
STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

This work contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree in
any university or other tertiary institution and, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the
work contains no material previously published or written by other person, except where due
to references has been made in the text.

Hanoi – 2007 Phm Th Thu Trang



ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to investigate the English language that native English teachers
use to conduct their lesson. It focuses on the presence of lesson phases, the language for
presenting in each lesson phases; the speech acts as well as the grammatical expressions
realizing those acts that they perform in instructing the lessons. Also, the comparison is made
between the grammatical expressions and the acts they perform to identify the most
preferable language expressions in performing a speech act in a language class.
The data consist of 14 lessons collected with audio-recorder in Lomonosov Private School,

thanks are also to all the Vietnamese teachers at Lomonosov Private School who generously
offered their help and support during the time of my teaching at Lomonosov Private School.
I would also thank all of my friends and classmates at Vietnam National University, Hanoi –
College of Foreign Languages, Postgraduate Studies as well as my old friends who have been
studying in England for their great support in sharing experience and providing me with
invaluable reference books, which was of great help in the completion of this study.
Last but not least, my heartfelt thanks go to my parents, who have always been by my side,
supporting and encouraging me for the whole course of my study, to whom I have never
found enough words to express my gratitude.


TABLE OF CONTENT

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 RATIONALE 1
1.2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 2
1.3 SCOPE OF THE RESEARCH 2
1.4 THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 3
1.5 METHODOLOGY 3
1.5.1. Approach 3
1.5.2. Techniques 3
1.6 STRUCTURES OF THE STUDY 5

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 6

3.1.8. Transitional stage 30
3.1.9. Summary 30
3.2 THE LANGUAGE OF INSTRUCTIONS 32
3.2.1. Signals to engage class’s attention 33
3.2.2. Statements of task or topic 34
3.2.3. Organizing seating/ groups 36
3.2.4. Main instructions 38
3.2.5. Monitoring understanding; repeat/ rephrase 43
3.2.6. Signals to start 44
3.2.7. Summary 45
3.3 SUMMARY 46

CHAPTER 4: AN INVESTIGATION INTO SPEECH ACTS IN LANGUAGE
LESSONS PERFORMED BY NATIVE ENGLISH TEACHERS 47
4.1 THE ACT OF REQUESTS AND MANAGING CLASS 47
4.1.1. Classification of grammatical forms 47
4.1.1.1. Modals 47
4.1.1.2. Infinitives 49
4.1.1.3. Gerunds 50
4.1.1.4. Questions 50
4.1.1.5. Others 51
4.1.2. Possible functions of requests in language classroom 52
4.1.2.1. Modals 52
4.1.2.2. Infinitives 56
4.1.2.3. Gerunds (V-ing) 57
4.1.2.4. Interrogatives 58


LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES AND FLOW CHARTS

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1 Types of classroom interactions
Figure 3.2 Le Cong Tien’s proposed elements for transitional phase
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Examples for greetings from data 1-14 27
Table 2: Examples for procedural English in the data 1-14 28
Table 3: Summary of elements of the opening phase found in data 1-14 31
Table 4: Signals to engage class’ attentions found in Data 1-14 34
Table 5: Requestive/ Politeness strategies used in the statement of tasks in Data 1-14 . 36
Table 6: Language of organizing seating/ groups of data 1-14 37
Table 7: Strategies for giving instructions 42
Table 8: Summary of the language for monitoring understanding; repeat/ rephrase 44
Table 9: Summary of signals found in 21 instructions in data 1-14 45
Table 10: Examples of requests realized by Modals in data 1-14 48
Table 11: Examples of requests realized by Infinitives in data 1-14 49
Table 12: Examples of requests realized by Gerunds in data 1-14 50
Table 13: Examples of requests realized by Interrogatives in data 1-14 51
Table 14: Examples for other types of requests expressions 51
Table 15: Possible strategies to perform requests using MODALS in language
classrooms 55


