Marija Milojković

University of Niš
Faculty of Philosophy

COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE THEORY IN THE FIELD

OF ENGLISH AS A LINGUA FRANCA – TEACHERS’
ATTITUDES IN SERBIA

Abstract: Considering that English is the most dominant language for international
communication and that non-native English speakers significantly outnumber native
speakers (Crystal 2008), it is reasonable to expect that English language learners
will most likely need to use English as a lingua franca. To address the needs of
English language learners, this paper suggests reconsidering teaching practices and
beliefs based on native speakerism and tapping into the findings of the English as a
Lingua Franca (ELF) field.
At a theoretical level, this paper provides an overview of the current research on
ELF speakers’ communicative practices against the framework of Communicative
Competence Theory (Hymes 1972), using the model of communicative competence
defined in the CEFR (Council of Europe, 2001). To gain a more practical
perspective, the present paper investigates how English language teachers in
elementary and high schools in Serbia understand the concept of ELF and how they
assess the linguistic features of ELF that differ from native-speaker norms. The data
is obtained via a questionnaire containing opened-ended questions and an evaluation
task taken from Dewey (2011). The results indicate that the participants lack a more
in-depth understanding of the concept of ELF and insist on standard language norms
and grammatical accuracy in their teaching practices.

Key words: communicative competence, native speakerism, standard language,

English as a Lingua Franca, teachers’ attitudes

1. Introduction

The introduction of the concept of communicative competence by

Hymes (1972) has radically changed the approaches to language learning
and teaching. It marked a shift from grammar-based pedagogy to
Communicative Language Teaching that has remained the dominant
approach to date (Leung 2005). According to Communicative Competence
Theory (Hymes 1972), in addition to implicit and explicit knowledge of
grammar rules, communicative competence includes rules of language use in
context, that is, the knowledge of whether a certain structure is formally
possible, feasible, appropriate and actually performed. Since the primary aim
of learning a foreign language is to communicate with its native speakers,
language learners’ use of the target language should resemble as closely as
possible the one of a native speaker, who has the highest authority on the
language.
However, the social context of use of English has significantly
changed since the 1970s, which calls for a reconsideration of the principles
and practices established in the English language teaching (ELT) profession
based on native speakerism (Dewey 2012). English is no longer primarily
used to communicate with native speakers as non-native English speakers
(NNESs) substantially outnumber native English speakers (NESs) (Crystal
2008). English is spoken by over two billion people (Graddol 2006), it is the
most frequently used foreign language in the world (Webber 2015), and it is
an international language used in a variety of domains, such as academic,
economic and political (Widdowson 2003). Therefore, it is reasonable to
assume that most English language learners in the Expanding Circle
countries (Kachru 1985), such as Serbia, will use English to communicate
with other NNESs more frequently than with NESs. In other words, they will
use English as a lingua franca (ELF), which differs from English as a native
language (ENL), as ELF researchers have pointed out (e.g. Jenkins 2011).
As Mauranen (2012) explains, due to the pedagogy based on native
speakerism, English language learners may face a discrepancy between the
kind of English they encounter in the real world and the kind of English they
expect based on their education experience. Leung (2005) argues that ELT
must consider social, cultural and language developments in the
contemporary world, which implies taking into account the pedagogical
implications of ELF. As Dewey (2012) states, in order to explore the ways in
which the findings about ELF can be used in practice, it is necessary to
investigate teachers’ awareness of this phenomenon and their beliefs about
what is considered good practice.
In order to shed more light on how ELF research could contribute to
improving the effectiveness of ELT, the present paper discusses the findings
of the ELF field against the framework of Communicative Competence
Theory and investigates how teachers in elementary and high schools in
Serbia understand the concept of ELF and how they assess the linguistic
features of ELF that differ from standard language norms. It is part of a
larger study that includes teachers’ attitudes and responses to the
sociolinguistic and pragmatic aspects of ELF use, which is currently in
progress.
Regarding the structure of the paper, the introductory section is
followed by Section 2 that deals with the model of communicative
competence according to the Common European Framework of Reference
for Languages (CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001). Section 3 presents the
main findings of the ELF field from the perspective of the CEFR and some
pedagogical implications as suggested in previous literature on the topic.
Section 4 describes the methodology used in the present study and Section 5
presents the results. Section 6 involves a discussion of the results and ideas
for further research and the final section offers concluding remarks.

