the real goal gard myself either as conservative or radi-
of language teaching an overgeneralization. cal in matters concerning theories of lan-
He also remarked that the discussion of guage, but I think Swan has given the mother
appropriacy often obscures a perfectly valid tongue too much merit than is necessary.
point about the need for increased attention There is no denying the fact that these skills
to the teaching of lexis. In my opinion, the can be transferred from the mother tongue.
Communication Approach has done a little But, at the same time, they are the skills that
bit of exaggeration in this regard, and Swan we are using consciously or unconsciously
may also have probably made light of one in the process of exchanging information
of the most significant concepts of the Com- among ourselves in real life. If we are trying
municative Approach. Few would argue to learn to use a language, it is natural that
with Swan’s statement that the choice of ap- we need to practise many of the skills in-
propriate lexical items is more to do with volved in the production or reception of it.
the teaching of lexis. However, to decide To give an example to support the idea that
which form the teaching of lexis should take skills need to be practised, we can look at
needs thinking. Traditional approaches have a squad of new recruits going about their
their ways of teaching of lexis, the simplest everyday drill during their military training.
of which is giving definitions or, in some For these young soldiers, the drilling will not
cases, translating the given words into the be complete without having to obey their
mother tongue. Still, knowing the meaning captain’s commands such as “Eye right”,
of a word is a far cry from knowing when “Eye left”, “Eye front”, “About turn”, “Stand
this word can be most appropriately used. easy”, “Attention”, etc. In fact, they are all
In order to know whether a certain language adults. Every one of them has no difficulty
item is appropriate to be used in a certain in carrying out their captain’s commands.
situation, one needs to have frequent expe- But it is to be remembered that they are
rience of seeing or hearing it in the context it practising a discipline which is going to be
belongs. In other words, a learner needs to strategically essential for the operations they
learn to use the most appropriate language have to carry out later. The same is true with
item out of many other synonyms by study- communicative skills. Though Swan said that
ing how it is used in an interactional dis- what the learners need is lexical items __ not
course. As Swan remarked, these are all these skills __ as a learner can fall back on
lexical matters; however, having recourse to the mother tongue for the latter, it may not
the communicative language teaching meth- be wrong to practise these skills while the
odology in this regard may prove more fruit- learners are at the lower levels of profi-

66
 A Critical Look at the Communicative Approach (1) and (2)

ciency. Another reason why we need to reasoned that the Communicative Approach
teach these skills is that there may be learn- will need to refer to a traditional lexical syl-
ers who, either out of confusion or anxiety, labus based on word-frequency in order to
simply do not know how to apply the skills cover all the common and important words.
they have acquired through their mother Traditional structural syllabuses, on the other
tongue in a classroom context. Definitely, hand, are not very good at catching sen-
we need to consider for the learners who tence-length idioms and conventional ex-
sometimes do not see the wood for the pressions, the area where the Communica-
trees. tive Approach can boast of its strength. His
Swan obviously backed up some of the maturity in terms of pedagogical experience
pedagogical aspects of the traditional ap- and insight can be seen in his suggestion that
proaches while criticizing the Communica- a sensible teaching programme should in-
tive Approach concerning its syllabus de- clude eight or so syllabuses (functional, no-
sign and its preference for the authentic tional, situational, topic, phonological, lexi-
materials. In the Communication Approach, cal, structural, skills) __ a systematic combi-
meaning is paramount, so items which be- nation of both syllabuses. One point I find
long together semantically are taught to- myself unsure whether to agree or disagree
gether. Swan noticed that this style of sylla- with Swan is that semantic syllabuses are
bus design can pose a lot of difficulties to needed to help us teach the “stereotyped”
the learners because we do not always use language and structural/lexical syllabuses will
the same structures to describe things which enable us to teach the “creative” language.
are semantically similar. He has, indeed, Though I can accept that semantic syllabuses
made a remarkable contribution in trying to are more to do with stereotyped language,
solve one of the most serious pedagogical I do not feel comfortable with his belief that
problems regarding the choice of priority structural syllabuses will enable us to teach
between form and meaning. He suggested “creative” language. A creative writer, to my
that we need to take into consideration sev- knowledge, does not think about the struc-
eral different meaning categories and sev- tures s/he has studied in the process of pro-
eral different formal categories when decid- ducing a piece of writing.
ing what to teach a particular group of learn- No aspect of the Communicative Ap-
ers. Then, as a compromise, he proposed proach received as much favourable assess-
that we can list the meanings we want our ment from Swan as its methodology, which
students to express and finally work out what encourages language work involving genu-
structures, words and expressions are used ine exchanges. But it was sensible of him to
to convey these meanings, thus ending the suggest that a little bit of artificiality should
controversy over placing priority between be allowable in some of our teaching activi-
form and meaning. ties for the sake of effective learning. He
Swan continued discussing the inter- said there is nothing wrong if activities such
supportive nature of the two approaches, as repetition, rote learning, translation and
leading to a point where he suggested inte- structural drilling are used moderately in our
grating semantic and formal syllabuses. He teaching. I am of the opinion that Swan, at