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 RATIONALE
Nowadays, English has become an international language. Learning English is not only
fashion as over ten years ago, but also a must for anyone to want to access the world. More
and more Vietnamese learn English to attain knowledge and achieve communicative
competence. In fact, the weakest point of Vietnamese learners is that they are not able to
produce meaningful utterances and communicate in real situations.
This fact raises the awareness of teaching and learning English communicatively to both
teachers and learners. The new textbooks in Vietnam are formed, edited in this way. In
addition, language teachers at high school now are trying to apply new methods to teach
English communicatively. The aim is to prepare students with authentic sources of
language, real situations, and practical use of language.
Lomonosov Private School (My Dinh – Tu Liem – Hanoi) is specialized in foreign
languages such as English, French, Chinese, and Japanese. In here, most language teachers
try to maximize the use of the target language and the talking time of the students in class.
Furthermore, the school has many exchange programs with some voluntary organizations
in Europe, Australia and America. Every year, there are many volunteer teachers from the
USA, Switzerland, Belgium, Australia, England… coming to this school and teaching the
children for about one period a week in each class, they have created a good language
environment for the students. During those lessons, the native teachers deal with the
children without the help of Vietnamese teachers in class. Most students like those lessons
much; they usually become more active, interested, motivated, and confident in speaking
English, especially to foreigners.
As a teacher, I always try to make full use of my English to familiarize the students with
real communication. Sometimes I failed and had to come back to our mother tongue,
Vietnamese. This fact raises a question to me: “How can English teachers get our
secondary students understand the lessons, get involved, actively participate and freely

aims of the language activities inside a language classroom. The analysis takes a closer
look at the opening, closing and transiting the activities, introducing new topics or new
vocabulary, and instructing students how to do the task assigned.



1.4 THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The study first examines the procedure of a language lesson to see whether the three-phase
theory is applied or not. Secondly, it looks at grammatical structures and the application of
speech acts in a language teaching environment to find out the possible acts, the most used
acts as well as the applicable politeness strategies if any. Thirdly, the study examines and
then proposes some paradigms for the sequences of steps in each phase of a language
lesson.
From the result of the study, the most preferable structures of language used in each phase
as well as the language used to perform the speech acts will be drawn out. Furthermore, the
study may be used for reference for the language teachers in the use of specific language
for instructions. It would be useful to have a closer look at the language used to introduce
new items, new topics or new vocabulary to the students.
It is believed that the study would provide the teachers with good reference for their real
teaching in terms of successful language used.
1.5 METHODOLOGY
1.5.1. Approach
The study will be carried out as an ethnographic and applicative research. It will be carried
out at a school with a group of teachers for a certain period of time for some groups of
students. The data come from real teaching and it is hoped to provide an applicative view
in the study of instructional language.
1.5.2. Techniques

the late December 2006 until early May 2007. Each lesson lasted for about forty-five
minutes with different activities, skills and tasks involved. Each teacher was asked for the
recording of around three or four lessons. Therefore, the quantity of the lessons in the data
was not equal for certain activity or lesson, as at a certain time there could not be two
classes with the same lesson under observation and recording. All the lessons were skills
integrated. The lessons were at a specific high school in Hanoi, therefore, the suggestions
and implications are also first for the teachers of English in that school, later on, are for all
the teachers who are interested in this matter as reference.



1.5.2.2.2. Data analysis
Analysis of the data is chiefly based on the concepts of lesson phases for teaching English
as foreign language and the concepts of instructional language as speech acts, discussed by
different applied linguists and methodologists. As a result, it will focus on each phase, for
example, opening phase, instructional phase, closing phase and transitional phase. For the
instructional phase, three main activities (introductions to new activities, or vocabulary
items, management of class, and instructions) will be analyzed instead of investigating all
activities. Moreover, all the grammatical forms of the language expressions and the acts of
requests performed by those expressions will be analyzed and compared. Each item of
analysis is presented separately, and the analyses can mostly be found in the appendices.
1.5.2.2.3. Comparison
To find out the equivalence between the speech acts and the grammatical language
structures perform those acts, comparison will be made for each grammatical structure that
realizes the speech acts performed by teachers in a language classroom. It will also take a
closer look at the speech acts performed in each phase, introductions to new topics,
activities, or vocabulary items, management of class, and instructions.