2. The CEFR model of communicative competence

Various models of communicative competence can be found in

literature on the topic, but three of them have been the most influential in
theoretical and practical work. These include Canal and Swain’s model
(Canale & Swain 1980; Canale 1983), Bachman and Palmer’s model
(Bachman 1990; Bachman & Palmer 1996), and the Common European
Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) defined by the Council of
Europe (Council of Europe, 2001). The present study focuses on the CEFR
as the dominant model in the European Union and other countries as well,
including Serbia.
The CEFR provides comprehensive guidelines for language learning,
teaching and assessment and it is directed at both teachers and learners. It
states that the aim of language learning is to develop the competence to
produce grammatical, functional and appropriate sentences in any given
context that resemble as closely as possible a native-speaker standard. It also
defines levels of proficiency ranging from A1 or “Breakthrough” to C2 or
“Mastery” and provides the criteria for describing each of the levels, based
on which learners’ progress can be measured.
According to the CEFR model, communicative competence is
comprised of three basic components: linguistic competence, sociolinguistic
competence and pragmatic competence. Linguistic competence refers to the
knowledge of linguistic resources at the level of lexis, grammar, semantics,
phonology, orthography and orthoepy and the ability to use them to form
well-structured messages. Sociolinguistic competence includes the
knowledge and skills necessary to use the language appropriately in different
socio-cultural contexts. It encompasses linguistic markers of social relations,
politeness conventions, expressions of folk wisdom, register differences,
dialect and accent. Pragmatic competence refers to the knowledge to
organize, structure and arrange messages in discourse (discourse
competence), to perform communicative functions (functional competence),
and to sequence messages according to interactional schemata (design
competence).
Critics of the CEFR claim that this view of communicative
competence relies on idealized, fixed and national ideas about standard
language (Leung 2005). Dewey (2012) states that the model reflects a
normative perspective on language, according to which grammar is a
precondition for communication and intelligibility rests on close adherence
to predetermined norms. Speakers’ proficiency is determined by assessing
their language use in relation to those norms, because of which teaching is
disproportionately focused on formal assessment (Dewey 2015).
Furthermore, Webber (2015) argues that the CEFR regards culture as a
reified, clear-cut concept inextricably connected with nations, rather than as
a process which is dynamic and flexible that transcends national borders.
Certain forms of language use are selected and presented as appropriate, but
as Leung (2005) says, these constitute just a partial representation of the
social reality of language use. In addition, the author says that such a view of
culture can be seen as imposing specific socio-cultural values and preventing
learners from expressing their own identity through the target language.
As Widdowson (2003) argues, English that is taught in the classroom
cannot be the same as the English used by native speakers; therefore, the
goal of mastering native-speaker norms is unrealistic and unnecessary.
However, this does not imply that standard norms and use should be
abandoned in ELT; rather, the language in the classroom should be made
real and relevant for the learners’ purposes (Webber 2015). If teachers are to
prepare their students to use English internationally, the findings of the field
of English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) must be taken into consideration.

3. Features of ELF and some pedagogical implications

3.1. The field of English as a Lingua Franca

The research field of English as a Lingua Franca was pioneered by

Jenkins’ (2000) work on the phonological characteristics of ELF and
Seidlhofer’s (2001) paper calling for more empirical research and for
treating lingua franca users as legitimate. In earlier studies, ELF was
construed as a distinct variety of English and the aim of ELF researchers was
to identify and describe its core features. However, later research has
demonstrated that ELF is characterized by such a high level of fluidity and
flexibility that it is impossible for any variety to emerge (Baker & Jenkins
2015). Seildhofer (2011: 7 italics in the original) defines English as a lingua
franca as “any use of English among speakers of different first languages for
whom English is the communicative medium of choice, and often only
option”. ELF communication does not exclude native speakers, but their
English is not a linguistic reference point for ELF users (Seidlhofer 2004;
Jenkins 2007; Dewey & Jenkins 2010). Native English speakers also need to
adapt and adjust their language and other communicative practices to ensure
successful ELF communication (e.g. Jenkins 2011).
ELF and English as a Foreign Language (EFL) differ in various
aspects which are summarized in Jenkins, Cogo and Dewey (2011).
Underpinned by theories of language contact and evolution, ELF belongs to
the Global Englishes paradigm which treats all varieties of English, both
native and non-native, as legitimate, and views deviations from standard
language norms as emerging or potential features of ELF rather than as signs
of incompetence. On the other hand, EFL belongs to the Modern (Foreign)
Languages paradigm based on which learners’ goal is to approximate native
language norms in order to achieve successful communication with native
speakers of the language. It is supported by theories of L1 interference and
fossilization and regards any deviations from standard language norms as
errors.

