Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc.

(TESOL)

English for Specific Purposes: International in Scope, Specific in Purpose

Author(s): Ann M. Johns and Tony Dudley-Evans
Source: TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 2 (Summer, 1991), pp. 297-314
Published by: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL)
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3587465 .
Accessed: 23/01/2015 00:24
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to TESOL Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TESOL QUARTERLY, Vol. 25, No. 2, Summer 1991

Englishfor SpecificPurposes:
Internationalin Scope,
Specificin Purpose
ANN M. JOHNS
San Diego State University
TONY DUDLEY-EVANS
The Universityof Birmingham

Over the past 30 years, English for specific purposes has

establisheditselfas a viable and vigorousmovementwithinthe
fieldofTEFL/TESL. In thispaper,Englishforspecificpurposes
is defined and its distinguishingfeatures examined. The
international
natureand scope of themovement
are particularly
the
emphasized.Finally,questionsand controversies
surrounding
movement
are discussed.
The studyof languages forspecificpurposes has a long and varied history(Strevens,1977). In recentyears,the focus of research
and curriculumdevelopment has been upon English, as it has
gained ascendancy in internationalscience, technology,and trade.
As TESOL entersitssecond quartercentury,the demand forEnglish forspecificpurposes (e.g., Englishforscience and technology,
Englishforbusiness,vocational ESL) continuesto increaseand expand throughouttheworld.
This paper celebratesthe modernhistoryof Englishforspecific
purposes (ESP), an internationalmovement characterized by a
concernwithadultstudents'"wider roles" (Swales, 1988,p. viii; i.e.,
theirroles as Englishlanguage speakers and writersoutside of the
classroom) and by its groundingin pedagogy, for ESP "distrusts
theoriesthatdo not quite work out in the litmus-paperrealitiesof
the classroom" (Swales, 1988,p. xvii). We will begin by presenting
a standarddefinitionof Englishforspecificpurposes,and continue
by discussingthe distinguishingcharacteristicsof the movement,
needs assessmentand discourseanalysis,thathave set it apart from
"general purpose English." (For an excellent ESP retrospective,
1962-1981, see Swales, 1988.) Following the discussion of these
297

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

features, we will focus upon ESP's international scope and

influence. Finally, we will address some of the questions and
controversiesthatsurroundESP in the 1990s.
A DEFINITION AND DISCUSSION OF PRINCIPALCOMPONENTS
ESP requires the careful research and design of pedagogical
materialsand activitiesfor an identifiablegroup of adult learners
within a specific learning context. Categories of ESP include
various academic Englishes, e.g., English for science and
technology,English forgraduateteachingassistants,and "general"
English for academic purposes, in addition to a number of
occupational Englishes,e.g., English for business,and vocational
ESL (also called Englishforthe workplace). Peter Strevens(1988),
who throughout his life was instrumentalin explaining and
developing the movement,provided this extended definitionand
listof claims:
betweenfourabsoluteand two
A definition
ofESP needsto distinguish
variablecharacteristics:
1) Absolutecharacteristics:
whichis:
ESP consistsofEnglishlanguageteaching
-designed to meetspecifiedneedsofthelearner
-related in content(i.e., in its themesand topics)to particular
and activities
disciplines,
occupations
-centered on the languageappropriateto those activitiesin
syntax,lexis, discourse,semantics,etc., and analysisof this
discourse
-in contrast
with"GeneralEnglish"
characteristics:
Variable
2)
ESP maybe, butis notnecessarily:
-restrictedas to thelanguageskillsto be learned(e.g., reading
only)
-not taughtaccordingto anypre-ordained
methodology
Claims:theclaimsforESP are
need,wastesno time
-being focussedon thelearner's
-is relevantto thelearner
inimparting
-is successful
learning
than"GeneralEnglish"(pp. 1-2)
-is morecost-effective
Streven'swidely accepted definitionwill be employed here to
discuss two "absolute" componentsof ESP: needs assessmentand
discourseanalysis.
298

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Needs Assessment
have been preoccupied
Throughoutitshistory,ESP practitioners
withlearnerneeds, withidentifying
learnerwants and purposes as
integraland obligatoryelements in materialsdesign.' (For more
complete discussionsof ESP components,see A. M. Johns,1990a;
Robinson, 1980, 1991.) In theirearlyyears,needs assessmentswere
fairlysimple, precourse procedures (Munby, 1978). Recent needs
assessments have grown increasinglysophisticated,however, as
materialsdevelopershave become aware of theproblematicnature
of theirtask. One attemptto capturesome of thecomplexityof the
means by which individuals acquire and employ language was
made by Jacobson (1986), who observed internationalstudentsin
the process of collectingdata for a laboratoryreport,in order to
determineat which points therewas communicationbreakdown.
Other assessmentshave exploitedethnographicprinciplesof "thick
description"in an effortto identifythe various elements of the
targetsituationin which studentswill be using English (Ramani,
Chacko, Singh,& Glendinning,1988).
Though the problems involved in assessing learner needs and
understandingthe situationin which theywill be usingEnglishare
daunting(Coleman, 1988), ESP materialsdesignersand practitioners continuein theireffortsto improveand expand theircollection
and analysistechniques.They argue thatall studentsare enrolledin
ESL or EFL classes for particularreasons and that the students'
targetEnglish situationshave identifiableelements;thus,it is the
responsibilityof teachers to discover these factorsand to deliver
courses thatare suitablefortheirstudentpopulations.
DiscourseAnalysis
A second, closely related elementis discourseanalysis,which in
ESP refersto the examinationof writtenor oral language,generally
for purposes of designing curricularmaterials. Throughout its
recent history (whose beginning Swales, 1988, marks with the
Barber, 1962/1988article), ESP specialists have been concerned
with identifyingand weighing the importanceof featuresof the
authentic,or "genuine" (Widdowson, 1981, p. 4), language of the
situationsin which studentswill be usingEnglish.In manypartsof
the world,the focusof thisanalysisis upon word or itemcounts,or
"lexicostatistics"(Swales, 1988,p. 189). These countshave become
1One of the most articulateproponentsof needs assessment,especially in the EAP readingwritingcontext,was Dan Horowitz (1986a, 1986b; and A. M. Johns,1990c). Withhis death,
ESP lost an intelligentand persuasiveadvocate.
ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC

PURPOSES

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

299

increasinglysophisticatedover the years (see, e.g., Gunawardena,

1989). Three promisingavenues for modern item counts are the
tense/aspect/moodfunctionapproaches,"communicativenotions,"
and concordancing. Major contributionsto the firstapproach are
found in the work of the "Universityof Washington School,"
consistingof a numberof well-respectednames: Trimble,Selinker,
Lackstrom, Huckin, Tarone, and Bley-Vroman (see especially
Selinker,Tarone, & Hanzeli, 1981). One of the best publicationsby
thisgroup was devoted to thepassive. In thispiece, Tarone, Dwyer,
Gillette,and Icke (1981) explored the incidence and functionsof
this feature acknowledged as typical of English for science and
technology(EST), withinjournal articlesin a single,well-defined
discourse community, astrophysics. In addition to destroying
assumptionsabout the scientificpassive in general,the researchers
turnedto an expertwithinthe astrophysicsdiscoursecommunityto
validate their assumptions. The use of experts to suggest and
confirmneeds and discourse analyses hypotheses has continued
since thattime. (Huckin & Olsen, 1984; Selinker,1979)
A second approach, based upon communicativenotions,has been
inspired by communicative syllabus design. A communicative
approach was taken by Kennedy (1987), for example, who
employed three differentmethods (frequency counts from texts,
dictionary search, and informantuse) to identify nearly 200
different linguistic devices to signal temporal frequency in
academic texts.
A thirdapproach in textfeatureanalysisis concordancing(T. F.
Johns,1989). In Stevens' (1991) concordancingprogram at Sultan
Qaboos University(Oman), forexample, most of thereading texts
assigned to studentsin theirclasses in science and technologyare on
the computer.Studentsand materialsdesignersuse theconcordancing systemto discover how often and in what contextswords or
phrases appear. A similar program has been developed at the
Universityof Zimbabwe (Mparutsa,Love, & Morrison,1991).
Other text analyses have had more global emphases. Louis
Trimble and his colleagues at the University of Washington
developed a useful Rhetorical Process Chart, which has assisted
researchers and curriculumdesigners to identify,for example,
levels of discourse within texts (Trimble, 1985). Swales (1984,
1990b) has been a leader in encouragingthe examinationof sections
of texts(e.g., introductions)in a numberof disciplinesin order to
determine the required steps. Swales (1990b) defines steps as
"elements that make a paper coherent to genre-experienced
readers" (p. 190). Most of Swales' work in this area has been
devoted to introductionsin researchpapers, in which he has found
300

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

fourprototypicalsteps:establishmentof thefield,descriptionof the

previous research,gap indication,and introductionof the present
research(1990a, p. 192).
Others have chosen to look in depth at one discipline. Dubois
(1980, 1985, 1987), forexample, has investigatedfeaturesof spoken
and writtendiscourse in biomedicine (e.g., purposes of poster
sessions, regulatory language, and citations). Bazerman has
examined the language of physics (1984), and Dudley-Evans and
Henderson (1990) have devoted a volume to the nature of
economics discourse.
Thus far, we have discussed some approaches to analyzing
genuinediscourseservingreal purposesin specifiedcontextsforthe
developmentof ESP materials.However, thisexternalview cannot
satisfy the many adherents of more process, learner-centered
philosophies.Thus, therehave begun a numberof studiesfocusing
upon learner interactionwith discourse, three of which will be
mentionedhere. Olsen and Huckin (1990) and Daoud (1991) have
discovered that many advanced ESL studentsunderstandevery
word in a lectureor in a readingbut stillfail to grasp the principal
argumentsor the purposes and audiences forthe discourse.These
researcherssuggesta broader strategyfor instruction,
based upon
the characterof the academic communityin which the discourseis
found. St. John (1987) employed insightsfrom writingprocess
literatureto study the effortsof Spanish scientiststo produce
publishable discoursein English.
In thissection,we have focused upon the "absolute" featuresof
ESP identifiedby Peter Strevens'needs assessmentand discourse
analysis. We now turn to a contextualized discussion of the
internationalscope of the ESP movement.
INTERNATIONALSCOPE
There are a numberof reasons forthe internationalcharacterof
ESP and itsimportancein EFL environments.
As earlyas the 1970s,
the participantsat a conferenceon second language learningand
national development in Asia, Africa,and Latin America summed
up the need forEnglishas follows:
the language problem in developmentstems fromat least three
communication
needswhichare increasingly
beingrecognizedbothin
themselves
and in othercountries
developingcountries
aidingin their
transmission
of science and
development:internalcommunication,
and international
communication.
technology,
(Mackay& Mountford,
1978,p. vi)
ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC

PURPOSES

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

301

Countries such as India, Nigeria, Singapore, Fiji, and Kenya

require English for internalcommunication,since thislanguage is
shared by educated citizens, and is the most neutral language
available. Gueye (1990) argues thatin these contexts,ESP, through
English for development purposes, should encourage studentsto
understandtheirroles in the educationaland social developmentof
theirown nations.Because of theinternalEnglishlanguage needs, a
number of countrieshave produced theirown ESP textbooksthat
reflectthe normsof local speech and discourse communitiesrather
than any transnationalstandard. (See, for example, A. M. Johns,
1986.) As economic communitiesform,the need forEnglish often
becomes centralto theirinternalinteractionas well. In anticipation
of the European Community, for example, Michel Perrin at
Bordeaux University,in cooperationwithhis colleagues at Toulouse
and Montpellier,has designed a predoctoral programin ESP for
French universities.
Perhaps of greaterinterestto readers of thisvolume is another
of ESP: theexplosionof scientificand
forcein theinternationalizing
technicalEnglish (EST) especially in professionalpublicationsand
graduate schools. Baldauf and Jernudd(1983) have found that in
of
chemistry,biology,physics,medicine,and math,more than651%
all internationaljournals are now English language, a dramatic
increase since 1965. To cope with thisexplosion,conferencesand
seminarsdevoted to EST are becoming common. Two recentwellattended Latin AmericanESP colloquia, held in Brazil and Chile,
concentrated principally upon written scientific and technical
discourse ("Second Latin American,"1990). A colloquium held in
1990 at the Institute of Agronomy, Rabat, Morocco, included
researchers,teachers,and secondaryschool inspectorsinterestedin
technicaland scientificEnglish. Yearly,the Chinese association of
teachersof Englishand the BritishCouncil cosponsor a conference
in which scientificreading and writingplay centralroles.
A thirdarea of need mentionedby Mackay and Mountford(1978)
is forinternationalcommunication.The language of the airways is
English; thus, ESP courses are designed for pilots and other air
personnel who must communicate without error with air traffic
personnel(Robertson,1988). The language of thesea is also English;
thusmaritimeworkersthroughouttheworld learn SEASPEAK, the
InternationalMaritimeEnglish (Strevens& Johnson,1983). There
businessin whichEnglishis
are also manyoccasions in international
the chosen or necessarylanguage of communication,even among
interlocutors(Smith,1987).
nonnative-speaking
internationalpublicationsvoice ESP (and lanNot surprisingly,
guage forspecificpurposes) concerns:forexample,theALSED-LSP
302

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Newsletter (from the Copenhagen School of Economics),

publishedby UNESCO; a numberofspecial issuesand publications
from the Regional English Language Centre in Singapore;
FACHSPRACHE
(Austria); ESPMENA (Sudan); and several
others.EFL subscribersto EnglishforSpecific Purposes:An InternationalJournalfaroutnumbersubscribersfromEnglish-speaking
nations(thismay be partiallyexplainedby thefactthatESP is often
called somethingelse in English-speakingcountries,e.g., "contentin the U.S. and Englishfortheworkplace (EWP)
based instruction"
in Australia;and morethanhalfof thearticlesare writtenby authors
teachingin EFL contexts.Unfortunately,
manyof the superior,but
localized, ESP projects are not discussed in internationalpublications,a great loss for teachersand materialsdesignerseverywhere
(Swales, 1988).
ISSUES AND CONTROVERSIES
In the early days, while ESP was establishingitselfas a separate
and valid activitywithinthe general contextof English language
teaching,the main controversycenteredaround the validityof the
approach: Was ESP likely to be more successful than general
purpose English (GPE) at preparingstudentsforstudythroughthe
medium of English or workingin situationsin which communication takes place in English?Early articles,such as thoseby Higgins
(1966) and Allen and Widdowson (1974) argued the case for ESP
and were influential
in establishingthemovement.At thattime(late
1960s, early 1970s), ESP activity drew much inspirationfrom
applied linguists such as Barber (1962/1988) and Lackstrom,
Selinker,and Trimble (1972). The materials production of ESP
practitionerssuch as Herbert (1965), Swales (1971), and Bates and
Dudley-Evans (1976) seemed to parallel the more theoreticalwork
of applied linguists.In the late 1970s and 1980s, theoreticalwork
seemed to lag behind materials development; only recentlyhas
theoreticallymotivatedresearchbegun to close the gap.
Now, we findESP less constrainedto argue the case forits own
existence.This is partly,we suspect,because the case forESP has
now been accepted internationally,and it is now possible for
teachers, especially in EFL contexts,to pursue a career in ESP
work. Unfortunately,
however, few empirical studies have been
conducted to test the effectiveness of ESP courses. Foley's
discussionof the ESP programat the Universityof Petroleumand
Minerals (1979) and the reportof the evaluation of the Brazil ESP
Reading Project(Celani, Holmes, Ramos, & Scott,1988) are notable
exceptions. For the most part, reportson ESP courses consist of
what Bowyers (1980) calls "war storiesand romances."
ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

303

Despite its acceptance as an activitycentral to many English

language teachingcontexts,controversiesand questionswithinESP
remain.Principalamong themare thefollowing:
1. How specificshould ESP coursesand textsbe?
2. Should they focus upon one particularskill, e.g., reading, or
should the fourskillsalways be integrated?
3. Can an appropriateESP methodologybe developed?
The question of how specific ESP courses should be was first
raised directlyby R. Williams (1978) who argued in favor of a
"wide-angle" (p. 30) approach in which language and skills are
taught throughtopics that are drawn from a varietyof subjects
ratherthan from the students'own discipline or profession.The
argumentfor a wide-angle approach has also been forwardedby
Widdowson in his volume Learning Purpose and Language Use
(1983), as well as by materialswritersand teachers of academic
writing(Spack, 1988). But the strongestcase forthisview has been
made by Hutchisonand Waters.In a numberof influentialarticles,
for example, "ESP at the Crossroads" (1980), and in theirvolume
EnglishforSpecificPurposes:A Learner-CentredApproach (1987),
they argue that the narrow-angleapproach is demotivatingand
irrelevantto studentneeds. In particular,they claim thatstudents
should be grouped forESP classes across broad subject areas with
materials drawing from topics that give "access to a number of
differentspecialistareas" (Hutchinson& Waters,1987, p. 166) thus
making studentsaware of the "lack of specificityof theirneeds"
(1987, p. 167).
We believe that the case made by Hutchinson and Waters is
overstated.The seeming suitabilityof the wide-angle approach to
prestudy courses does not mean that it is suitable for all ESP
courses, in particular, for graduate students and professionals
(Swales, 1990a) and in a number of EFL contexts.The various
team-teachingexperimentsreported in the ESP literature(e.g.,
de Escorcia, 1984; T. F. Johns& Dudley-Evans, 1980) show thatthe
wide-angle or so-called common core approach needs to be
supplemented by some attemptto define students'more specific
thattheyface on a day-toneeds and theactual language difficulties
in
or
in
classes
their
disciplines in theirprofessionallives.
day basis
The concern with the nature of the discourse community(Joliffe,
1988; Swales, 1990a) and theprocess of socializationof the"novice"
into that community (Ballard, 1984; Berkenkotter,Huckin, &
Ackerman,1991) confirmthe need for focus upon the differences
among disciplines and professions. Related studies in rhetoric
304

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

confirmtheneed fortheESP teacherto take account of thevarying

epistemologicalassumptionsof differentacademic disciplinesand
professionaldiscourse communities.In academic studies,Hansen
(1988) shows clearly that rhetoricalconventionsdifferbetween
anthropology and sociology; Benson (1991) demonstrates that
values upon which discourses are based vary from discipline to
discipline.
The debate about the validity of a focus upon a single skill is
conducted along similarlines. In ESP practice, the single skill is
usually reading because of its primaryimportancein many EFL
environments. It has been argued (e.g., Chitravelu, 1980;
Hutchinson & Waters, 1987) that concentrationon one skill is
limitingand thatsome attentionto otherskillsis likelyto improve
performance in the target skill. Nonetheless, monoskill reading
courses have undoubtedlyproved popular and successfulin many
parts of the world, such as China (A. M. Johns,1986) and some
Latin American countries("Second Latin American,"1990). The
exemplary Brazilian ESP project has generated both teaching
materials and a number of reportson the relevance of teaching
readingalone (Celani, et al., 1988).
Does ESP have itsown methodology?It has tended to be a needsand materials-ledmovement,historicallyquestionedby onlya few
(see Phillips & Shettlesworth,1978). However, with the learnercentered bias of Hutchinson and Waters (1987), interest in
methodologies has increased. Courses at the Asian Instituteof
Technology in Thailand (Hall & Kenny, 1988) and the British
Council's English Study Centre in Recife, Brazil, exhibit this
influence.
We believe thatESP requiresmethodologiesthatare specialized
or unique. An English for academic purposes (EAP) class taught
collaborativelyby a language teacher and a subject-arealecturer
(T. F. Johns& Dudley-Evans, 1980), shelteredand adjunct EAP
classes (Brinton,Snow, & Wesche,1989), and special Englishclasses
forstudentsin theworkplace (Lompers, 1991) requireconsiderably
differentapproaches thanthose foundin generalEnglishclasses.
Given the importanceof the teachingof writingin many ESP
situations,it is not surprisingthattheprocess/productdebate in L1
compositiontheory(Flower, 1989) has spilled over into ESP. The
work of genreanalysis(Swales, 1990a) and the increasinginfluence
of the social constructionist
view of writing(A. M. Johns,1990b),
however, seem to provide a systemof analysis and therebyan
approach to theteachingof writing( Weissberg& Buker,1990) that
successfullycombines the considerationof end product with the
writingprocess.
ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