or ideas between two or more people resulting in a reciprocal effect on each other”. It is
believed that interaction is an important factor for communicative achievement, as
according to Rivers (1987: 4), he writes:
Part of the teacher art is to create, or stimulate student creation of, the types
of situation in which interaction naturally blossoms and in which students
can use for actual communication what they have been learning in a more
formal fashion. In this way, they are already engaging in the central activity
for which language is used in human relations.
Many linguists propose the mainly found patterns for classroom interactions as I-R-F,
which is Initiating – Responding – Follow up. However, Sinclair and Coulthard (1975)
suggest another pattern as I-R-E, which are Initiating – Responding – Evaluation.
However, in real classroom observations recently, it can be seen that the patterns of
interaction now is I-R-F, which are Initiating – Responding – Feedback. And this pattern is
the combination of the above two. Here the Feedback consists of assessment (evaluation),
correction, or comment and then the next initiation occurs.
The interactions can be between the teacher and an individual student, between the teacher
and the whole class, between a student and a student, between a student and the whole



class, or among students in a group. The types of classroom interaction can be generalized
as in the following chart:


And he believes that “verbal interactions had to be limited”, which is far more different
from recent views in this field.
In addition, those interactions serve different purposes in each stage of the teaching
procedure, which will be discussed more in detailed in the next part. By interacting with
the students, the teachers can lead them to new language input or new activities; organize
the class settings and the students; check if the students understand the lessons; help the
students with difficult items in the language; control the class, manage the activities; and
get the students work This kind of language is known as meta-language (Wajnryb,
1992:43), the language that is “not related to the language being presented”.
More commonly, the teachers try to create the real need for the students to interact, to
communicate, that is to give meaningful interactions. This kind of interactions seems to
seek for “genuine information” (Le Cong Tien, 1997:7) from the teacher or from the
students. For example:
(1) What’s the date today, children?
Today is Wednesday, September 4, 2007, Miss Trang.
Ok, thanks. Sit down, please.
(2) Miss Trang, what’s your date of birth?
My date of birth? It’s on 17th February.
Really? My birthday is in February, too.
(3) I like reading books, especially in my free time. What about you, Linh?
I don’t like reading at all, it’s so tiring. I like listening to music.
(4) What’s the date today?
Miss, Wednesday September 4, 2007.
Oh, I forgot my cousin’s birthday. It was yesterday.


- Giving
instructions
- Checking
comprehension
“Can you see where the
bank is (on the map)?”



Furthermore, it is the teacher who decides what kind of interactions should occur in the
classroom, for what purpose, for how long and about what topics, what kinds of language
should be used during those interactions.
In addition, it is also proved that the classroom interactions are also typical for checking
students’ understanding. The teachers often check their students’ understanding of the
structures, instructions, or requirements of the activities. The teachers want to make sure if
the students understand what they are supposed to do in each activity of the lessons, and if
they need any further explanation or sampling.
Moreover, it is believed that the teacher is always aware of her students’ level of English.
She “usually closely adapts” her language to her students’ level (Le, 1997:8). Sometimes,
when the teachers can not make the students understand in the target language, they have
to change to the students’ mother tongue, in other words, they translate the instructions into
the students’ first language if it is available to all of them.
In short, we can find special kinds of communication inside the classroom context. That is
the typical setting where its interactions can serve not only the meaningful communications
but also the study of the language in forms and in use. In addition, classroom interactions
also mark the significant roles of the teachers in terms of handling the activities during the
lessons, managing classes, giving instructions about the language and its use inside and

in order to motivate and get the students more involved in the activities to find out the
language or the teaching aims themselves.
Le (1997) also states that the opening phase of the lessons help the students to “link the
previous lesson with the present one or even the forthcoming one”. However, they also aim
at create a link in the students’ mind between what the students already know and may use
in the lesson and what they might learn to use during and after the lesson. By doing that,
the teachers aim at providing the students with general view or knowledge about what
language abilities, language patterns or the topic of the lessons that may be required during
class activities. In his study, Le (1997) once more suggests that:
“…the chief purpose is to define the aims of the lesson, to state what the main
work is and how it is expected to be done within class time…”
(Le, 1997: 20)
LESSON