3.2. Features of ELF from the perspective of the CEFR

A large body of research on various aspects of ELF interaction, mostly

spoken communication in various domains such as business, education,
politics, tourism, the media, allows us to discuss ELF communication from
the perspective of the theory of communicative competence and the CEFR
model.
In terms of the components of linguistic competence, extensive
research had been done on phonological, lexical and lexico-grammatical
features of ELF. Jenkins’ (2000) study on ELF phonology shows that ELF
users’ non-conformity to certain phonological features of standard language
does not impede mutual intelligibility. These features, such as /ð/, /θ/ and
dark /l/, vowel quality, weak forms, assimilation and other features of
connected speech, should not receive much pedagogic attention, contrary to
the features that are decisive for intelligibility and which constitute Jenkins’
Lingua Franca Core. Furthermore, the author stresses the importance of
phonological accommodation, whereby ELF speakers change their speech in
order to adapt to the interlocutors and secure mutual understanding.
An overview of lexico-grammatical features of ELF obtained via
numerous corpus-based studies can be found in Jenkins, Cogo and Dewey
(2011). Many of these features are regarded as errors or instances of
fossilization in EFL, whereas ELF researchers view them as variants. These
features include:
- absence of the third person present tense -s;
- non-standard use of definite and indefinite articles;
- confusion over the use of the relative pronouns who and which;
- non-standard use of questions tags;
- use of redundant prepositions (We have to study about);
- overuse of verbs of high semantic generality (e.g. do, have, make,
put, take);
- overdoing explicitness (e.g. black color instead of just black);
 - morphosyntactic adaptations (e.g. discriminization and levelized);
- re-metaphorization of idiomatic language (e.g. we should not wake
up any dogs as opposed to let sleeping dogs lie).
Considering the sociolinguistic aspect of ELF communication,
researchers explain that ELF interaction is characterized by a high level of
linguacultural diversity (Dewey 2012). Coming from different linguacultural
backgrounds, ELF users do not share much common cultural knowledge and
they tend to combine individual, national, and global cultural frames of
reference in hybrid ways (Baker 2015). Knowing the standard norms of
English language use in relation to the target culture does not have the same
value in ELF interaction as in interaction between native speakers. Baker
(2015) argues that culture should be understood as situated and emergent
rather than bounded and centered on nation states, which is the case in ELT.
The author claims that English language pedagogy should avoid simplistic
and essentialist representations of Anglophone culture and focus on
promoting intercultural awareness and competence instead.
Finally, when talking about pragmatic competence as a component of
communicative competence according to the CEFR, ELF research has
shown that ELF speakers use a wide range of communicative and pragmatic
strategies to achieve mutual understanding and prevent non-understanding
and misunderstanding. Cogo and House (2017) provide an overview of ELF
pragmatics, emphasizing accommodation and negotiation of meaning as the
most important pragmatic strategies in ELF. As the authors state, these
strategies can be realized in different forms, such as code-switching,
confirmation checks, self- and other-repetition, reformulation, mediation,
and their aim is to get the message across rather than focus on formulating
the message based on native-speaker standards.

