English for Specific Purposes: Its Definition, Characteristics, Scope and Purpose
Definition of ESP
ESP seems quite flexible discipline and different people have defined it differently. We can count as many definitions as the number of
linguists who have defined it. All these definitions appear to cover various characteristics of this approach (Sifakis, 2003 cf. Rogers, 1989;
Rogers, 1996). Anthony (1997,p. 1) mentioned the “clear differences in how people interpreted the meaning of ESP” at "The Japan
Conference on ESP” held on November 8, 1997 at Aizu University in Aizuwakamatsu. He pointed out that the participants were divided into
two groups. One group held the view that ESP was teaching of English for any purpose that could be specified whereas the other group of
participants ascribed to it as“ the teaching of English used in academic studies or the teaching of English for vocational or professional
purposes”(ibid., p. 1). This particular example of differing views regarding its definition offers clear insights about the general truth in relation
to this controversy. Hutchinson and Waters (1987) havedefinedESPasan“approach” rather than a “product”– meaning that ESP does not
necessarily involve any particular kind of language, teaching material or methodology. The fundamental function of ESP is: “Why does this
learner need to learn a foreign language”(Milavic, 2006 cf. Hutchinson and Waters, 1987)? The rationale of learning English, thus, became
the crux of ESP. Robinson (1980) has defined it as the teaching of English to the learners who have specific goals and purposes. According to
him, these goals might be professional, academic, scientific etc. Mackay and Mountford (1978, p. 2) have referred to it as the teaching of
English for “clearly utilitarian purposes”. These specific purposes are the above-mentioned academic, professional or scientific ones that
clearly depend on the learners’ needs. Both these definitions do not confine ESP to any specific field, discipline or profession and recognize its
broader area of action. A rather comprehensive approach to define ESP has been tried By identifying its absolute and variable characteristics.
Strevens' (1988) definition makes a distinction between four absolute and two variable characteristics:
Absolute Characteristics:
ESP consists of English language teaching which is:
•designed to meet specified needs of the learner;
•related in content (i.e. in its themes and topics) to particular disciplines, occupations and activities;
•centred on the language appropriate to those activities in syntax, lexis, discourse, semantics, etc., and analysis of this discourse;
•in contrast with General English.
 Variable characteristics:
ESP may be, but is not necessarily:
•restricted as to the language skills to be learned (e.g. reading only);
•taught according to any pre-ordained methodology (Gatehouse, 2001 cf. Strevens, 1998,pp. 1-2).This definition tries to identify ESP in
contrast with General English. Therefore, the emphasis on “Specific English” that belongs to some particular discipline, occupation or activity.
This definition makes it mandatory that ESP courses should concentrate on the language, i.e. syntax, lexis, discourse, semantics etc., which is
appropriate for some particular discipline, occupation or activity. Dudley-Evans and St. John (1998, p. 4-5) have presented a modified
definition of ESP which is also comprised of absolute and variable characteristics of ESP that are as follows:
 Absolute Characteristics
•ESP is defined to meet specific needs of the learner;
•ESP makes use of the underlying methodology and activities of the discipline it serves;
•ESP is centered on the language (grammar, lexis, register), skills, discourse and genres appropriate to these activities.
Variable Characteristics
•ESP may be related to or designed for specific disciplines; 
•ESP may use, in specific teaching situations, a different methodology from that of general English;
•ESP is likely to be designed for adult learners, either at a tertiary level institution or in a professional work situation. It could, however, be for
learners at secondary school level;
•ESP is generally designed for intermediate or advanced students;
•Most ESP courses assume some basic knowledge of the language system, but it can be used with beginners”.

