Skip to main content

MFL? ML? LOTE? WL? FL? L2? AL? SFL? IL? L?

There are a number of terms and abbreviations used in the field of teaching languages other than English. As far as the teaching of French is concerned, in Anglophone countries, some Americans (in New York) talk of LOTE (Languages Other Than English), some of WL (World Language(s)), most that I have found use FL (Foreign Language). The term Languages is also used on its own, for example by New Zealand high schools. Australians and New Zealanders seem to use ML (Modern Languages) at the university level, but at high school level, Australians frequently use LOTE. In NZ literature I have also seen IL, for International Languages.

The British now use MFL (Modern Foreign Languages). We used to say Modern Languages (ML), but some years ago it was thought necessary to distinguish the likes of French and German from community languages such as Hindi or Chinese. Interestingly, in the British university sector, where the distinction with community languages is less relevant, the term Modern Languages is still used.

The university of South Africa has a course in Modern European Languages and distinguishes them from World Languages. At high school level, where Afrikaans is a major "home language" the term "additional language" is sometimes used.

Meanwhile Canadian universitites also refer to Modern Languages while the terms Foreign Language, Modern Languages or just plain Languages can be found in high schools.

So, is any term superior to the others?

Nomenclature can clearly depend on the particular political concerns of countries. In South Africa the dictinction between home language and other languages is important. In the UK, the distinction between community languages and other languages is significant. This goes some way in explaining the variation in terminology and there is no compelling reason why everyone in the world should use the same term.

According to Wikipedia, "a world language is a language spoken internationally which is learned by many people as a second language". This definition is a handy, very broad definition and one which excludes ancient languages. It is matched closely by the term LOTE, therefore, in definition. LOTE could theoretically include classical languages. To me, however, adding the word "world" seems superfluous.

The term "additonal language" (AL) is a handy one, and shorter than LOTE. It makes the distinction with one's native language clear, but it could refer to a bilingual's own second language.

The term "second language" (L2), widely used in applied linguistics, is problematic since for many learners the extra language learned at school may be a third language.

To me, the term modern languages implicitly gives too much importance to Latin and Greek, which, whatever their merits, are learned these days by relatively few students. It is a term which may have been thought useful when there was potentially confusion between classical and modern languages. Latin and Greek can be conveniently referred to as Classics, leaving the term languages available for French, Spanish and so on..

In Britain "foreign languages" is no doubt seen as politically incorrect because of the ambiguous meaning of the word "foreign". We frown these days at the term foreigner, just as the British frown at the term "handicapped" (although the French do not mind handicapé - different countries, different euphemisms). In addition, there is an issue in referring to community languages as "foreign". In a sense they are, but to speakers of community langauges the term might be offensive.

The French have their generally accepted term langue vivante (LV) ("living language", an equivalent to modern language), whilst the Germans use Fremdsprache (foreign language). Wordreference informs me that the Spanish use lenguas vivas/modernas and the Italians lingue moderne. Are they less bothered about political niceties??

The term "modern foreign languages" (MFL) seems a bit too fussy to me, although, as I mentioned earlier, it is quite precise what it means in a British context.

It's not easy to come down in  favour of any of these terms and I am tempted to conclude that the term "languages" is perfectly adequate since we generally know what this means.

So I'd go with L!

Comments

  1. Hi Steve!
    At my school we say Languages as opposed to English and Thai. Then L1 stands for home language and L2 for 2nd language other than English. Really it depends on the school context. François Stalder, Head of Languages, www.harrowschool.ac.th

    ReplyDelete
  2. The IB term is "language B" to allow for students to have more than one language already. It is (mildly) problematic to have so many different terms - for Twitter I have learned to use the hashtag MFL to find relevant chat. I dislike the term "language" to mean 1st language skills - but teachers of L1 / Language A / English probably have similar conversations about what terminology should be used :)
    MFL is probably less relevant outside of Australia and the UK where the linguistic environment is richer... but why not include community languages? And why differentiate between modern languages and classical? I'll quite happily go with L with you!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for commenting.

    On Twitter I find that MFLtwitterati generates the most contacts. My impression is that British language teachers are the busiest on Twitter, but that may be down to numbers, with The UK having a larger population than Australia, NZ and Canada.