3.3. Some pedagogical implications of ELF

Contrary to what one would expect based on the tenets of

Communicative Competence Theory that emphasize adherence to standard
language norms to achieve intelligibility and the described features of ELF,
misunderstandings in ELF communication are quite rare (Mauranen 2012;
Kaur 2009). In other words, the findings of ELF prove that the insistence on
native speaker norms and formal correctness traditionally upheld in ELT is
not prerequisite for successful ELF communication which is “the most
extensive contemporary use of English worldwide” (Seidlhofer 2001: 133).
This does not mean that teachers should abandon standard language norms
altogether, nor that, as Jenkins (2007) claims, ELF research is concerned
with providing alternative teaching models. Instead, ELF researchers suggest
adopting an ELF-aware approach to ELT (e.g. Webber 2015, Bair 2015;
Bowles & Cogo 2015; Vettorel 2015; Kohn 2015; Lopriore 2017; Sifakis
2014; Dewey 2011, 2012). Such an approach could involve less focus on
native-speaker norms and formal correctness, raising awareness of language
variety, exposure to non-native use of English, developing intercultural
awareness and competence, and developing pragmatic strategies such as
accommodation and negotiation of meaning. It is up to ELT practitioners to
decide for themselves whether and to what extent ELF is relevant for their
teaching contexts and whether to introduce it or not (Dewey 2012).
However, as Jenkins, Cogo and Dewey (2011) point out, since ELF research
findings challenge traditional ELT beliefs and practices, it is likely that the
adoption of an ELF-aware approach into the language classroom will be
contested and gradual.
When it comes to the possible pedagogical implications of ELF in the
context of ELT in Serbia, two doctoral dissertations should be taken into
consideration. Ošmjanski (2014) investigated the attitudes of university
students and English language teachers at philological faculties in Serbia
towards ELF as a variety of the English language and the results indicated
that the participants showed a preference for the standard language as the
classroom model. The main impediment to accepting the concept of ELF
was the lack of a linguistic description and no need for any alternative
models that would replace the standard one. Duka (2015) explored
pedagogical implications of ELF in secondary schools in Serbia by
investigating the attitudes of teachers and students towards the English
language and English language learning. The study showed that, although
both the students and the teachers agreed that the main aim of learning
English was to communicate with both native and non-native speakers, the
majority of the teachers emphasized the necessity of adhering to the standard
English language in ELT.
The two studies proved a certain level of reluctance to apply the
concept of ELF in ELT among teachers on different levels of schooling in
Serbia. Our hypothesis is that teachers lack an adequate level of awareness
of the features of ELF that would enable them to work out some practical
ways of applying them to increase the effectiveness of ELT. Therefore, the
focus of the present paper is to investigate teachers’ level of awareness of
ELF and their assessment of some of its features that differ from standard
language norms.

4. The study

4.1. Research questions

 The present paper focuses on teachers’ awareness of ELF and their
assessment of the linguistic features of ELF that differ from standard
language norms. More specifically, it investigates how elementary and high
school teachers in Serbia understand the concept of ELF and whether and
how it is relevant to their teaching practices. It also addresses the questions
concerning the ideology of native speakerism by inquiring about teachers’
beliefs regarding the main purpose of learning English and the appropriate
classroom model of English. Finally, teachers’ responses to the linguistic
features of ELF are examined by replicating a part of Dewey’s (2011)
research that includes an evaluation task.

4.2. Data collection

The data for this study was collected using a questionnaire that
consists of three sections.
The first section refers to teachers’ background information including
age, gender, mother tongue, years of experience of teaching English as a
foreign language, teaching contexts (such as elementary school, high school,
university, private language school), and their ELF experience in terms of
the time spent in a country where English is not the official language but is
primarily used for international communication.
The second section contains open-ended questions that address
teachers’ understanding of the concept of ELF and its relevance to their
teaching contexts, the main reason for learning English in elementary and
high schools in Serbia, and the most suitable variety of English as the
classroom model.
The third section is an evaluation task adapted from Dewey (2011).
The task includes 8 sentences taken from ELF communication which the
participants need to assess in terms of their correctness, acceptability for
international communication, intelligibility, and importance of correcting in
the classroom using a 5-item Likert scale (I strongly disagree, I disagree,
Undecided, I agree, I strongly agree).
The questionnaire was administered to the members of ELTA Serbia
(English Language Teachers’ Association of Serbia) and NELTA (English
Language Teachers’ Association of Niš) via their official Facebook pages.

4.3. Participants

As the present paper deals with the initial stage of a larger study in
progress, the responses of only 20 participants were analyzed. These
participants were selected because they provided the most extensive answers
to the questions.
 The participants included 14 female and 6 male teachers whose
average age is 35 (SD=8.1). Half of the participants have taught English both
in elementary and high schools, 7 of them have taught only in elementary
schools and 3 only in high schools. Their teaching experience ranges from 2
to 25 years (average=10.3, SD=6.7). Regarding their ELF experience, 3
participants have spent 1 year and one participant 6 months in a country
where English is not the official language but is primarily used for
international communication.

5. Results

5.1. Results of the open-ended questions

The participants’ answers to the open-ended questions in the second

section of the questionnaire were analyzed from a qualitative perspective.
Regarding the first question that addresses the main reasons for
learning English in elementary and high schools in Serbia, the majority of
the participants (N=14) singled out the ability to communicate with people
around the world. The participants emphasized that English was the most
widely spoken language in the world and that the number of English
language speakers was on the rise. In addition, three of these participants
explicitly stated that English was a lingua franca. Other reasons include
better career opportunities (N=5), access to information and knowledge,
especially thanks to the internet (N=5), and traveling or living abroad (N=2).
The second question concerns the most suitable variety of English as
the classroom model and 90% of the participants stated American English
and/ or British English. One participant did not refer to any standard variety
and said “good communicative knowledge of the English language”
(Respondent 2, male, age 57, 25 years of teaching experience in elementary
schools), while one participant only expressed his uncertainty about the most
suitable classroom model of English (Respondent 19, male, age 31, 7 years
of teaching experience in elementary schools).
The results of the third question that deals with how the participants
understand the concept of ELF show that most of the participants (N=16)
understand ELF as a universal language or a global language that facilitates
communication around the world (N=11) or as a means of communication
between speakers of different L1 (N=5). Three of these participants
emphasized its usefulness in the business domain, while two participants
stated that it was useful in all spheres of life. One respondent stated that she
did not understand the concept at all (Respondent 13, female, age 38, 15
years of teaching experience in elementary schools), whereas one respondent
answered that the concept was not important to him (Respondent 2, male,
age 57, 25 years of teaching experience in elementary schools). One
respondent defined ELF as the historical influence of the British Empire and
the political power of the USA and referred to the structural simplicity of
English in comparison with other languages in the world (Respondent 1,
female, age 29, 5 years of teaching experience in both elementary and high
schools), while another respondent answered by elaborating on her teaching
practices in relation to grammar accuracy, as can be seen in Example 1.

1) From a teacher's point of view, the idea taught me to stop over-correcting

and to allow students to relax and try to achieve fluency although it often
meant letting them disobey some grammar rules. This was VERY difficult at
the beginning of my career. I tended to correct (teacher-correction, peer-
correction, self-correction) pretty much everything. I'm more laid back now :)
(Respondent 5, female, age 34, 10 years of teaching experience in high
schools)

Concerning the relevance of the concept of ELF to their teaching

contexts and practices, the majority of the participants (N=12) gave an
affirmative answer, but only 6 provided more details. Two of these
participants said that ELF was relevant when teaching social and cultural
issues. Another two participants stated that ELF was relevant when teaching
adult learners who were more motivated to learn English for international
communication and less focused on grammar. One of these answers is
particularly revealing for the purposes of this paper and can be seen in
Example 2.

2) It depends. I had the chance to work in special philology classes in high-

school, where grammatical precision is highly valued. In private schools, I
worked with adults who mainly wanted to improve communication skills and
had very little interest in speaking grammar-perfect English. So I'd say it
depends on the motivation of the speaker themselves and the context of
learning. (Respondent 5, female, age 34, 10 years of teaching experience in
high schools)

Furthermore, one participant stated that ELF was relevant when

talking about online games with the students, while another one said that
ELF was important as a phenomenon as many teaching materials were
produced by non-native speakers.
When it comes to the negative answers, one respondent answered that
the concept was not important to him, as in the previous question
(Respondent 2, male, age 57, 25 years of teaching experience in elementary
schools), and one respondent stated that ELF was not important since his
students were 1st graders. One negative answer deserves more attention and
it is shown in Example 3.

3) No, because I tend to teach grammatically correct English. (Respondent 9,

female, age 27, 5 years of teaching experience in elementary schools)

Finally, 4 participants did not provide any answer to this question.

5.2. Results of the evaluation task

The results of the evaluation task were analyzed quantitatively by

converting the responses on the Likert scale to numerical values (I strongly
disagree = 1, I strongly agree = 5) and calculating the mean scores for each
of the four criteria (correct, acceptable, intelligible, important to correct in
the classroom) for each of the 8 sentences. However, due to a technical
problem with the questionnaire, the instructions might not have been clear
enough when it comes to the criterion of acceptability as the participants
could not see clearly that this referred to acceptability for international
communication. Therefore, this aspect is not considered in our analysis of
the results.
The results are presented in the following boxplots.
 As the boxplots clearly show, the mean scores in terms of correctness
are quite low, 2 or less, with the exception of Sentences 2 and 5, which are
still less than 3. This means that the participants assessed all of the examples
as incorrect, and consequently important to correct, as can be seen in terms
of the high values of the mean scores for the criterion “important to correct”,
which are close to 4 or higher. Regarding intelligibility, the scores for this
criterion are higher than the scores for correctness for all of the sentences.
The participants’ assessment of all the sentences grouped together is
presented in the following boxplot and the difference in the means scores for
correctness and intelligibility becomes more noticeable.
 A Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to check the statistical
significance of the difference in the mean scores for correctness and
intelligibility, and the result was significant at p < .00001.
Another Mann-Whitney U test was carried out to investigate whether
teaching experience had an influence on the participants’ assessments. The
participants were divided into two groups: one group with less than 10 years
of teaching experience and one group with 10 or more years of teaching
experience. The means scores are presented in Table 1.