Types of ESP
Dudley-Evans and St. John, (1998) have divided EAP into two divisions: English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP) and ESAP. EGAP is
related to the teaching of language skills that are common in different disciplines but ESAP refers to the teaching of language features that
are specific for various disciplines. Research has offered insights into the mutual relationship of EGAP and ESAP. Skills and language functions
learnt in EGAP programs may be transferred to specific disciplines in ESAP programs (ibid.). Many researchers have discussed about the
types of ESP and most of them have grouped ESP into two main categories: English for Occupational Purposes (EOP) and EAP(Hutchinson
and Waters, 1987; Robinson, 1991) whereas Carter (1983) has identified the following three types of ESP:1.

 
  English as a restricted language2.
 
 English for Academic and Occupational Purposes (EAOP)3.
 
 English with specific topics.
Mackey and Mountford (1978) clearly defined the concept of “restricted language” in their following statement:“... the language of
international air-traffic control could be regarded as 'special', in the sense that the repertoire required by the controller is strictly limited and
can be accurately determined situation ally, as might be the linguistic needs of a dining-room waiter or air-hostess. However, such restricted
repertoires are not languages, just as a tourist phrase book is not grammar. Knowing a restricted 'language' would not allow the speaker to
communicate effectively in novel situation, or in contexts outside the vocational environment” The scope and canvas of this first type of ESP
is extremely limited which allows the learners learn English language for very restricted purposes and it trains the learners to handle specific
situations in extremely limited linguistic settings. This kind of ESP teaching restricts itself to "limited number of phrases and expressions and
these learners remain unable to use English in any setting other than the one they have been trained for. EAOP has been recognized as the
second kind by Carter (1983) whereas majority of other researchers have confined their classification of ESP to EAP and EOP. Robinson
(1991) has also included these two types in his classification of ESP. Kennedy and Bolitho (1985) have added English for Science and
Technology (EST) in their list of types of ESP. It seems to transpire that ESP has been separated from EOP and EAP because of the fact that it
was basically scientific and technological knowledge that this new approach of ELT was supposed to transfer to non-native speakers of
English(Hutchinson and Waters, 1987; Gatehouse, 2001; Dudley-Evans and St John, 1998; Strevens, 1977).“Tree of ELT”(Hutchinson and
Waters, 1987, p. 6) describes the classification of ESP in detail which offers significant insights into the broad scope of ESP:
 English for Specific Purposes
 English for Academic Purposes English for Occupational Purposes English (Academic) English for professional
or Science and purposesTechnology English for OccupationalPurposes English (Academic) ForLegal
Purposes English for English for Medical Business PurposesPurposes English (Academic) for MedicalPurposes Pre-
vocational VocationalPurposesPurposes English (Academic) ForManagement,FinanceandEconomics
Hutchinson and Waters (1987) seem to agree with Carter (1983) in his belief that EOP and EAP are not entirely separate phenomena. They
have argued that “people can work and study simultaneously; it is also likely that in many cases the language learnt for immediate use in a
study environment will be used later when the student takes up, or returns to, a job”(ibid., p. 16). What transpires from the above discussion
is that EOP and EAP have approximately common goals but their dynamics and means to achieve the ultimate goals are indeed different.
Dudley-Evans and St. John(1998, p. 5) have also included only EAP and EOP in their division of ESP. Their suggested classification is as under:
 
ESP

EOP  EAP
Pre-experience  As a school subject
Post – experience  Independent 
Simultaneous /In-service  Integrated
English for Occupational Purposes Post-experience
 Pre-study
 Post-study
 In-study

“English with specific topics” is the third type of ESP according to Carter (1983). He has mentioned activities like post-graduate reading
studies, working in foreign institutions and attending conferences as future needs for scientists. This third category of ESP requires that the
linguistic needs of the learners should be properly determined before any ESP material is designed. It confines itself to the target future
(linguistic) needs (TFN) of the learners to prepare them for their future needs. It seems that this category of ESP is not very distinguishable
because all ESP courses have a proper NA procedure as an integral component of developing ESP teaching material which targets situational
language, including topics mentioned by Carter (1983) and others, in present and target workplace settings (Gatehouse, 2001).