elt j 2014 clavel arroitia 124 34

7/25/2019 ELT J 2014 Clavel Arroitia 124 34

1/11

The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.

The authenticity of real textsin advanced English language

textbooksBegoa Clavel-Arroitia and Miguel Fuster-Mrquez

The term authenticity has been variously interpreted by second language

acquisition and ESL scholars. It has been taken to refer to the materialsused in class, such as texts, but also to the type of tasks the students areassigned, or even to the type of classroom interaction. Our contributionis concerned with the first of these interpretations. We focus on theauthenticity of what are purported to be real texts included in textbooks

for advanced students of English at B2 and C1 levels, according to theCommon European Framework of Reference. This empirical study is basedon a series of parameters that have been established in order to examinethe extent to which the authenticity of real texts has been preserved andto establish other related changes that such texts are subjected to when

included in textbooks.

Authenticity has been subject to different interpretations in theresearch literature. For some second language acquisition (SLA) andESL scholars, this term may refer to texts and other materials usedin class; for others, it might also include the assignments given tostudents and even different kinds of classroom interaction. This paperis concerned with the first of these interpretations: the authenticity ofwhat are taken to be real texts 1 in coursebooks for advanced learnersof English, that is, the B2 and C1 levels as defined in the Common

European Framework of Reference (CEFR).2

For this study, we haveselected a sample of 60 texts used in six English textbooks fromseveral prestigious publishing houses, drawing upon ten texts perbook. In this paper, we examine the extent to which the authenticityof these texts has been preserved, the kind of changes they haveundergone when found in textbooks, and the rationale for thesechoices. In the next section we will offer a review of the literature inSLA/ESL concerning the introduction of authentic material. Then, wewill describe the methodology that we followed and discuss the resultswhich emerged from the parameters we used to evaluate the issue ofauthenticity in the ESL context, and offer conclusions arising fromthis study.

Introduction

124 ELT Journal Volume 68/2 April 2014; doi:10.1093/elt/cct060

b yM oh d a i z a t om a r onF e b r u a r y1 1 ,2 0 1 6

h t t p : / / e l t j . oxf or d j o ur n a l s . or g /

D o wnl o a d e

d f r om
http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/


2/11

A number of authors ( Guariento and Morley 2001 ; Mishan 2004 )highlight the advantages of introducing learners to authentic texts. Theyare thought to be pedagogically appropriate, interesting, and motivatingfor advanced students. Nevertheless, there is no wide consensus in theSLA literature as to what is meant by authenticity or how it shouldbe implemented. One of the first scholars to address this issue wasWiddowson (1978 : 80). He distinguished between genuineness, an

inherent quality of text passages, and authenticity, that is, the readersinterpretation of text passages. A different conception of authenticityis that voiced by Wallace (1992 : 145), for whom authentic texts are[] real-life texts, not written for pedagogic purposes (see also Little,Devitt, and Singleton 1989 ). For Richards (2001) and Tamo (2009) ,texts, photographs, video selections, and teaching materials which arenot specifically prepared for pedagogical purposes are deemed to begenuinely authentic materials.

Some scholars are concerned by the use of authentic materials in theclassroom. For example, Widdowson (2000 : 7) objects to studentsbeing exposed to the exploration of corpora by means of concordancersbecause the authentic data accessed this way is decontextualized.Furthermore, Widdowson (1998) argues that the classroom cannotprovide the conditions for authentic language data to remain authenticwhen deployed in a learning context.

The issue of pragmatic or cultural decontextualization of real texts orcorpora in the classroom has been emphasized by various scholars (seeHutchinson and Waters 1987 : 15). On the other hand, some authors(see Richards op.cit.) emphasize that the problems experienced by

learners may stem from an untimely exposure to complex structures,unnecessary vocabulary, or to a careless selection of texts. ForOmmagio (2003) , low learner competence in the target languagemay be a good reason not to use authentic texts. We claim that mostof these drawbacks cannot be attributed to the presence of real texts,but to the inappropriate choices of coursebooks by teachers. We agreewith Mishan (op.cit.: 219) that the introduction of authentic materialsmay arouse learners interest, and be more motivating than ordinarynon-authentic texts encountered in textbooks (see also Guariento andMorley op.cit.: 3489). However, the reality of TEFL is that, other thingsbeing equal, L2 learners are exposed to authentic versus non-authenticlanguage samples of language in unequal proportions depending on thetextbook and the materials selected by teachers.