Teaching experience correct acceptable intelligible important to correct

mean SD mean SD mean SD mean SD

less than 10 years 1.96 1.14 2.57 1.26 3.71 1.00 4.19 0.97

10 and more years 2.14 0.92 2.78 0.96 3.02 0.96 3.75 1.02

  p= .06876 p = .22628. p< .00001 p= .00398

Table 1. The influence of teaching experience on the assessment of ELF linguistic

features that differ from standard language norms.

The group of participants with less teaching experience gave lower

scores in terms of correctness and acceptability and higher scores in terms of
intelligibility and importance of correcting in the classroom compared to the
group with more teaching experience. However, statistical significance was
confirmed only for the criteria of intelligibility and importance of correcting.
It can be concluded that the group with less teaching experience perceived
the sentences as more intelligible but also more important to correct than the
more experienced group of the participants.

5. Discussion of the results

When it comes to our first research question that addresses teachers’

awareness of ELF, the results point to a superficial level of awareness. The
participants are well aware of the spread of the English language as a lingua
franca and its importance for international communication, but it seems that
they understand the concept of ELF as a distinct variety of English rather
than as a way of using English, as proposed in more recent ELF studies (e.g.
Seidlhofer 2011). Such an understanding of ELF puts much focus on its
formal characteristics that make it a separate entity, and, consequently,
grammatical inaccuracy and non-standard language norms become quite
salient ELF features. Furthermore, the traditional insistence on adhering to
native-speaker norms and formal correctness in ELT may also contribute to
perceiving the differences in the linguistic features of ELT and English as a
native language as more striking. The manner in which Respondents 1, 5 and
9 commented on the issue of grammatical accuracy in the context of ELF is
illustrative of a more general view of ELF as grammatically incorrect variety
of English. What we suggest is that teachers’ awareness of the
sociolinguistic and pragmatic aspects of ELF must be raised before any ideas
of how to incorporate an ELF-aware approach to ELT can be put forward
and operationalized in practice. In line with the studies done by Ošmjanski
(2014) and Duka (2015), our results indicate that, although the participants
highlighted the possibility of communicating with people around the world
as opposed to communicating with native speakers as the main reason for
learning English, they still chose a standard variety of English as the
classroom model. What is interesting to point out is that the only participant,
namely Respondent 2, who did not refer to any standard variety as the most
suitable classroom model, but emphasized good communicative knowledge
instead, which might point to ELF, later stated that ELF was not important to
him.
The results of the evaluation task, that is, the participants’ assessment
of the linguistic features of ELF that differ from native-speaker norms, show
that all the participants considered them incorrect and important to correct in
the classroom, but they also gave relatively high scores in terms of
intelligibility, which brings into question the principle of Communicative
Competence Theory that grammatical accuracy is a precondition for
intelligibility.
Another finding worth noting is the fact that more experienced
teachers assessed the ELF sentences as less intelligible than the participants
with less teaching experience, but they also regarded them as less important
to correct in the classroom. This finding seems rather contradictory and it
requires further investigation.
Finally, it must be admitted that a questionnaire is not the best method
of collecting data on the researched issues. The participants of our study
could have more knowledge or experience related to ELF in fact but were
not willing to share it in writing as it takes up a considerable amount of time.
Conducting interviews or organizing discussion sessions with teachers
would provide more detailed information on the issues.

5. Conclusion

The present paper revisits the concept of communicative competence

as described by the CEFR (2001) and based on native speakerism from the
perspective of English as a Lingua Franca. It is part of a larger, ongoing
study the aim of which is to explore the ways of using the findings in the
ELF field to increase the effectiveness of English language teaching. As
Dewey (2012) points out, in order to reach some ideas or conclusions on
how to use ELF in ELT, it is necessary to investigate teachers’ awareness of
this phenomenon and their beliefs about what is considered good practice.
Therefore, the present study focuses on investigating teachers’ awareness of
the concept of ELF and their assessment of the linguistic features of ELF
that differ from native-speaker norms.
The results of the study indicate that the participants lack an in-depth
understanding of the concept of ELF. They are well aware of the wide
spread of English as a lingua franca and its importance for international
communication, but they tend to view ELF as a distinct variety of English
characterized by grammatical inaccuracy which needs to be corrected in the
classroom, despite of being rather intelligible. Their preferred classroom
model of English is American English and/ or British English, which is in
line with previous studies on ELF in Serbia and the prevalent ideology of
native speakerism in ELT.
Our final conclusion is that it is necessary to raise teachers’ awareness
of the sociolinguistic and pragmatic aspects of ELF and promote ELF as a
way of using English rather than as a variety of English in order to come up
with ways of tapping into ELF for the benefit of ELT.

References

Bachman, L. F. 1990. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L.F. & A. S. Palmer. 1996. Language Testing in Practice: Designing and
Developing Useful Language Tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Baker, W. 2015. Culture and Complexity through English as a Lingua Franca:
Rethinking Competences and Pedagogy in ELT. Journal of English as a Lingua
Franca 4(1), 9-30.
Baker, W. & J. Jenkins. 2015. Criticising ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua
Franca 4(1), 191-198.
Blair, A. 2015. Evolving a Post-native, Multilingual Model for ELF-Aware Teacher
Education. In Current Perspectives on Pedagogy for English as a Lingua
Franca, Y. Bayyurt & S. Akcan (eds.), 89-101. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter
Mouton.
Bowles, H., A. Cogo (eds.). 2015. International Perspectives on English as a Lingua
Franca. Pedagogical Insights. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Canale, M. & M. Swain. 1980. Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to
Second Language Teaching and Testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
Canale, M. 1983. From Communicative Language Competence to Communicative
Language Pedagogy. In Language and Communication, J. C. Richards & R. W.
Schmidt (eds.), 2-27. London & New York: Longman.
Cogo, A. & M. Dewey. 2012. Analysing English as a Lingua Franca: A Corpus-
Driven Investigation. New York: Continuum.
Cogo, A. & J. House. 2017. Intercultural Pragmatics. In The Routledge Handbook of
Pragmatics, A. Barron, Y. Gu & G. Steen (eds.), 168-182. Taylor & Francis.
Council of Europe. 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge, UK: Press Syndicate
of the University of Cambridge.
Crystal, David. 2008. Two Thousand Million? English Today 24(1). 3-6.
Dewey, M. 2011. Accommodative ELF Talk and Teacher Knowledge. In Latest
Trends in ELF research, A. Archibald, A. Cogo & J. Jenkins (eds), 205-
227. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Dewey, M. 2012. Towards a Post-Normative Approach: Learning the Pedagogy of
ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 1(1), 141-170.
Dewey, M. 2015. Time to Wake Up Some Dogs! Shifting the Culture of Language
in ELT. In Current Perspectives on Pedagogy for English as a Lingua Franca,
Y. Bayyurt & S. Akcan (eds.), 121-134. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Dewey, M. & J. Jenkins. 2010. English as a Lingua Franca in the Global Context:
Interconnectedness, Variation and Change. In Contending with Globalization in
World Englishes, Mukul Saxena & Tope Omoniyi (eds.), 72-92. Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.
Duka, V. 2015. Uticaj engleskog jezika kao lingua franca na nastavu jezika u
srednjim školama u Srbiji. Filološki fakultet Beograd. Retrieved from:
https://fedorabg.bg.ac.rs/fedora/get/o:10614/bdef:Content/download
Graddol, D. 2006. English Next. Why Global English May Mean the End of ‘English
as a Foreign Language’. London: British Council.
Hymes, D. H. 1972. On Communicative Competence. In Sociolinguistics: Selected
Readings, J.B. Pride & J. Holmes (eds.), 269-293. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Jenkins, J. 2000. The Phonology of English as an International Language. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Jenkins, J. 2007. English as a Lingua Franca: Attitude and Identity. Oxford
University Press.
Jenkins, J. 2011. Accommodating (to) ELF in the International University. Journal
of Pragmatics 43(1), 926-936.
Jenkins, J., A. Cogo & M. Dewey. 2011. Review of Developments in Research into
English as a Lingua Franca. Language Teaching 44(3), 281 - 315.
Kaur, J. 2009. Pre-Empting Problems of Understanding in English as a Lingua
Franca. In English as a Lingua Franca: Studies and Findings, A. Mauranen & E.
Ranta (eds.), 107-123. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Kohn. K. 2015. A Pedagogical Space for ELF in the English Classrooom. In Current
Perspectives on Pedagogy for English as a Lingua Franca, Y. Bayyurt & S.
Akcan (eds.), 51-67. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Leung, C. 2005. Convivial Communication: Recontextualizing Communicative
Competence. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 15(2), 119-144.
Lopriore, L. 2017. Voicing Beliefs and Dilemmas from WE- and ELF-Aware
Reflective Teacher Education Contexts: Teachers’ Personal Responses to
Rapidly Changing Multilingual Contexts. Lingue e Linguaggi 24, 225-237.
Mauranen, Anna. 2012. Exploring ELF: Academic English Shaped by Non-Native
Speakers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ošmjanski, V. 2014. Koncept engleskog jezika kao lingua franca i njegova
percepcija u akademskoj zajednici u Srbiji. (Doctoral Dissertation). Filološki
fakultet Beograd. Retrieved from:
http://nardus.mpn.gov.rs/handle/123456789/4100
Seidlhofer, B. 2001. Closing a Conceptual Gap: The Case for a Description of
English as a Lingua Franca. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 11(2),
133-158.
Seidlhofer, B. 2004. 10. Research Perspectives on Teaching English as A Lingua
Franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 24, 209-239.
Seidlhofer, B. 2011. Understanding English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford, Oxford
University Press.
Sifakis, N. 2014. ELF Awareness as an Opportunity for Change: A Transformative
Perspective for ESOL Teacher Education. Journal of English as a Lingua
Franca 3(2), 317-335.
Vettorel, P. 2015. Primary School Teachers’ Perceptions: Englishes, ELF and
Classroom Practices – Between ’Correctness’ and ’Communicative
Effectiveness’. In New Frontiers in Teaching and Learning English, P. Vettorel
(ed.), 129-155. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
Webber, E. 2015. Can We Change the Subject, Please? A Pedagogic Perspective on
ELF. In Current Perspectives on Pedagogy for English as a Lingua Franca, Y.
Bayyurt & S. Akcan (eds.), 171-190. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Widdowson, H. 2003. Defining Issues in English Language Teaching. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Marija Milojković

TEORIJA KOMUNIKACIJSKE KOMPETENCIJE U OBLASTI

ENGLESKOG KAO LINGUA FRANCA – STAVOVI NASTAVNIKA
U SRBIJI

Rezime

Imajući u vidu da je engleski najdominantniji jezik za međunarodnu komunikaciju i

da broj govornika kojima engleski nije maternji jezik značajno nadmašuje broj
govornika kojima on to jeste (Crystal 2008), opravdano je očekivati da će učenici
engleskog jezika najverovatnije morati da koriste engleski kao lingua franca. Da bi
se ispunile potrebe učenika engleskog jezika, ovaj rad predlaže razmatranje
nastavnih praksi i uverenja zasnovanih na govoru izvornih govornika i korišćenje
uvida iz oblasti istraživanja engleskog kao lingua franca (ELF).
Na teorijskom nivou, ovaj rad pruža pregled aktuelnih istraživanja komunkativnih
praksi ELF govornika kroz teorijski okvir Teorije komunikacijske kompetencije
(Hymes 1972) pomoću modela komunikacijske kompetencije definisanog u
Zajedinčkom evropskom okviru za žive jezike (Common European Framework of
Reference for Languages, CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001). Kako bi se stekao
praktičniji uvid u ovo pitanje, aktuelno istraživanje ispituje kako nastavnici
engleskog jezika u osnovnim i srednjim školama u Srbiji shvataju koncept ELF-a i
na koji način ocenjuju jezičke karakteristike ELF-a koje se razlikuju od normi
izvornih govornika. Podaci su prikupljeni pomoću upitnika koji sadrži pitanja
otvorenog tipa i zadatak sa evaluacijom koji je preuzeti iz Dewey (2011). Rezultati
ukazuju na to da učesnicima nedostaje detaljnije shvatanje koncepta ELF-a i da u
svojim nastavnim praksama insistiraju na standardnim jezičkim normama i
gramatičkoj preciznosti.

marija.milojkovic88@yahoo.com