OPENING PHASE

INSTRUCTIONAL PHAS
E

CLOSING PHASE

ACTIVITY 1

ACTIVITY 2

ACTIVITY 3

TRANSITIONAL PHASE

ACTIVITY 1

end of previous activity, summarize the main or important points of the activity, review the
results of the activities or comment on the students’ performance. Sometimes, this phase is
also the time for the teachers to give their students homework or further exercises, even
short tests to check how well their students acquire after the lessons. If there is more
activity, this phase is only to end the previous activity and set the transition to the next
activity. In addition, in this phase, the teachers usually try to create a pleasant and
comfortable even funny atmosphere for the students so that they will feel happy and good
when ending the lessons, and they will feel eager to the next meeting.
Normally, the activities in a language classroom are often very active and noisy; they are
usually at high speed and require much energy and concentration from the students. It is
not easy to end up an activity with only one word or one signal.
As stated in the introduction, this study aims at the language used in each phase of the
lessons, so in the next part, the patterns of interactions in each phase will be on the focus.
There is also a question about the language patterns that are used to serve the aims of each
phase, the answer will be given during the analysis process of the data. However, some
patterns proposed by some linguists will also be mentioned in the following part as
reference.



Willis (1981: 8-9;34-36) proposes some constituents of the opening phases such as
greetings, beginning a chat, beginning a revision, talking about the lesson, defining aims,
introducing a new stage in a lesson. Following is the chart showing the patterns of the
opening phase proposed by Le (1997: 22):

PREVIOUS
TRANSITIONAL SIGNAL
TRANSITIONAL STAGE
Figure III.3 The opening phase
E
X
C
H
A
N
G
E
D

TRANSITIONAL
SIGNALS

I
N
T
R
O
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
S

R
M
A
T
I
O
N

TRANSITIONAL SIGNALS/ STAGES
CLOSING PHASE

Figure III. 4. The instructional phase



As regarding the language patterns which can be found in this early stage, Wajnryb
(1992:95) lists several ways for the teachers to elicit:
Open questions: “What do you think of…?”
Close questions: “What’s the word for…?”
Imperative prompts: “Tell me what you know about…”
Directed questions: “Anton, what can you tell me about…?”
In short, the language that the teachers import to serve the teaching aims in language
classroom can be flexible and various. One sentence can serve different purposes in each
situations or teaching phases. More important, the language patterns can also be very
different from all of the patterns that we have discussed in this part. The analysis of my
data will give a sound conclusion whether the proposed patterns are similar to what we can
find in real classroom contexts.

- Linh, sit down, please.
- Nam, what are you doing?
- Alright, ask your friend, I am listening.
- I want to hear your voice, louder please.
- All talking, please.
- You work with Lan…
In the analysis of the data, the language of managing class will be clearer in grammatical
expressions.
2.1.5. Language of instruction
Instructional language is the language employed to draw the attention of the students to the
new activities in the lessons, then lead them participate in the activities comprehensively
and comfortable. It serves the need of the students in terms of vocabulary, grammar points
review (if any), of how to do the tasks and of what the aim must be achieved after the task
is. Language of instruction is one among many aspects that have been studied by many
linguists, educators and language teachers. In this section, some models of the language
used for opening and closing the lesson will be presented.



Gower and Walters comment (1988: 37) on the language of instruction as follows:
The way you give instructions indicates the way you control exercise
and your attitude to the group…generally students, even adults, would
not appreciate you trying to be more polite. It would be time-wasting
and slow things down and would involve you in more complicated
language than they can really understand.
It is believed that the language of instructions should be clear, short and comprehensible to
the students. Widdowson (1990: 67) states:

meaning exchange between the teachers and the students. Doughty and Pica (1986: 313)
suggest some categories for language operations through which meaning may be
negotiated. Followings are the examples adapted from their study:
A confirmation check:
This is where the listener believes they have understood but wishes to make certain,
for example:
A: Mexican food has a lot of ulcers.
B: Mexicans have a lot of ulcers? Because of the food?
A comprehension check
This is where the speaker wants to make certain that the listener has understood, for
example:
A: Do you know what I mean?
A clarification request
This is when one interlocutor does not entirely comprehend the meaning and asks for
clarification, for example:
A: She’s on the welfare.
B: What do you mean by welfare?
A repetition
This is where the speaker repeats (or re-states) their own (or another’s utterance) in order
to repair a real (or perceived) communication breakdown, for example: