Abstract
The research, which has been carried out, is aimed at analyzing the role of nonverbal communication (NVC) in the acquisition of the foreign language. In particular, it focuses on the cultural and psychological peculiarities of non-linguistic units. The main purpose is to describe the way, in which, they are interpreted by representatives of different cultures and show how this knowledge can be used in studying foreign languages. Additionally, the research explores modern approaches to second language acquisition and the way; they incorporate NVC into the study of foreign languages.
Introduction
The research, which has been carried out, is aimed at analyzing the role of nonverbal communication in the acquisition of the foreign language. In particular, I would like to focus on the modern approaches to SLA (Second Language Acquisition), especially the methods of teaching non-linguistic units (body language, gestures, postures, facial expressions, eye contact. etc). In addition to that, it is of the crucial importance to show the relationships between verbal and non-verbal signals. I also intend to discuss nonverbal communication as a cultural phenomenon, and its manifestation in various cultures. Moreover, it is necessary to show how the knowledge of non-linguistic units can be incorporated into the study foreign languages.
The relationship between verbal and non-verbal communication
Linguists and educators have already come to the consensus, that acquisition of any foreign language is impossible without proper knowledge of culture. There is a widely held opinion that the concept of culture can be interpreted as the total of inherited ideas, activities, beliefs, and values, constituting the basis for the functioning of the society (Argyle, 1975). Judging from this definition, educators inferred that, language skills should accompanied by the knowledge of the countrys history, literature, political system, religious tradition and behavioral code. Naturally, such approach seems to be quite prudent; however, there are some other aspects, which cannot be disregarded. Unfortunately, it seems that some of them have been overlooked, to say the least, especially, non-verbal communication. First, it is worth mentioning that approximately sixty-five percent of the information that a human being communicates is rendered by means of non-verbal signals, in other words, our gestures, or movements, can tell much more than our words (Segerstrîle, 1997). Moreover, it has often been argued that non-verbal signals can be treated as cross-cultural phenomenon, which means that, to a certain degree; they are identical in every culture. However, recent studies, dedicated to this issue have proved that, it is not a universal phenomenon and that false interpretation or use of body language can result in misunderstanding, especially, regarding inter-cultural communication.
Prior to analyzing the role of nonverbal communication in second language acquisition, I would like to discuss the very notion of communication; it seems, modern approaching to teaching and learning are not as effective as they can be, because they misinterpret this concept. The process of communication can be described as the information interchange, which is performed by verbal and non-verbal means. As a rule, the primary importance is attached to verbal means, in other words, sounds, syllables, words, intonation patterns, sentences, (or syntagmas), whereas, are usually considered supplementary, though, in fact, they can be more informative, than sounds or words(David McNeill, 2007).
In his book “Bodily Language” Michael Argyle argues that non-verbal signals actually perform four functions: expressive (by means of body language, we show our attitude or emotions), supplementing (they help us to support our verbal message), moreover, they send “messages about our personality”, which means that some gestures or movements can indicate some traits of our character. Finally, some elements of body language have become an inseparable part of ritualistic behavior (Argyle, 1975). These actions are performed automatically, almost subconsciously. It should be borne in mind that non-compliance with the established stereotypes of bodily language can be viewed as abnormal behavior. Thus, it is quite possible to arrive at the conclusion that the role of non-verbal signals cannot be underestimated, because they not only support verbal communication, but also can act independently and be more informative than verbal signals.
NVC as a cultural phenomenon
Now that the functions of nonverbal signals have been discussed, it is of the utmost importance to analyze this phenomenon from cultural perspective. Scholars have not yet come to the consensus as to the nature of NVS. There is a widely held opinion that, body language is intercultural in its core. Certainly, there are some examples substantiating this statement; people, who do not share common language often, try to communicate with each other by means of gestures, especially deictic signs, which describe graphically the ideas of the speaker.
Additionally, it is argued that NVC is subconscious in its nature, therefore the actions or gestures are usually made automatically, which means that cultural background does not affect the behavior of the speaker. However, such rule can be applied only to facial expressions or any rather bodily movements, indicating physical or emotional state of the speaker (Segerstrîle, 1997).
Scholars, who support such interpretation of NVC, also say that gestures only perform deictic function, or support verbal communication. According to them deictic signs are universal, and can be correctly interpreted by the representatives of various cultures, but the role of NVC cannot be limited only to supplementing the verbal language, as Michael Argyle successfully proves, nonverbal communication is not just graphical description of words.
