In the forthcoming issue of our journal, we would like to encourage you to consider the ways in which communication is conducted in foreign language classrooms at all educational levels. This includes the choice of language for communication, the frequency of use of L1 and L2, speech acts performed in the foreign language within the school discourse, the relationship between the intensity of L2 use and the development of learners’ language competence and motivation, and other issues.
Research into classroom communication has a long history, see amongst others Bellack et al. (1966), Sinclair and Coulthard (1975), Mehan (1979), Van Lier (1988), Henrici (1990), Bausch et al. (2000), Breen et al. (2001), Bigot (2002), Bigot (2005), Cicurel (2002), Cicurel (2007a), Cicurel (2007b), Bouchard (2005), Becker-Mrotzek and Vogt (2009), Badstübner-Kizik, C. and Bielicka, M. (2023a).
In the Polish context, researchers have also devoted their attention to various aspects of school communication: Majer (2003) conducted a comprehensive study of school discourse, Niżegorodcew (2007) examined the educational discourse against the backdrop of relevance theory, Pawlak (2004) examined aspects of discourse such as: taking the initiative in classroom discourse, types of interaction, types of questions asked by teachers, communication strategies, and the use of pupils’ mother tongue. In volumes 38/1 and 38/2 of Neofilolog (Pawlak 2012a and Pawlak 2012b), numerous elements related to the ability to manage classroom discourse are discussed, e.g. the use of language correction, ensuring an appropriate balance between teaching elements of the language system and teaching communication skills, and again – the ability to ask questions and the choice of language for communication.
Occasionally, practical resources are published, offering teachers phrases useful for classroom communication – see e.g. Iluk (1993), Iluk (1995), Iluk (1996), Butzkamm (2007) and Badstübner-Kizik and Bielicka (2023b) – however, these always reflect a specific perspective on the teaching process and the roles of teachers and pupils, and, like textbooks, become outdated from both a linguistic and methodological point of view. In teacher training, language competences related to classroom communication are often addressed only marginally, and trainee teachers acquire them only indirectly, whilst developing relevant transferable skills. It should be noted, however, that the time and energy devoted by teachers in professional situations to organisational, motivational, explanatory and disciplinary activities constitute a significant proportion of lesson time.
As everyday school life in Poland is extremely difficult to explore empirically, teachers’ actual language practices remain, in many respects, uncharted territory – empirical research is not very representative, and its integration into teacher training and professional development has not yet been established. Despite this challenging situation, it is encouraging that some Polish researchers are undertaking studies in classroom settings, see, for example, the study by Michońska-Stadnik (2012), in which the researcher sought to capture the degree of authentic communication and the correlation between the use of spontaneous language and teachers’ age, or the study by Kouhan (2012), in which the control of interaction by pupils and teachers, the clarity of communication (through knowledge of lesson objectives), and methods of correcting errors are examined. There is, nevertheless, a lack of contemporary comparative research addressing the question of to what extent various aspects related to the teaching process (e.g. duration, intensity, cultural dimension) influence communication in foreign language lessons.
To initiate a scholarly discussion on the above topics, we plan to publish a volume that examines the issue of communication in foreign language teaching contexts from various perspectives. We invite submissions in Polish, English, German and French. Articles addressing the following aspects are particularly welcome:
- Classroom discourse that supports or hinders learning,
- Criteria for selecting L1 and L2 during lessons,
- Quantity and quality of the linguistic input (structural and lexical richness) / authenticity of classroom language,
- The relationship between the intensity of classroom communication in L2 and pupils’ language competences,
- Difficulties in using L2 as a means of communication,
- The choice of language of communication and pupils’ concentration and motivation,
- Teacher feedback, including the role of questions in classroom discourse,
- The role of the mother tongue and English as an opportunity to support the reception of other foreign languages being taught,
- Ways of improving teachers’ communicative competence,
- Support for teachers in maintaining and further developing their language competence,
- Speech acts performed in L1 and L2 during foreign language lessons.
- The specific nature of school discourse in English lessons versus lessons in other languages
Cited literature:
Badstübner-Kizik C., Bielicka M. (2023a), Die Fremdsprache Deutsch als Unterrichtssprache im DaF-Unterricht – das Fallbeispiel Polen, “Neofilolog”, nr 60/2, s. 285–300.