305

FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
We noted earlier that ESP is now accepted as an important,if
idiosyncratic,part of Englishlanguage teaching,at least in international contexts.It is now increasinglyconcerned withthe "ecological" issue of how to ensurethatESP projectslast and continuein local situations(Holliday & Cooke, 1982), and in this,the role of the
nonnative-speakerESP teacheris crucial. As mightbe predicted,a
considerable numberof ESP studentand teacher preparationprogramshave arisenin EFL contexts. Two of many examples are the
courses for technical studentsand teaching professionalsat Jiao
Tong Universityin Shanghai,China-a countryin which thereare
numerousESP programsand publications-and at theundergraduate teacherpreparationprogramat theUniversityof Blida, Algeria.
Other ESP programs are in the offing,for example, a graduate
programat the Catholic Universityin Santiago,Chile.
It is unfortunate
thatgraduateprogramsin the UnitedStateshave
not recognized the need for English for specific purposes courses
forinternationalstudentsor English-speakingstudentswho desire
employmentoverseas or in specific purpose contexts.Because of
thislacuna, it is difficultforagencies such as AMIDEST (American
Friends of the Middle East) to place studentsforgraduatestudies,
and forthe United StatesInformationAgency,whichprovidesU.S.
consultantsfor internationalcontexts,to satisfythe requests for
English for specific purposes experts (B. Avant, personal
communication,1991).2 The situationis considerablybetterin other
English-speakingcountries.In the United Kingdom, for example,
thereare a number of ESP teachertrainingprograms,includinga
Master of Science in Teaching English for Specific Purposes at
Astonand a certificatein Teaching ESP at the Universityof Essex.
For most of its history,ESP has been dominated by English for
academic purposes, and under thatrubric,by English for science
and technology (Swales, 1988); EAP continues to dominate
However, the increased number of immigrantsin
internationally.
English-speakingcountriesand the demand forMBA courses in all
partsof the world have increased the demand forprofessionaland
businessEnglish,vocational English (VESL/EVP in the U.S., EOP
in the U.K.), and English in the workplace (WPLT) programs.
Again, there is a dilemma about how specific the business and
vocational Englishcourses should be and whetherthesecourses are
2 The planned creation of an ESP Special InterestGroup in TESOL may improve matters
somewhat, though the currentSIG membership consists principally of consultantsin
workplace contexts in the United States, whose needs and interestsare considerably
differentfromthose of the internationalstudentor scholar.
306

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

to be considered ESP. It is our contention that all courses in

specialized language and practicefallunderthe Englishforspecific
purposes rubric.
As happened in the 1970s in the case of English for academic
purposes and English for science and technology,the increasing
interestin professionalEnglish has resultedin a number of good
general business English volumes which have emerged from
teachingsituations.These include books such as BusinessConcepts
forEnglishPractice(Dowling & McDougal, 1982),BusinessEnglish
(Wilbert& Lewis, 1990),In at theDeep End (Hollett,Carter,Lyon,
& Tanner,1989), and Ready forBusiness(Vaughan & Heyen, 1990)
thathave clearlybenefitedfromhavingbeen piloted and revisedin
light of teaching experience. However, in the more specific
materialson topics such as meetingskills,businessnegotiation,and
case studies,thereis thedangerof overdependenceon thematerials
writers'intuitionsabout what is involved in such activities,rather
than upon research and analysis of representativediscourse. A
number of studies have pointed to the mismatch between the
textbookview of what happens in,forexample,a businessmeeting
and what a detailed analysis reveals (Oertli, 1991; M. Williams,
1988). This is not to suggest that otherbranches of ESP have not
faced the same problems. Research in business-relatedskills is,
however, hampered by the difficultyof obtainingdata. Lampi's
a relatively
(1985) work on business negotiationis, unfortunately,
rareexample of a businessEnglishstudybased upon authenticdata.
As ESP delves deeper intostudents'needs and extendsbeyond its
traditionalEAP base, therewill be an increasingneed forresearch
into the nature of discourse, writtenor spoken, that must be
produced or understood by those enrolled in ESP courses. The
importanceto ESP of genreanalysis(Swales, 1990a), of theinsights
of writingscholarssuch as Bazerman (1988) and Myers(1989), and
of the findingsof thosestudyingtherole of writtentextin the work
situation(Bazerman & Paradis, 1991;Coleman, 1989) will also be of
increasingsignificance.Whetheror not thisresearchwill take ESP
furtheraway from its parent disciplines of TESL/TEFL and
applied linguistics,as Swales (1988) suggests,remainsto be seen.
Whatis clear is thatit will increasinglydraw on and workwithother
disciplines such as rhetoric,the sociology of science, and social
psychology.
Interestingly,the converse also seems to be occurring:Other
disciplines are now beginningto draw upon the insightsof ESPrelated research,as can be seen fromrelated work in communication studies (Chukwuma, Obah, Robinson,& St. John,1991; Love,
ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC

PURPOSES

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

307

1991). A review (Brown, 1991) of The Language of Economics

(Dudley-Evans & Henderson, 1990) in the Economic Journal
expresses some impatience with the authors'carefulargumentfor
the importanceof genreand discourseanalysisto an understanding
of thenatureof communication;thereviewerlooked forwardto the
considerationin a successor volume of "the wider epistemological
implicationof discourse analysis for the teaching and learningof
economics" (p. 1317). ESP may,in fact,begin to expand beyond its
classroom role to assume a substantialconsultancyrole in a wide
varietyof academic and professionalenvironments.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authorswould liketo thankJohnSwales forhis assistancein shapingthepaper
and forhis valuable commentson itsvariousdrafts.