67
San Shwe Baw

this point, is somewhat influenced by ally know hardly anything about how lan-
Audiolingual Method, which is character- guages are learnt. I am not sure whether he
ized by dialogue and drills, repetition and was just trying to appear modest or humble
memorization, pattern practice and similar with that statement. It is a good thing to be
activity types. modest and to be humble anyway. But if
Swan also criticized some “information we still have got almost nowhere after con-
gap” activities that do not reflect the needs ducting decades of extensive research into
of the learners, and suggested asking the second language learning and teaching, there
students to talk about themselves to ensure is no point in thinking about or in trying to
a productive language practice. It is, no find out how languages are learnt. Enough
doubt, a very nice idea, but there is no guar- time has been spent.
antee that the whole class will be interested Since so little do new approaches base
in his/ her talk. It may not be very easy their theories on proven facts (his belief),
for a student to captivate the attention of had we better not rely only on our own
the whole class just by talking about him- speculation, common sense and experience
self/herself in most cases. which may, at least, help our students to learn
His observations on the use of authen- something from us? His remark “Somehow
tic and scripted materials are interesting and our students do manage to learn languages”
insightful. In his own way of thinking, he seems to be giving the answer “Yes”. His
might be right in stating that the Communi- remark may be taken even as a kind of in-
cative Approach fails to recognize the cru- sinuation that language learning is possible
cial role of the mother tongue in foreign lan- no matter what or how the teacher teaches
guage teaching. But the four-stage model in the classroom. He observed that the lack
that he finally proposed appeared too math- of a solid empirical “anchor” of established
ematical to me. Though we may find out knowledge about language learning makes
what the learner needs to know with rela- us very vulnerable to shifts in intellectual
tive ease, it may be really difficult to find out fashion, which, in my opinion, is a perfectly
exactly what s/he knows already, because sound statement. But is it not through chop-
what kinds of language learning sources the ping and changing that we learn things bet-
learner has been exposed to apart from the ter? So long as there are thinking people,
classroom learning may still remain in the changes in any field cannot be taken as un-
dark. natural phenomena. Swan actually was not
There is no doubt that all the theoretical so much concerned about the changes tak-
and practical aspects of language teaching ing place in the teaching arena as he was
Swan had discussed pro and con in his two frustrated with the theoretical pendulum
articles were thoughtful, informative and in- swinging from one extreme to the other. But
triguing. However, it is my impression that he was seen to be taking a more neutral and
he was a little bit skeptical and pessimistic softer stance as the article neared its end.
in his overall estimate of the whole affair in He warned us not to give up useful older
the conclusion part. At the very beginning methods simply because they have been
of his conclusion, he reflected that we actu- proved wrong, and not to expect too much

68
 A Critical Look at the Communicative Approach (1) and (2)

from the newly gained insight. Needless to

say, Swan’s two articles offer some really
interesting, insightful observations into the
nature of language teaching which will defi-
nitely provide teachers of English as a for-
eign language with the much-needed intel-
lectual nourishment.

References

Swan, M. (1985). “A critical look at the

Communicative Approach (l)”. ELT
Journal 39/1:2-12.
Swan, M. (1985). “A critical look at the
Communicative Approach (2)”. ELT
Journal 39/2:76-87.

69
© 2011. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this
content in accordance with the associated terms available at
http://www.assumptionjournal.au.edu/index.p
journal/about/editorialPolicies#openAccessPolicy