The aim of this research is to observe the extent to which authentic textsare used by textbook writers at the B2 and C1 levels, to highlight somefeatures which inform their choices and, above all, to identify the natureof the adaptations made by textbook writers. The linguistic and culturalchoices embodied in foreign language textbooks are central to theteaching experience since, for a large number of L2 teachers, textbooksare practically the only learning resource in the classroom (see Alcaraz2011: 209). Therefore, the question is whether textbooks providerelevant and genuine target language and cultural input regardingthe target language and culture. Our hypothesis is that texts in the

Authenticity

Researchon languageauthenticity inEnglish textbooks

The authenticity of real texts in advanced English language textbooks 125



D o wnl o a d e

d f r om
http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/


3/11

textbooks examined in this research lack authenticity. It seems that thedanger of not using authentic texts is that students at higher levels maybe denied sufficient exposure to the kind of English they need to face inthe real world after years of study.

There has been considerable research in recent decades in the fieldof corpus linguistics related to the language in textbooks. Much ofthis research has dealt with the issue of authenticity. Meunier andGouverneur (2009 : 183) review recent work which examines thedistance/closeness of textbook materials to the target language. Tosummarize some of the issues raised, there seem to be significantmismatches between native production and the language in texts anddialogues in textbooks. Yet, most researchers advocate the inclusionof authentic language by means of authentic texts or real collocationalpatterns in constructed texts.

To our knowledge, no research has been conducted on the typeand quality of real texts that are included in L2 language textbooks.

Meanwhile, opportunities to access authentic language materialshave risen exponentially thanks to the internet and the developmentof communication technologies. However, we are still in the darkas to how those genuine texts are actually handled by individualteachers.

We selected six textbooks which are sold internationally by well-established TEFL publishing houses: Cambridge University Press,Macmillan, and Oxford University Press. These English textbooks aresold and used worldwide although some of their features may vary to

target specific users or local markets (for example Spanish, Italian,Asian, etc.). Such changes may affect the selection of activities, but notthe selection of so-called real texts or the way they are adapted in asignificant way. All these coursebooks make use of authentic texts butthese are subject to varying degrees of adaptation. The six textbooksselected for our analysis represent levels B2 and C1 in CEFR, and werepublished between 2008 and 2011. In the case of books published bythe same publisher (for instance Cambridge University Press), onlythose with different authors were selected. All these books are intendedfor adults, a fact that is reflected in the contents and tasks.

B2-level coursebooks

Global by Lindsay Clandfield and Rebecca Robb Benne (Macmillan2011).

Complete First Certificate by Guy Brook-Hart with Debbie Owen(Cambridge University Press 2008).

English Unlimited by Alex Tilbury and Leslie Anne Hendra with DavidRea, Theresa Clementson, and Vicente R. Sanchs Caparrs. Courseconsultant: Adrian Doff (Cambridge University Press 2011).

C1-level coursebooks English Unlimited by Adrian Doff and Ben Goldstein with

M. A. Meroo (Cambridge University Press 2011).

Methodology I:objectives andtexts examined

126 Begoa Clavel-Arroitia and Miguel Fuster-Mrquez



D o wnl o a d e

d f r om


4/11

New English File by Clive Oxenden and Christina Latham-Koenig(Oxford University Press 2010).

Ready for CAE by Roy Norris with Amanda French (Macmillan2008).

The aim of our study is to examine whether the authentic texts selectedin ELT textbooks meet a number of requirements in relation to their

authenticity. A cursory examination of the textbooks yields positiveresults: real texts have certainly been used in all B2 and C1 textbooks.However, as we will show, these texts have been changed by writers todifferent degrees and the choice of texts is often restricted in terms ofvariety, register, complexity, etc. In our research, it is precisely thesealterations that we find interesting.

B2 and C1 textbook writers explicitly acknowledge the inclusion of realtexts, obtained from real sources such as newspapers, web pages, books,etc. Nevertheless, we claim that as soon as texts are separated fromtheir natural environment they lose authenticity, since they are made to

serve an alien pedagogical purpose. This process of de-authenticationis enhanced when textbook authors introduce new layouts or go as faras to alter the wording of selected texts. This step constitutes furtherde-authentication, which results in a greater gap between the text inthe textbook and the original format.

Our study combines both quantitative and qualitative analysis.We selected a total of 60 texts, ten from each of the six textbooks.Research on the authenticity of textbooks has been performed onlarger and smaller samples than this. However, in our view, this

sample is sufficiently large to provide us with relevant insights. Themain principle for this selection was that every text should belongto a different unit of each book. However, this could not be donemechanically, because each textbook had a different number ofunits, often larger than the number of texts selected. For instance,Ready for CAE contains 14 units, whereas Complete First Certificate has 16 units, etc. Therefore, in this case, the ten texts selected do notrepresent all 14 units. A second restriction concerned the availabilityof the authentic texts. Only those texts whose original could be foundwere included in the analysis. When alterations were too significant,to the point that no single original text could be contrasted with thetextbook example, it was automatically excluded. Thus, as a rule, onlya small percentage of texts in textbooks might be labelled as authentic.The texts extracted from textbooks were analysed according to theseparameters:1 text typology according to dominant text type2 type/degree of adaptation3 the variety of English represented4 acknowledgement of authorship, date of publication, or source.

These parameters and the results of the examination of informationfrom the textbooks were entered into a database (Microsoft Access) andsubsequently transferred to a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet to make thenecessary calculations.

Methodology II:text selection andparameters




D o wnl o a d e

d f r om


5/11

Results anddiscussion

An overview of the results revealed by the parameters we chose showsthat the average written text in our analysis exhibits the typologicalcharacteristics listed here:

it is mostly descriptive or expository; it represents a native variety: British English (BrE); it has undergone alterations, and one or more sections of text have

been trimmed to fit a pre-established size; linguistic substitution regularly affects the title, which is either

modified or changed completely; acknowledgements are included, but frequently in small print and

detached from the body of the textbook.

In what follows we will discuss these findings in greater depth,although in some cases it will be convenient to refer to the relationshipbetween the different parameters we have just mentioned.

Text typology Text typology is not directly related to authenticity. However, the factthat textbook writers make, or fail to make, an appropriate choice of texttypes has an effect on the exposure of learners to a rich variety of texts.It is difficult to assign a particular text to a single mode of writing. Thisis unsurprising as there are no pure modes of writing and it is oftendifficult to decide whether a large number of texts conform to a singlemode. On the contrary, a particular genre may contain several modesof writing. We decided to classify each text according to its dominantmode, as shown in Figure 1.

A careful selection of a variety of text types should be of primaryconcern to textbook writers because, as already mentioned, the textbookis often the only source of language the students have. The sample inthe figure below shows that learners are exposed mostly to descriptivetexts, followed by expository texts, while other categories rarely appear.Particularly striking is the very low percentage of argumentative texts.

FIGURE 1

Results of types oftexts




D o wnl o a d e

d f r om


6/11

Oddly enough, B2 and C1 textbooks regularly ask students to writeargumentative essays but hardly include any authentic texts to cater forthat need. It is difficult to decide what an ideal and balanced list of texttypes should be like at these stages. There is nothing arguably wrongwith the low percentage of poetry and drama. It is also true that someof the other text types are often hybrid and may include features of amissing purer argumentative type. Nevertheless, it is still puzzling

that a dominant argumentative model is under-represented.

Adaptation Adaptation is a central issue in this research on authenticity. In general,we claim that all the texts examined should be considered authentic,since they are real texts imported from natural contexts, regardless ofthe type or amount of modification they have undergone. However,we think that the term adaptation, often mentioned in the textbooksthemselves, is too vague a term and does not provide relevant details oftextual or linguistic changes. In our analysis, we distinguished between

two basic types of adaptation. On the one hand, there is cropping, i.e.the trimming of parts of text; and, on the other, linguistic substitution:changes in the original language such as orthographic or lexico-syntactic rewordings. Cropping involves reducing the quantity of textwhile linguistic substitution involves qualitative changes in the text.Our analysis shows that 96.6 per cent of the texts in the corpus (thatis, 58 of a total of 60) have been adapted in quantity and/or quality. Inthe case of these adapted texts, we found that all but two had undergonesome type of cropping at the beginning, in the middle, or at the endof the text and in quite a number of cases cropping affected severalparts. The only two texts which were not cropped were a poem and aliterary review. The main reason for cropping long texts was simply togive them an adequate size. However, it also served to simplify difficultpassages. In most cases, the discarded parts do not hinder basiccomprehension. Whatever the reason for their omission, the removal ofparts of the text certainly affects the original design. Equally significantwas the fact that most of the cropped texts (92.9 per cent) also exhibiteddifferent degrees of qualitative changes.

