A PSYCHODYNAMIC INTERPRETATION

We turn now to what, for want of a better term, we may call a psychodynamic interpretation of what happens in language classes. The Greek term "psychodynamics" translated into Latin would be something like "intra- and inter-personal action," and in plain Anglo-Saxon "what goes on inside and between folks." The Anglo-Saxon, as usual, is the most direct and expressive way to put the matter; unfortunately, there is no convenient way to make an adjective of it. In any case, and in whatever

\

language, we shall base this formulation on all that has preceded it in this book, and we shall test it in the chapters that follow.

First, we focus our attention on two principles that underlie foreign language learning.

A Psychodynamic Interpretation of Language Learning

Principle la: Language is one kind of purposeful behavior between people.

Obviously, this is not a definition, but only a partial description, in which the key words are purposeful and people. It shifts emphasis away from the audiolingualists' "Language is a system of oral symbols ... " and beyond the more recent view of language as "creative, rule-governed behavior"

(Chastain 1971 :88). It uses the "system" for a purpose, and it "creates"

for a purpose, and these purposes inevitably involve other people.

Principle lb: And language behavior is intertwined with other kinds of purposive behavior between people. Even in the earliest weeks of infancy, the interaction between child and mother reflects "a rather finely tuned and potentially meaning-laden system wherein each allows the other to act" (Lewis and Freedle 1973:128). From that stage on, except in language classes, people ordinarily do not talk without having something to say to someone else. But even in language classes, people do not communicate by words alone. Tone of voice, body language, and many other channels carry at all times, wil-we nil-we, messages that either confirm the words, or are irrelevant to them, or contradict them. Lozanov makes a major point of this observation when he talks about the

"biplanarity" of communication; his method develops "biplanar" com­

munication, based on scientific principles, into a fine art (p. 43).

Principle Ila: The human mind learns new behavior rapidly at any age. This says neither that the mind learns with equal speed at all ages, nor that the learning process at age 20 is pedagogically or physiologically the same as it was at age 2.

Principle fib: But (many kinds of) learning will be slowed down when the learner is busy defending himself from someone else. In Maslow's theory (1970), the highest form of motivation is "self-actualization," and this can be realized only when threats on all preceding levels have been reduced to tolerable amounts. In Berne's theory (1972:Ch. 5), the optimum "way of structuring time" is "intimacy," a "candid, game-free relationship, with mutual free giving and receiving and without

exploita-A General View 121

tion" (Berne 1972:25). Some degree of intimacy is a precondition of receptive learning. The writings of Curran, Gattegno and Lozanov, unlike the writings of most of us full-time career language teachers, make the reduction of defenses into a matter of fundamental importance and chronological priority (cf., Libit and Kent 1970:55). One of the most fascinating aspects of comparing methods (Chapters VIII, IX, X) is to see how differently this problem is dealt with by various practitioners.

Innumerable writers have listed innumerable principles of foreign language learning. To omit them here is not to say that those principles are invalid, or even that they are unimportant; it is however to say that the two listed here are, from a psychodynamic point of view, central.

Placing "principles of learning" before "principles of teaching" is consistent with the ideas of Gattegno (1972), Wardhaugh (1971 :19) and some others, even though it conflicts with the practice of many.

A Psychodynamic Interpretation: Foreign Language Teaching From a psychodynamic standpoint, the central principles of language teaching are also two in number.

Principle I I I. Help the student to stay in contact with the language.

This principle, like Principle I la, is as important for what it does not say as for what it does say. In the light of Principle I, staying in contact with the language means more than merely listening to or looking at sentences in the language, even if one understands their meaning. The teacher/textbook must ordinarily maintain the student's understanding of the language: in the terminology of Principle lb, they must keep clear how the language strand of behavior is related to the other strands. But Principle la says that behavior is not only a cable, it is also a cable that is attached at both ends:

the teacher must help the student to maintain interpersonal purpose on one or (preferably) more of the levels that we have listed (p. 49f). Goals differ in range (short or long) as well as in level.

Principle IV. Help the student to maintain wholesome attitudes.

With some simplification and a little distortion, we may state the national mottos of Audiolinguia and Cognitia as follows:

Audiolinguia: "The crucial (though not the only essential) factor in second language learning is the quantity of oral activity."

Cognitia: "The crucial factor in second language learning is the quality of mental understanding."

In contrast to these formulations, the present chapter says:

Terra lncognita: "The crucial factor in second language learning is the quality of personal activation."