Badstübner-Kizik C., Bielicka M. (2023b), Ausdrücke und Wendungen für Deutsch als Unterrichtssprache im DaF-Kontext. Deutsch als Unterrichtssprache im vorschulischen, schulischen und außerschulischen Kontext. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Rys.
Bausch K.-R. et al. (ed.) (2000), Interaktion im Kontext des Lehrens und Lernens fremder Sprachen.Arbeitspapiere der 20. Frühjahrskonferenz zur Erforschung des Fremdsprachenunterrichts. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
Becker-Mrotzek M., Vogt R. (2009), Unterrichtskommunikation. Linguistische Analysemethoden und Forschungsergebnisse. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Bellack A. et al. (1966), The Language of the Classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
Bigot V. (2002), Lieux et modes de construction de la relation interpersonnelle en contexte didactique. Analyse d’interactions verbales en cours de français langue étrangère. Thèse pour le doctorat, en didactique des langues et de cultures. Université Paris 3 Sorbonne Nouvelle.
Bigot V. (2005), Négociation de la relation et processus d’appropriation en classe de langue. “AILE“, nr 22, Publications Encrages, Université Paris VIII-Saint-Denis, s. 17–43.
Bouchard R. (2005), Les interactions pédagogiques comme polylogues, “Lidil” nr 31, s. 139–155.
Breen M. P. et al. (2001), Making sense of language teaching: teachers' principles and classroom practices. “Applied Linguistics”, nr 22(4), s. 470–501.
Butzkamm M. (2007), Unterrichtssprache Deutsch. Wörter und Wendungen für Lehrer und Schüler, 2. aktualisierte Auflage. Ismaning: Hueber.
Cicurel F. (2002), La classe de langue, un lieu ordinaire, une interaction complexe. “AILE” nr 16, s. 145–164.
Cicurel F. (2007a), A la recherche d’une grammaire de l’agir professoral, (in:) M. Charolles et al. (ed.), Parcours de la phrase, Mélanges offerts à Pierre le Goffic. Paris: Ophrys, s. 213–226.
Cicurel F. (2007b): L’agir professoral, une routine ou une action à haut risque? (in:) Plazaola-Giger, I. I Stroumza, K. (ed.), Paroles de praticiens et description de l’activité. Bruxelles: de Boeck, s. 7–36.
Henrici (1990), L2 Classroom Research. Die Erforschung des gesteuerten Fremdsprachenerwerbs. „Zeitschrift für Fremdsprachenlehrforschung”, nr 1, s. 21–61.
Iluk J. (1993), Polsko-niemiecki słownik wyrażeń i zwrotów lekcyjnych. Warszawa: WSiP.
Iluk J. (1995), Polsko-angielski słownik wyrażeń i zwrotów lekcyjnych. Warszawa: WSiP.
Iluk J., Jarząbek K. (1996), Polsko-rosyjski słownik wyrażeń i zwrotów lekcyjnych. Warszawa: WSiP.
Kouhan B. (2012), Dyskurs edukacyjny na lekcji języka obcego w polskim liceum ogólnokształcącym a brytyjskim the six form college - wyniki badań porównawczych. „Neofilolog”, nr 38/2, s. 201–222.
Majer J. (2003), Interactive discourse in the foreign language classroom. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.
Mehan H. (1979), Learning lessons. A social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Michońska-Stadnik A. (2012), Comparing the proportion of the language of use and usage in teachers with different I professional experience. “Neofilolog”, nr 38/2, s. 139-150.
Niżegorodcew A. (2007), Input for instructed L2 learners: the relevance of relevance.
Pawlak M. (2004), Describing and researching interactive processes in the foreign language classroom. Konin: Wydawnictwo Państwowej Wyższej Szkoły Zawodowej.
Pawlak M. (ed.) (2012a), Dyskurs edukacyjny w klasie językowej. „Neofilolog”, nr 38/1.
Pawlak M. (ed.) (2012b), Dyskurs edukacyjny w klasie językowej. „Neofilolog”, nr 38/2.
Sinclair J., Coulthard M. (1975), Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by
teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
Van Lier, L. (1988): The classroom and the Language Learner. London, New York: Longman.
Important deadlines
31 October 2026 – submission of draft texts
30 November 2026 – feedback on draft texts
31 January 2027 – submission of final texts