    ReplyDelete
  4. At the Eurolingua Institute SA, we tend just to talk about 'languages' as we teach Arabic, Catalan, Chinese, Dutch, English, Farsi, French, German, Hebrew, Italian, Japanese, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, Swedish, in the countries where the language is spoken nationally. www.eurolingua.com

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The latest research on teaching vocabulary

I've been dipping into The Routledge Handbook of Instructed Second Language Acquisition (2017) edited by Loewen and Sato. This blog is a succinct summary of Chapter 16 by Beatriz González-Fernández and Norbert Schmitt on the topic of teaching vocabulary. I hope you find it useful.

1.  Background

The authors begin by outlining the clear importance of vocabulary knowledge in language acquisition, stating that it's a key predictor of overall language proficiency (e.g. Alderson, 2007). Students often say that their lack of vocabulary is the main reason for their difficulty understanding and using the language (e.g. Nation, 2012). Historically vocabulary has been neglected when compared to grammar, notably in the grammar-translation and audio-lingual traditions as well as  communicative language teaching.

(My note: this is also true, to an extent, of the oral-situational approach which I was trained in where most vocabulary is learned incidentally as part of question-answer sequence…

Delayed dictation

What is “delayed dictation”?

Instead of getting students to transcribe immediately what you say, or what a partner says, you can enforce a 10 second delay so that students have to keep running over in their heads what they have heard. Some teachers have even used the delay time to try to distract students with music.

It’s an added challenge for students but has significant value, I think. It reminds me of a phenomenon in music called audiation. I use it frequently as a singer and I bet you do too.

Audiation is thought to be the foundation of musicianship. It takes place when we hear and comprehend music for which the sound is no longer or may never have been present. You can audiate when listening to music, performing from notation, playing “by ear,” improvising, composing, or notating music. When we have a song going round in our mind we are audiating. When we are deliberately learning a song we are audiating.

In our language teaching case, though, the earworm is a word, chunk of l…

Designing a plan to improve listening skills

Read many books and articles about listening and you’ll see it described as the forgotten skill. It certainly seems to be the one which causes anxiety for both teachers and students. The reasons are clear: you only get a very few chances to hear the material, exercises feel like tests and listening is, well, hard. Just think of the complex processes involved: segmenting the sound stream, knowing lots of words and phrases, using grammatical knowledge to make meaning, coping with a new sound system and more. Add to this the fact that in England they have recently decided to make listening tests harder (too hard) and many teachers are wondering what else they can do to help their classes.

For students to become good listeners takes lots of time and practice, so there are no quick fixes. However, I’m going to suggest, very concisely, what principles could be the basis of an overall plan of action. These could be the basis of a useful departmental discussion or day-to-day chats about meth…

Five great advanced level French listening sites

If your A-level students would like opportunities to practise listening there are plenty of sources you can recommend for accessible, largely comprehensible and interesting material. Here are some I have come across while searching for resources over recent years.

Daily Geek Show

I love this site. It's fresh, youthful and full of really interesting material. They have an archive of videos, both short and long, from various sources, grouped under a range of themes: insolite (weird news items), science, discovery, technology, ecology and lifestyle. There should be something there to interest all your students while adding to their broader education. Here is one I enjoyed (I shall seriously think about buying tomatoes in winter now):




France Bienvenue

This site has been around for years and is the work of a university team in Marseilles. You get a mixture of audio and video material complete with transcripts and explanations.This is much more about the personal lives of the students …

Responsive teaching

Dylan Wiliam, the academic most associated with Assessment for Learning (AfL), aka formative assessment, has stated that these labels have not been the most helpful to teachers. He believes that they have been partly responsible for poor implementation of AfL and the fact that AfL has not led to the improved outcomes originally intended.

Wiliam wrote on Twitter in 2013:

“Example of really big mistake: calling formative assessment formative assessment rather than something like "responsive teaching".”

For the record he subsequently added:

“The point I was making—years ago now—is that it would have been much easier if we had called formative assessment "responsive teaching". However, I now realize that this wouldn't have helped since it would have given many people the idea that it was all about the teacher's role.”

I suspect he’s right about the appellation and its consequences. As a teacher I found it hard to get my head around the terms AfL and formative assess…