I would also like to say that social behavior of any person is strongly influenced by his or her cultural background. Nonverbal communication is a constituent part of social behavior, thus it has certain cultural peculiarities, which are not identical. It can be observed that people from various countries use the same gesture in different ways. I would like to analyze such “universal” gesture as handshake. It stands to reason that its meaning cannot be misinterpreted, but its functioning can vary. For instance, in Eastern European countries, men shake hands with each other even if they are not closely acquainted. If a person refuses to do it, his behavior can be treated as disrespect or rudeness, while in Western countries (the United) the handshake may symbolize reconciliation or close friendship. It is more typical for people who are on friendly terms with each other, but it is not an obligatory part of greeting etiquette. Chinese or Japanese people are usually disinclined to shake hands with each other, viewing it as “barbarism”. Moreover, women also look at handshake from different standpoints. In Western Europe or the United States, women may greet each other in this way, though it has become relatively widespread only at the end of the twentieth century; it can explained by the growth of feminist movement, whereas in Post-Soviet countries such form of salutation is not popular (Feldman, 2002). Thus, even such seemingly “universal” gesture acquires peculiar features.
Nonverbal communication comprises several elements, not only gestures. The way people use time (chronemics) also depends on the cultural background of the person. There are mono and poly-chronic cultures, people, living in Western countries (monochronic type) concentrate only on one particular subject at a time. Unlike them, polychromic people may do several things simultaneously.
These examples prove that attitude towards the same bodily movement can vary. L2 learners must be familiar with the cultural peculiarities of nonverbal communication, because incorrect use of NVC may produce the impression of deviant or abnormal behavior, even the person wants to be polite or courteous. It can gradually lead to estrangement between the interlocutors.
The question arises what components verbal communication comprises? There are many approaches to this issue; however, the overwhelming majority of scholars believe that this phenomenon includes the following constituent parts: kinesics (or gestures, body movements, and facial expressions), haptics, (or the style of touching ) , oculesics (eye), contact, chronemics,( the way, in which we perceive and use time) (Michael Argyle, 1975). Additionally, there is the so-called paralanguage, which can be defined as phonetic properties of the language, particularly, intonation (tone, rhythm, tempo, and timbre. Some linguists believe that paralanguage also includes hisses, moans tongue clicks, though, it should be borne in mind such opinion has been debated. Educators have always paid attention to phonetic elements of non-verbal communication, because pronunciation is one of the most significant aspects of second language acquisition.
Nevertheless, it seems that, some components have been overlooked, especially body language. Probably, it can be explained by the fact, that NVC is often mistakenly considered a cross-cultural phenomenon, and that it can be adequately interpreted and understood by representatives of various cultures. Naturally, there are some nonverbal signals, which have become practically universal, but it does not mean that NVC does not have any cultural peculiarities.
The necessity to incorporate nonverbal communication into teaching foreign languages has been discussed by many scholars. Further, the criteria of assessment have been a subject of heated debate. For example, many English proficiency tests (CPE) evaluate a students response according to the following standards; the range of vocabulary, correct use of grammatical structures, coherence of speech, ability to support one’s argument. Certainly, these aspects cannot be underestimated, but such approach to assessment disregards the use of nonverbal communication.
In his work “Changes in Patterns of Thinking with Second Language Acquisition”, Gale Stam argues that acquisition of a foreign language may prove fruitless if some components of nonverbal communication are ignored. The author mostly focuses on gestural element; the experiment, conducted by the researcher shows that native speakers of English and ELL students (particularly, native speakers of Spanish) express their emotions or support their argument in different ways. According to him, ELL students subconsciously attempt to use gestures of their own culture while speaking English, which sometimes leads to certain inconsistency between what they say and what they show. Gale Stam says that assessing the language proficiency, one should always pay extra attention to the use of body language.
His views are supported by such scholars as David McNeil and Susan Duncan, who also state that non-verbal signals play a significant part in second language acquisition. In their opinion, the use of gestures much depends on a persons proficiency in the language. This rule can be applied not only to ELL students, but also to native speakers. Gestural behavior may sometimes depend upon the educational background of a person. In the overwhelming majority of cases, bilinguals are more inclined to support the speech gestures when they speak foreign language. Further, the authors prove that body language of native speakers and L2 learners is not identical. The essence of the experiment, described lied in the following: 30 students (native speakers and L2 learners) were asked to summarize the same text. Naturally all of them, subconsciously resorted to body language (especially gestures), but it is worth mentioning that ELL learners tended to make deictic gestures, in other words they tried describe graphically what they narrated. Psychologists believe that the cause of such behavior is the fear of being misunderstood or misinterpreted, though this fear is not always substantiated. Judging from this experiment, I would like to say that nonverbal communication should be analyzed not only from cultural perspective, but also in terms of it physiological mechanisms(David McNeil, 2007). Therefore, it can be observed that theoretical aspects of these issues have already become a subject of thorough cultural, linguistic, and psychological analysis, but it seems to, that research findings have not been properly utilized.
Modern approaches to second language acquisition and NVC
In order to substantiate this statement, it is necessary analyze current methods of teaching nonverbal communication. The emphasis is usually placed upon verbal signals or linguistic units. Certainly, paralinguistic units (tone, tempo, rhythm) are not ignored, because without phonetics second language acquisition is utterly fruitless. As regards, nonverbal signals, I would like to say that, they are practically overlooked. Certainly, it is stated, they are an inseparable part of language education, but there are no clear instructions as to methods of teaching. As a rule, a very noncommittal formulation is given, according to it; nonverbal language must be used in socially and culturally appropriate ways (Cook, 2004).
The fact that nonverbal communication is very seldom taught in classroom can be explained by many factors. First, it is usually viewed as less important, in comparison with the verbal language. However, recent researches, conducted in this field show, that such approach is erroneous in its core. Another reason for overlooking, NVC is the lack of time and the belief that body language is a cross-cultural notion. Finally, this phenomenon has not yet been properly explored. There are many works dedicated to this issue, but they look at NVC from cultural or psychological perspectives, whereas its connection with the acquisition of foreign language and culture has seldom being discussed.
Perhaps, it would be better to show NVC is incorporated into the study of foreign languages. I would like to analyze Virginia Evans textbook “Upstream Proficiency”, which is often considered the best for English language learners. The author attempts to teach verbal and nonverbal communication in the following way: words and word combination, denoting facial expression for instance, “to win, to frown, to wince, to knit the brows” are graphically illustrated (Evans, 2002). Such technique seems to me quite prudent because it creates the association between the linguistic and nonlinguistic units. Furthermore, the words, themselves are better memorized, if they are accompanied by graphical symbols. These examples prove that nonverbal verbal communication cannot be separated from second language acquisition; moreover, such approach is more effective.
However, educators should not limit NVC only to the use of facial expressions. As it has already been mentioned earlier, body language fulfills several functions; it helps to express emotions and attitudes, supplements our verbal message, and constitutes a very important part of ritualistic activities. It seems to me that, teaching of verbal and nonverbal communication, especially within the context of SLA, may be done in the following way.
First, educators may use Virginia Evans technique, in other words, set phrases, denoting attitude, emotion should be graphically illustrated. Secondly, it is necessary to pay extra attention to the use of deictic gestures, because as a rule, they are not necessary; people make them, when they are afraid of being misunderstood. Teachers should make their students to give up this habit, because it only spoils the overall impression. The cultural aspect of this issue requires complex approach. Linguists should use the resources of kinesics, haptics, oculesics, and other disciplines, studying nonverbal communication. Particularly, they should focus on the cultural peculiarities of NVC and the differences in its usage. Furthermore, nonverbal signals should be analyzed in terms of their functionality, it is necessary to explore the ritualistic aspect of body language, in other words how representatives of different cultures use gestures their everyday life, for example greetings, farewells, table etiquette, etc. In my opinion, explanatory dictionaries or textbooks should include the information about the use of nonverbal signs in various cultures.
It is also possible to develop some exercises in order to practice the correct use of bodily movements. For instance, the teacher can act out dialogues, and the teacher should assess not only the use of linguistic units, but also their gestural behavior, particularly, the use deictic gestures.
Conclusion
It is possible to arrive at the following conclusions: first, second language acquisition cannot be separated from nonverbal signals, which perform several functions in the process of human communication (not only deictic or supplementing function). Secondly, NVC cannot be viewed only as intercultural phenomenon; each culture may have its own interpretation of the same bodily movement. The present day approaches to language education usually perceive nonverbal communication as less important, especially in comparison with the linguistic units, despite the fact that NVC can be more informative. Furthermore, criteria, according to which, the presidency of L2 learner is assessed, should include the adequate use of bodily movements.
Bibliography
- Cook, V. (2001). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching. London: Hodder Arnold.
- David McNeill, Susan D. Duncan (2007). Gesture and the Dynamic Dimension of Language: Essays in Honor of David McNeill. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
- Gale Stam (2006). Changes in Patterns of Thinking with Second Language Acquisition. The University of Chicago.
- Michael Argyle (1975). Bodily Communication. Taylor & Francis.
- Ullica Segerstrîle (1997) Nonverbal Communication: Where Nature Meets Culture. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Robert S. Feldman (2002). Applications of Nonverbal Behavioral Theories and Research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Virginia Evans, Jenny Dooley (2002). Upstream: Proficiency. Express Publishing..