A Brief Analysis of the Exploitation of Students’ Subjective Consciousness in English Teaching

Introduction

One of the most controversial problems in applied linguistics is the link between conscious and unconscious processes in language learning. In the study of language learning, consciousness is a crucial factor to take into consideration. The importance of awareness in language acquisition cannot be overstated, and it should be carefully researched if significant strides are to be made in the understanding of how language learning occurs. Svalberg (2007) argues that learners must have a working knowledge of the target language system in order to develop and apply suitable forms. People make mistakes because they don’t know or remember the rules of the language they are trying to communicate in. This widely held belief is unfounded, as no current theory sees conscious grammar study as a pre-requisite or sufficient one for language learning. Others such as García (2008) are convinced that language acquisition is mostly unconscious. The aim of this essay is to provide an analysis of the exploitation of students’ subjective consciousness in English teaching. Specifically, it looks at literature on students’ subjective consciousness and how this is applicable in English teaching and learning.

Conscious and Unconscious Processes in Language Learning

Language awareness, in this case consciousness, refers to an understanding of the features of texts and language, as well as the contexts in which language is used. The importance of language in teaching and learning cannot be overstated. The goal of language conscious teaching is to help teachers have a better knowledge of how language is utilized in the classroom, or to help them strengthen their language awareness abilities (Andrews, 2006). Language awareness refers to being aware of how language behaves in different circumstances, such as text and voice. Language awareness assists students in understanding how language is typically utilized in various subject areas as decided by the instructor. Key vocabulary that acts as a doorway to knowledge acquisition is a type of content-area-specific language (Otwinowska, 2017). Language conscious education provides and prepares students with the tools they need to think about how language is used in everyday settings.

Significance of Language Awareness in English Teaching

Language awareness is a complete process through which learners develop a gradual understanding of language forms and functions as they assimilate specific language knowledge. It is, according to Lo (2019), an abstract and difficult mental activity. Language is critical for expressing emotions and communicating ideas between persons. The first step in teaching students how to use language effectively in English writing is to raise their level of language awareness. Teachers should support students in gaining a fresh perspective on language acquisition and incorporating it into their everyday English instruction.

Conclusion

At present, there is no consensus from the academic circles regarding language awareness as a pre-requisite for language learning. However, its importance in English teaching cannot be disputed. Language awareness is an understanding of the features of texts and language, as well as the contexts in which language is used.

Reference List

Andrews, S., 2006. The evolution of teachers’ language awareness. Language Awareness, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1-19.

García, O., 2008. Multilingual language awareness and teacher education. Encyclopedia of language and education, no. 6, pp. 385-400.

Lo, Y.Y., 2019. Development of the beliefs and language awareness of content subject teachers in CLIL: does professional development help?. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 818-832.

Otwinowska, A., 2017. English teachers’ language awareness: away with the monolingual bias?. Language Awareness, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 304-324.

Svalberg, A.M., 2007. Language awareness and language learning. Language Teaching, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 287-308.