This is a point at which the teacher's whole personality makes an impact, of course. This is where the teacher may try to supply missing motivations, whether "instrumental" or "integrative" (Prator 1971 ). This is where a relatively mechanical procedure like Interaction Analysis (Moskowitz 1968, 1971, 197 4; Krumm 1973) may provide the raw material for invaluable insights into the effects of one's teaching behaviors. Here, too, in watching oneself in a videotaped microteaching episode, one may profit from turning off the sound.

But this is also the point at which technique comes into its own, both for minimizing frustration and confusion, and for avoiding a feeling of stagnation in class activity. And this is where advances in linguistic analysis may cast light on the whole process, from writing of materials, through planning of lessons, all the way to teaching in the classroom. As guidelines for employing technical virtuosity in a more "psychodynamic"

way, we may suggest the following:

1. Reduce "reflectivity." Even theoretically, reflectivity cannot be reduced to zero, for the student inevitably requires at least brief exposure to a suitable model. It is even doubtful whether it should be reduced as far as possible, for to do so might produce destructive anxieties at other levels. Nevertheless, many of the tribal customs widely practiced in all major styles of language teaching are unnecessarily reflective.

2. Increase "productivity" at as many levels as possible. The meaning of this injunction is illustrated on pp. 116-119.

3. Teach, then test, then get out of the way. The maxim "teach, then test" has long been known to us. A fair paraphrase is probably

"present the new material clearly, so as to develop a new bit of 'competence'; then conduct some activity which wi II enable you and the students to verify that this competence has indeed become available as a basis for performance." Insofar as this formula has reminded us not to confuse "teaching" and "testing," it has served a useful purpose. Unfortunately, however, it has often been subjected to a particular kind of distortion, which has changed it from a

A General View 123

moderately helpful principle into a pernicious one. The distorted version is: "Teach, then test, then teach some more, then test some more, all the way to the end of the course." In the metaphor of p.

115, this application of the rule produces a circle of small radius. In some of the terminology of Chapter V, it tends to perpetuate the Controlling Parent-Adapted Child nexus. It tends to minimize

"productivity" and maximize "reflectivity." If the personalities of teacher and students are such that learning becomes partially

"receptive," the depth· of the "receptivity" is nevertheless limited to the relatively shallow level from which "productivity" is accepted. In teaching and then testing, the teacher is fulfilling essential Natural Parental functions: (1) meeting the fundamental security need by providing structure and continuity for the student's activity, and (2) serving as a link between the neophyte and the demands of the foreign language. By failing-or even refusing-to get out of the way, the teacher becomes a Controlling Parent. Just how often to "get out of the way," and how soon, and how far, are matters of judgment which cannot be prescribed here or in any other book. In general, however, most of us would do well to step farther aside, and sooner and more often, than we are accustomed to doing. As the teacher learns to limit himself, he can give more independent meaning and value to the others in the classroom (Curran 1968:213).

A Psychodynamic Interpretation of Materials Development Principle V. In preparing materials, make it easy for teacher and students to follow Principles I-IV. Affirmatively, this means providing potentially purposeful material (cf., in my 1971 treatment, "occasions for use,"

"samples," "social and topical dimensions," and especially "strength") that will minimize confusion (cf., "transparency" and guided "explora­

tion") and forestall stagnation (cf., "lightness"). Negatively, it means refusing to use the materials as a showcase for technical virtuosity beyond the demands of the first four principles.

CONCLUSION

These five principles make up a set of correlative assumptions about the nature of language and the nature of language teaching and learning. We might therefore, using Anthony's figure of speech (1963 ), say that they

represent an approach to our subject matter. In another metaphor, they are simply a way of looking at our work, just as the infrared camera brings out features of an aerial photograph which do not appear on conventional film.

How is this way of looking at language teaching related to recent calls for greater emphasis on "communication," and to exhortations that we take into account the affective side of education? First, I have tried to explore "what happens inside and between folks in a language class" more thoroughly and more systematically than hitherto. Although what I have done is only preliminary and very tentative, I have drawn a rough map rather than just mentioning a few landmarks.

Second, the point of view set forth here contrasts with the idea that

"communication" is one of three indispensable stages, following "mechan­

ical" and "meaningful" practice, or that "depth" is reached only after a series of preliminary steps. I have tried to see the personal and interpersonal significance of mechanical and meaningful practice, as well as of genuine communication, at all levels in the "depth dimension,"

extending from the first minute of instruction to the last.

In the chapters that follow, we shall look at several methods­

successful methods-that appear on the surface to be quite different from one another. We shall view them through the "psychodynamic" filter of this chapter, to see whether in this chapter we have, indeed, found some of the underlying principles to which they all conform.

VIII

Community