Toward mapping listening skills on the CEFR: An investigation of colloquial language Nigel Downey & Anne Nebel Center for Applied Linguistics and Language Studies, Hellenic American University Athens, Greece

The focus of the study  A descriptor of overall listening ability at C1 level in the CEFR reads as follows: “ Can recognize a wide range of idiomatic expressions and colloquialisms. ” (CEFR, p. 66)

The focus of the study  In attempting to operationalize this can- do statement for test development purposes, two major issues have come to light:  Weaknesses of the CEFR as a tool for test development  Concerns over whose language we are testing and why

CEFR  Terminology: undefined  Definition of idioms & colloquial language?  Operations: unclear  What does it mean “to recognize” I & CL?  Purpose: unspecified  Test development tool: incomplete  How are I & CL processed (cognitive load) ?  How can we best test I & CL (method) ? (see Alderson et al, 2004, 2006; Weir, 2005)

Whose colloquial language?  Whose norms are we using and why?  Standard BrE? AmE? EIL? ELF? Nativized forms? (see Davies, Hamp-Lyons and Kemp, 2003; Brown, 2004; and Lowenberg, 2002 for discussion)  Who uses I&CL ? When? Where? Why?  “unilateral idiomaticity” (Seidlhofer, 2004: 220)  WE, ELF developments in testing (Jenkins, 2006)

Formulaic sequences  Subsumed I & CL under the larger term of formulaic structures/sequences (FS)  What are FS?  Definition: expanded  Processing: processing shortcuts  Purpose: promotion of self (?) (see Wray 2000; Wray & Perkins 2000)

Testing the living language?  Native speaker & non-native speaker environments  Creativity  Influence  Testing

Formulaic sequences in testing aiming at C1 level  Considerations  Context & genre  Frequency  Distribution  Duration

Formulaic sequences in the ALCE  Part of international English language use  The dollar took a dive  Negotiations ground to a halt  Reception versus production  Washback effect  Research

References & resources Alderson, J.C., Figueras, N., Kuijper, H., Nold, G., Takala, S. and Tardieu, C. (2004) The development of specifications for item development and classification within the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment. Reading and listening. Final report of the Dutch CEF construct project. Retrieved 27/04/06 from Alderson, J.C., Figueras, N., Kuijper, H., Nold, G., Takala, S. and Tardieu, C. (2006) Analyzing tests of reading and listening in relation to the Common European Framework of Reference: The experience of the Dutch CEFR construct project. Language Assessment Quarterly 3 (1), Brown, J. D. (2004) What do we mean by bias, Englishes, Englishes in testing, and English language proficiency? World Englishes 23 (2), Buck, G. (2001) Assessing listening. Cambridge University Press. Council of Europe. (2001) The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching and assessment. Cambridge University Press.

Davies, A., Hamp-Lyons, L. and Kemp, C. (2003). Whose Norms? International proficiency tests in English. World Englishes, 22 (4) Jenkins, J. (2006) Current perspectives on teaching world Englishes and English as a lingua franca. TESOL Quarterly 40 (1), Lowenberg, P. (2002) Assessing English proficiency in the Expanding Circle. World Englishes 21(3), Seidlhofer, B. (2004) Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 24, Weir, C. (2005) Limitations of the Common European Framework for developing comparable examinations and tests. Language Testing 22 (3), Wray, A. (2000) Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: principle and practice. Applied Linguistics 21/4, Wray, A. and Perkins, M. (2000) The functions of formulaic language: an integrated model. Language & Communication 20, References & resources

Thank You  

Formulaic sequences: a definition  “a sequence, continuous or discontinuous, of words or other meaning elements, which is, or appears to be, prefabricated: that is, stored and retrieved whole from memory at the time of use, rather than being subject to generation or analysis by the language grammar” (Wray & Perkins, 2000: 1)

Why focus on FS in listening?  Lack of familiarity with vocabulary causes problems and misunderstandings. Most interestingly, perhaps, are cases of ‘unilateral idiomaticity’ where particularly idiomatic speech by one participant can be problematic when the expressions used are not known to the interlocutors. Characteristics of such unilateral idiomaticity are, for example, e.g., metaphorical language use, phrasal verbs, and fixed ENL expressions such as this drink is on the house or we can give you a hand (Seidlhofer, 2004: 220).