We compared the use of cropping and substitution by textbook authors atlevels B2 and C1. Quantitatively and qualitatively there are no significant

differences between the two levels with regards to cropping. There are,however, differences in terms of substitution since it is more frequent inC1 textbooks. Nevertheless, all the texts with no linguistic amendmentsat B2 level come from a single textbook and basically involve creativeprose or even poetry, where it is understandable that the original wordingshould be preserved. From a linguistic standpoint, the reason for thecropping and substitution seems to be to simplify texts for students.

Textbook writers approached the task of text adaptation in somewhatdifferent ways. For instance, the authors of Cambridge ELT textbooks(B2) have adapted texts more thoroughly than the authors of theMacmillan textbook. On the other hand, another B2 textbook, Global (Macmillan), contains texts by collaborators such as David Crystal.These texts have been specially designed for this textbook and,




D o wnl o a d e

d f r om


7/11

consequently, do not represent genuine texts derived from nativecontexts. Nevertheless, the authors of Global are more inclined to cutout parts of the texts than to perform qualitative changes.

As a rule, the authentic texts in C1 textbooks are longer and exhibitgreater lexical richness than those found in B2-level books. Thealterations in the authentic texts at C1 level appear to be less significantthan those found at B2 level. However, adaptations are still quitefrequent in the C1 textbooks examined, a level at which students shouldbenefit from a greater authentic input.

FIGURE 2Results ofvarieties ofEnglish

Variety of Englishrepresented

A second compelling reason for some of the changes described above isto make the text conform to Standard BrE. Indeed, the vast majority of thetexts we have analysed represent a single variety, BrE; only a few representany other variety. In itself, this constitutes a poor attempt to exposeadvanced learners to mainstream varieties. As we can see in Figure 2 ,there is an overwhelming tendency for authentic texts to have a BrEsource. This strong preference is often specified in the introductory pages,

although the textbooks under scrutiny have an international outlook.While Figure 2 shows that 20 per cent of texts represent a differentvariety, the fact is that whenever these other varieties are introduced,some of their salient varietal features have been minimized. Textswhich were apparently composed by non-native speakers were includedin order to give a cosmopolitan appearance to the textbook. Although wedo not have any concrete evidence, the lack of mistakes or transfers inthese texts leads us to suspect that they have been altered.

At the same time, American English (AmE) texts are quite systematically

made to conform to the BrE variety. American English spellingconventions are almost invariably changed to BrE equivalents by thetextbook writers. This is strengthened by the observation that mostauthentic texts in our corpus have British newspapers or magazines astheir sources. Other varieties of English are under-represented: 7 per centfor AmE and 3 per cent or less for any other variety.




D o wnl o a d e

d f r om


8/11

We will now examine some examples of qualitative alterations and offer aninterpretation; the section in which the changes occur has been underlined:

Extract 1

There is no absolute certainty about the source of the original textfrom which Extract 1 is taken, since this is not mentioned in thetextbook itself. However, versions of it appear to be freely accessibleon the internet on a number of different websites, for example thisone above from The Washington Post , September 1989 (which appearsto be the original text). What becomes apparent is that this is anAmerican text. Apart from the change in spelling, from AmE behavior

to BrE behaviour, the word American before major corporationshas been eliminated, which widens its referential potential. Thisremoval of spatial and temporal references is common practice andcertainly contributes to greater decontextualization. It is also worthmentioning that the original text shows real situations that are comicalor unrealistic. However, this reference has been removed by the author.Thus, the learner cannot recover an essential contextual feature thatmight have contributed to a fuller understanding of the text and itspurpose in its real context. Other deletions, such as the expressionDont belch or the sentence that follows, are made perhaps because

they are thought inappropriate for a textbook. Colloquial languagestructures (for example the donts) are removed and the originalexpression go light years beyond this is changed to go a long waybeyond this. While the goal of simplifying language is achieved, itcomes at the cost of removing a number of connotations from the text,thus exacerbating its linguistic and cultural estrangement.

Another striking case is provided by a text intended for C1 learners (seeExtract 2). It may be catalogued as AmE but of a specially challengingkind. The author is a US citizen of Spanish-Mexican descent. Itappeared in a blog called LA Weekly . It consists of the comments madeby a Spanish-speaking blogger living in the US who is discussing thequality of food in Mexican restaurants in the part of the country he hasrecently moved to. We reproduce just a fragment of it:

Weve all been in erviewed for jobs. And, weve all spen mos of hose in erviews hinkingabou wha no o do. Don bi e your nails. Don dge . Don in errup . Bu some jobapplican s go a long way beyond his. We surveyed he op personnel executves of a hundred

major corporatons and asked for s ories of unusual behaviour by job applican s.

(Hendra, Tilbury, Clemen son, and Rea English Unlimi ed for Spanish Speakers UpperIn ermedia e Coursebook wi h e-Portolio 2011, p. 90, Cambridge Universi y Press,reproduced wi h permission.)

Weve all been in erviewed for jobs. And, weve all spen mos of hose in erviews hinkingabou wha no o do. Don bi e your nails. Don dge . Don in errup . Don belch. If we didany of he don s, we knew wed disqualify ourselves ins an ly. Bu some job applican s go lighyears beyond his. We surveyed op personnel executves of 100 major American corporatonsand asked for s ories of unusual behavior by applican s.

(Levey, B. Going ligh years beyond belches, The Washing on Pos 1989.)




D o wnl o a d e

d f r om


9/11

Extract 2

It is apparent that the text contains Spanish words and expressionswhich are perhaps not uncommon in the southern AmE of the blogsauthor. In the adapted text (Extract 3), the double strategy of the ELT

textbook writer consists of (1) removing passages and (2) translating theSpanish parts into English:

Parts of the beginning, middle, and end have also been cropped.Spanish expressions like vale madre or S, como dulce have beenremoved. The second technique is translation, thus mesero becomeswaiter, salsa de tomate is rendered as tomato ketchup, or cebolla as onion, etc. The reference to that outlet known as Taco Bellis turned into the harmless and vague expression outlets you geteverywhere. After this heavy textual intervention, the learner hasthe impression that the text has been written by an educated Englishspeaker who speaks a mainstream variety of English.

Extract 3

Acknowledgements It is quite clear that the parameters we have examined in this discussionare interrelated. Additionally, references to the original author arekept whenever those texts correspond to well-known English writersor scientists whose work is reported. However, those references aresystematically eliminated when the authors are journalists. Thus,while the name of the newspaper may be reproduced in the textbook,the author is not. Acknowledgements normally take the form of smallprint at the beginning or at the end of the textbook, at a distance from




D o wnl o a d e

d f r om


10/11

the corresponding text. Probably the main reason for this is not toinfringe copyright regulations. In fact, our results show that properacknowledgement of sources has been provided for only 22 of the textsanalysed (that is, 36.6 per cent of the cases). This appears to go againstthe general trend elsewhere of acknowledging sources and copyright in amuch more visible way. Lack of proper acknowledgement of authorshipis yet another way of making a text less authentic. In this line, while the

authors name is regularly removed from newspaper articles, the titlesthemselves are also frequently altered. This adds further to the loss ofidentity and greater decontextualization of these texts.

Conclusions Authenticity is a key issue in SLA and language teaching. Within thecontext of our discussion, authenticity is first and foremost related totexts which are imported from a natural context of language use; thatis, texts that have not been produced with the purpose of teachinga language. The balance of authentic and non-authentic texts is ofinterest in the context of language teaching. A general outcome of our

analysis is that the real texts incorporated in the B2 and C1 textbooksselected have been systematically modified to a lesser or greater extent.More often than not the goals of adaptation are to reduce a longer textto a more manageable size by removing parts of it and simplifyingcomplex language. Also, the preferred variety is unquestionablyBrE which is why texts belonging to other varieties are consistentlyaltered to make them look more British. This analysis also reveals thedearth of argumentative texts. Finally, the lack of adequate ways todirectly acknowledge sources and authorship are sufficient evidence ofdecontextualization or estrangement.

Our empirical observations are in line with the well-known view oftextbooks held by Sinclair (2004 : 216), expressed here:

the texts chosen for class input are often adjusted in order tofacilitate learners processing, or shortened to a more desirablelength. When this happens, we may argue that the model of languagepresented to the learners may be different from language as it is usedin real communication.

This empirical study has shown that recently published textbooks, evenat higher levels, are not as authentic as some researchers argue they

should be. Further research should include more in-depth qualitativeanalysis of those texts catalogued as authentic. Also, a pedagogicaldiscussion is needed to establish what adaptations might be justifiableor beneficial for learners at these stages in the light of the evidencepresented in this study. The drawback is that many of the originaltexts cannot be accessed unless the textbook offers clear and reliablereferences. In this respect, we believe that teachers who regularly usethese textbooks should be given the opportunity to know in greaterdetail how the texts have been modified and what informed thechoices made. Further insightful evaluations could emerge when the

proportions of authentic versus contrived texts are contrasted in thelight of their pedagogical function in the text.

Final version received July 2013




D o wnl o a d e

d f r om


11/11

Notes1 To clarify, we use the term real or authentic

when referring to texts imported from anatural context of language use, i.e. that havenot been produced for a pedagogical purpose.

2 CEFR (2001) Common European Frameworkof Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching,

Assessment . Strasbourg: Language PolicyDivision of the Council of Europe. Available athttp://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Cadre1_en.asp (last accessed 10 January 2013).

ReferencesAlcaraz, G. 2011. Cantidad y ritmo de adquisicinlxica en un contexto de introduccin no sistemtica:estudiantes de ingls como lengua extranjera eneducacin primaria . Unpublished PhD thesis,

Universidad de Murcia, Spain.Guariento, W. and J. Morley. 2001. Text and taskauthenticity in the EFL classroom. ELT Journal 55/4: 34753.Hutchinson, T. and A. Waters. 1987. English forSpecific Purposes: A Learning-Centred Approach.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Little, D., S. Devitt, and D. Singleton. 1989.Learning Foreign Languages from Authentic Texts:Theory and Practice. Dublin: Authentik.Meunier, F. and C. Gouverneur. 2009. New

types of corpora for new educational challenges.Collecting, annotating and exploiting a corpus oftextbook material in K. Aijmer (ed.). Corpora andLanguage Teaching . Amsterdam: John BenjaminsPublishing Company.Mishan, F. 2004. Authenticating corpora forlanguage learning: a problem and its resolution.ELT Journal 58/3: 21927.Ommagio, A. 2003. Teaching Language in Context (third edition). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.Richards, J. C. 2001. Curriculum Developmentin Language Teaching . Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Sinclair, J. M. (ed.). 2004. How to Use Corpora inLanguage Teaching . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Tamo, D. 2009. The use of authentic materialsin classrooms. Linguistic and CommunicativePerformance Journal 2/1: 748.Wallace, C. 1992. Reading . Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Widdowson, H. G. 1978. Teaching Language asCommunication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Widdowson, H. G. 1998. Context, community, andauthentic language. TESOL Quarterly 32/4: 70516.Widdowson, H. G. 2000. On the limitations oflinguistics applied. Applied Linguistics 21/1: 325.

The authorsBegoa Clavel-Arroitia is an Assistant Lecturerof English at the Universitat de Valncia where

she teaches SLA and TEFL modules at bothundergraduate and postgraduate level. She is amember of IULMA-UV (Interuniversity Instituteof Applied Modern Languages, Universitat deValncia) and carries out research in the field ofcorpus linguistics and its applications to teaching,the implementation of ICT resources in languageteaching, and the study of gender and language.She is a member of the research groups Gentextand CASTLE.Email: [email protected]

Miguel Fuster-Mrquez is Senior Lecturer ofEnglish at the Universitat de Valncia and amember of IULMA-UV. His research interestsinclude corpus linguistics and its applications toresearch and teaching, lexicology, variation andhistorical linguistics. He is currently a memberof the research group COMETVAL where heparticipates in the project Lexical analysis anddiscursive parallel and comparable corpora ofSpanish-English-French websites which promote

tourism.Email: [email protected]




D o wnl o a d e

d f r om
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Cadre1_en.asphttp://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Cadre1_en.aspmailto:[email protected]?subject=mailto:[email protected]?subject=http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/mailto:[email protected]?subject=mailto:[email protected]?subject=http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Cadre1_en.asphttp://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Cadre1_en.asp

elt j 2014 clavel arroitia 124 34

Documents