THE AUTHORS
AnnM. Johnsis Professor
of AcademicSkillsand Linguistics
at San Diego State
Universityin California. She is the author of articles on English for academic

Researchand
purposesand Coeditor(withU. Connor)of Coherencein Writing:

Pedagogical Perspectives (TESOL, 1990). She is Coeditor (with Tony DudleyEvans and JohnSwales) of EnglishforSpecificPurposes:AnInternational
Journal.
She has worked cooperatively on curriculumdevelopment projects in eight
countries. Her research interestsinclude student representationof academic
reading and writingtasks, testingacademic literacy,and argumentationin the
disciplines.
Tony Dudley-Evans is Senior Lecturerand Director of the English for Overseas
StudentsUnit in the School of English at the Universityof Birmingham.He has
coedited internationalESP textbooks and has written articles on ESP/EAP.

he hascoeditedTheLanguageofEconomics:TheAnalysis
ofEconomics
Recently
Discourse (with Willie Henderson) (ELT Documents No. 134, 1990). He is
Coeditor (with Ann Johnsand JohnSwales) of Englishfor Specific Purposes: An
his
InternationalJournal.He has taughtand consultedin a varietyof environments;
particular interestsare ESP, team teaching with subject specialists,and genre
analysis.

REFERENCES
Allen,J.P. B., & Widdowson,H. G. (1974).Teachingthecommunicative
use of English.InternationalReview of Applied LinguisticsXII(1), 1-20.

308

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Baldauf, R. B., & Jernudd,B. H. (1983). Language of publications as a

variable in scientificcommunication.Australian Review of Applied
Linguistics,6, 97-108.
Ballard, B. (1984). Improvingstudentwriting:An integratedapproach to
culturaladjustment.In R. Williams,J. M. Swales, & J. Kirkman(Eds.),
Common ground: Shared interestsin ESP and communicationstudies
(ELT Documents No. 117, pp. 43-54). Oxford: Pergamon Press in
associationwiththeBritishCouncil.
of modernscientific
Barber,C. L. (1988). Some measurablecharacteristics
prose. In J.Swales (Ed.), Episodes in ESP: A source and referencebook
for the developmentof Englishforscience and technology.New York:
Prentice Hall. (Reprinted from Contributionsto English syntax and
philology [Gothenberg Studies in English No. 14, 1962, pp. 1-23].
Stockholm:Almquist& Wiksell)
Bates, M., & Dudley-Evans, A. (1976). Nucleus: English for science and
technology.Harlow, England: Longman.
Bazerman, C. (1984). Modern evolution of the experimentalreport in
physics: Spectroscopic articles in Physical Review, 1893-1980. Social
Studies in Science, 14, 163-196.
Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping writtenknowledge. Madison: Universityof
WisconsinPress.
Bazerman, C., & Paradis, J. (1991). Textual dynamicsof the professions.
Madison: Universityof WisconsinPress.
Benson, M. J.(1991). UniversityESL reading:A contentanalysis.English
for Specific Purposes,10, 75-88.
Berkenkotter,C., Huckin, T. M., & Ackerman,J. (1991). Social context
texts:The initiationof a graduatestudentintoa
and socially-constructed
writingresearch community.In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis, Textual
dynamics of the professions(pp. 1, 191-216). Madison: Universityof
WisconsinPress.
Bowyers, R. (1980). War stories and romances. In Projects in materials
design (ELT Documents Special, pp. 71-82). London: BritishCouncil.
Brinton,D., Snow, M.A., & Wesche, M. B. (1989). Content-basedsecond
New York: NewburyHouse/Harper & Row.
language instruction.
Brown, V. (1991). [Review of The Language of Economics: The analysis
of economics discourse].Economic Journal,101(408), 1315-1317.
Celani, M. A., Holmes, J.,Ramos, R. S., & Scott,M. (1988). The Brazilian
ESP project:An evaluation.Sao Paulo: UniversidadesBrasileiras.
Chitravelu,N. (1980). Strategiesforreading.In The Universityof Malaya
English forspecial purposes project (ELT Documents No. 107, pp. 1737). London: BritishCouncil.
Chukwuma, H., Obah, T., Robinson, P., & St. John, M. J. (1991). A
comparative study of communicativeskillsprojects: Factors affecting
success. Paper presentedat the 1991 BALEAP Conference,Southampton University,U.K.
Coleman, H. (1988). Analyzing language needs in large organizations.
EnglishforSpecific Purposes,7, 155-169.
ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

309

Coleman, H. (Ed.). (1989). Workingwith language: A multidisciplinary

consideration of language use in work contexts. Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter.
Daoud, M. (1991). The processingof EST discourse: Arabic and French
native speakers' recognitionof rhetoricalrelationshipsin engineering
texts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,Universityof California,Los
Angeles.
de Escorcia, B. A. (1984). Team teachingfor studentsof economics: A
Colombian experience. In R. Williams,J. M. Swales, & J. Kirkman
(Eds.), Common ground: Shared interestsin ESP and communication.
studies(ELT Documents No. 117,pp. 105-144).Oxford:PergamonPress
and the BritishCouncil.
Dowling, B. T., & McDougal, M. (1982). Business concepts for English
practice. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Dubois, B. L. (1980). Genre and structureof biomedical speeches. Forum
Linguisticum,5, 140-169.
Dubois, B. L. (1985). Popularizationat the highestlevel: Postersessionsat
biomedical meetings. International Journal of the Sociology of
Language, 56, 67-85.
Dubois, B. L. (1987). Somethingon theorderof aroundfortyto forty-four:
Imprecise numericalexpressionsin biomedical slide talks.Language in
Society,16, 527-541.
Dudley-Evans, A., & Henderson, W. (Eds.). (1990). The language of
economics: The analysisof economics discourse (ELT Documents No.
134). London: Modern English Publications in association with the
BritishCouncil.
Flower, L. (1989). Problem-solvingstrategiesfor writing(3rd ed.). San
Diego: HarcourtBrace Jovanovich.
Foley, J. (1979). Problems of understandingscience and technological
textbooks in English for first year students at the Universityof
Petroleum and Minerals in Saudi Arabia. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation,Universityof London.
Gueye, M. (1990). One step beyond ESP: English for development
purposes. English Teaching Forum,XXVII(3), 31-34.
Gunawardena,C. N. (1989). The presentperfectin therhetoricaldivisions
of biology and biochemistryjournal articles. English for Specific
Purposes,8, 265-274.
Hall, D., & Kenny, B. (1988). An approach to a trulycommunicative
methodology: The AIT pre-sessional course. English for Specific
Purposes,7, 19-32.
Hansen, K. (1988). Rhetoric and epistemologyin the social sciences: A
contrastof two representativetexts.In D. A. Joliffe(Ed.), Writingin
academic disciplines: Advances in writingresearch. Norwood, NJ:
Ablex.
Herbert,A. J. (1965). The structureof technicalEnglish. London: Longman.
310

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Higgins, J. J. (1966). Hard facts (Notes on teaching English to science

students).EnglishLanguage Teaching,21, 55-60. (ReprintedinJ.Swales
[Ed.], Episodes in ESP [pp. 28-34],1988,New York: PrenticeHall)
Hollett, V. R., Carter,R., Lyon, L., & Tenner, E. (1989). In at the deep
end. Oxford: OxfordUniversityPress.
Holliday, A. R., & Cooke, T. (1982). An ecological approach to ESP. In
A. Waters(Ed.). Issues in Englishforspecificpurposes (LancasterPractical Papers in English Language Education, Vol. 5, pp. 123-143). Oxford:PergamonPress.
Horowitz, D. M. (1986a). Essay examinationpromptsand the teachingof
academic writing.EnglishforSpecific Purposes,5, 197-220.
Horowitz, D. M. (1986b). What professorsactually require: Academic
tasksforthe ESL classroom.TESOL Quarterly,20(3), 445-462.
Huckin,T., & Olsen, L. (1984). On the use of informantsin LSP discourse
analysis.In A. Pugh & J. Ulijn (Eds.), Reading forprofessionalpurposes
(pp. 120-129).London: Heinemann.
Hutchison,T., & Waters,A. (1980). ESP at the crossroads. English for
specific purposes (Newsletter), 36, 1-6. Oregon State University.
(Reprintedin J.Swales [Ed.], Episodes inESP [pp. 174-185],1988,New
York: PrenticeHall)
Hutchinson,T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A
learning-centred
approach. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Jacobson, W. HI. (1986). An assessmentof the communicationneeds of
non-nativespeakersof Englishin an undergraduatephysicslab. English
forSpecific Purposes,5, 173-188.
Johns, A. M. (1986). Some comments on the nature of Chinese ESP
coursebooks. In P. Wilcox Peterson(Ed.), ESP in Practice (pp. 85-89).
Washington,DC: USIA.
Johns,A. M. (1990a). ESP: Its historyand contributions.In M. CelceMurcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreignlanguage (2nd
ed., pp. 67-78). New York: Newbury House.
Johns,A. M. (1990b). L1 compositiontheories:Implicationsfordeveloping
theoriesof L2 composition.In B. Kroll (Ed.). Second language writing:
Research insightsfortheclassroom (pp. 24-36). Cambridge: Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Johns, A. M. (1990c). Process, literatureand academic realities: the
contributionsof Dan Horowitz.JALT Journal,12, 29-36.
Johns,T. F. (1989). Whence and whitherclassroom concordancing? In
T. Bongaerts,P. de Haan, S. Lobbe, & H. Wekker (Eds.), Computer
applications in language learning (pp. 9-33). Dordrecht,Netherlands:
Foris.
Johns,T. F., & Dudley-Evans, A. (1980). An experimentin team teaching
overseas postgraduatestudentsof transportation
and plant biology. In
Team teachingin ESP (ELT Documents No. 106, pp. 6-23). London:
BritishCouncil. (Reprintedin J.Swales [Ed.], Episodes in ESP [pp. 137156], 1988,New York:PrenticeHall)
ENCLISII F()R SPECIFIC PURP()SES

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

311

Joliffe,D. A. (1988). Writingin academic disciplines:Advances in writing

research.Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Kennedy, G. D. (1987). Expressing temporal frequency in academic
English. TESOL Quarterly,21(1), 69-86.
Lackstrom,J. E., Selinker, L., & Trimble, L. P. (1972). Grammar and
technicalEnglish.English Teaching Forum,X(5), 58-66.
Lampi, M. (1985). Linguisticcomponentsof strategiesin businessnegotiations. Unpublisheddissertation,Universityof Jyvaskyla,Finland.
Lompers, A. E. (1991, April). Critical featuresin effectiveworkplace
language training(WPLT) programs. Paper presented at the 22nd
Annual CATESOL Conference,Santa Clara, CA.
Love, A. (1991). Communicationskillsin the ESL Africansituation.Paper
presented at the 1991 Communication Skills Conference, Nairobi,
Kenya.
Mackay, R., & Mountford,A. (1978). English for specific purposes.
London: Longman.
Mparutsa, C., Love, A., & Morrison,A. (1991). Bringingconcord to the
ESP classroom. In T. F. Johns & P. King (Eds.). Classroom
concordancing (ELR Journal,Vol. 4, pp. 115-134). Birmingham:The
Universityof Birmingham,U.K.
Munby, J. (1978). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge:
Cambridge UniversityPress.
Myers, G. (1989). Writingbiology: Texts in the social constructionof
scientificknowledge. Madison: Universityof WisconsinPress.
Oertli,P. (1991). The language of businessmeetings:Teaching materialsin
thelightof one reality(An inside-outview). Unpublishedmastersthesis,
The Universityof Birmingham,U.K.
Olsen, L. A., & Huckin, T. N. (1990). Point-drivenunderstandingin
engineeringlecture comprehension.English for Specific Purposes, 9,
33-48.
C. C. (1978). How to arm yourstudents:
Phillips,M. K., & Shettlesworth,
A considerationof two approaches to providingmaterialsin ESP. In
English for Specific Purposes (ELT Documents No. 101). London:
BritishCouncil. (Reprintedin J.Swales [Ed.], Episodes in ESP [pp. 104114], 1988,New York: PrenticeHall)
Ramani, E., Chacko, T., Singh, S. J., & Glendenning,E. H. (1988). An
ethnographicapproach to syllabus design: A case study of the Indian
Instituteof Science, Bangalore. EnglishforSpecific Purposes,7, 81-90.
Robertson,F. (1988). Airspeak:Radiotelephonycommunicationforpilots.
New York: PrenticeHall.
Robinson,P. (1980). ESP: Englishforspecificpurposes. PergamonPress.
Robinson,P. (1991). ESP today:A practitioner's
guide. New York:Prentice
Hall.
St. John,M. J. (1987). Writingprocesses of Spanish scientistspublishingin
English.EnglishforSpecific Purposes,6, 113-120.
312

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Second Latin American ESP Colloquium Proceedings. (1990). Santiago:

Universidadde Chile.
Selinker,L. (1979). On the use of informantsin discourse analysis and
language for specialized purposes. InternationalReview of Applied
Linguistics,17, 189-215.
Selinker,L., Tarone, E., & Hanzeli, V. (Eds.). (1981). Englishforacademic
and technicalpurposes:Studiesin honorof Louis Trimble.Rowley,MA:
Newbury House.
In P. H.
Smith,L. E. (1987). Language spread and issues of intelligibility.
Table
on
Round
Languages
Lowenberg (Ed.). Georgetown University
and Linguistics1987: Language spread and issues of language policy:
Issues, implicationsand case studies. Washington,DC: Georgetown
UniversityPress.
Spack, R. (1988). InitiatingESL studentsinto the academic discourse
community:How farshould we go? TESOL Quarterly,22(1), 29-52.
Stevens, V. (1991). Classroom concordancing: Vocabulary materials
derived fromrelevant,authentictext.EnglishforSpecific Purposes,10,
35-46.
Strevens,P. (1977). Special purpose language learning:A perspective.
Language Teaching and LinguisticsAbstracts,10, 145-163.
Strevens,P. (1988). ESP aftertwentyyears: A re-appraisal.In M. Tickoo
(Ed.), ESP: State of the art (pp. 1-13). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional
Language Centre.
Strevens, P., & Johnson,E. (1983). SEASPEAK: A project in applied
linguistics,language engineeringand eventually,ESP for sailors. The
ESP Journal(Now EnglishforSpecificPurposes),2, 123-130.
Swales, J. (1971). WritingscientificEnglish.London: Nelson.
Swales, J. (1984). Research into the structureof introductionsto journal
articles and its application to the teaching of academic writing.In
R. Williams & J. Swales (Eds.), Common ground: Shared interestsin
ESP and communicationstudies (ELT Documents No. 117, pp. 77-86).
Oxford:PergamonPress.
Swales, J. (Ed.). (1988). Episodes in ESP: A source and referencebook for
the development of English for science and technology.New York:
PrenticeHall.
Swales, J. M. (1990a). Genre analysis:English in academic and research
settings.Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Swales, J. M. (1990b). Nonnative speaker graduate engineeringstudents
and theirintroductions:Global coherence and local management.In
U. Connor & A. M. Johns(Eds.), Coherence in writing:Research and
pedagogical perspectives(pp. 187-208).Washington,DC: TESOL.
Tarone, E., Dwyer, S., Gillette,S., & Icke, V. (1981).On the use of the
passive in two astrophysicsjournalpapers. The ESP Journal,1, 123-140.
Trimble, L. (1985). English for science and technology:A discourse
approach. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Weissberg,R., & Buker,S. (1990). Writingup research.Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: PrenticeHall.
ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC

PURPOSES

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

313

Widdowson, H. G. (1981). English for specific purposes: Criteria for

course design. In L. Selinker,E. Tarone, & V. Hanzeli (Eds.), English
foracademic and technicalpurposes: Studiesin honorof Louis Trimble
(pp. 1-11). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Widdowson, H. G. (1983). Learning purpose and language use. Oxford:
Oxford UniversityPress.
Wilbert, P., & Lewis, M. (1990). Business English: An individualized
learningprogramme.Hove, U.K.: Language Teaching Publications.
Williams,M. (1988). Language taughtfor meetingsand language used at
meetings:Is thereanythingin common? Applied Linguistics,9, 45-58.
Williams,R. (1978). EST-Is it on therighttrack?In C. J. Kennedy (Ed.),
English for specific purposes [Special issue]. MALS Journal(Midlands
Applied Linguistics Association) (pp. 25-31), The University of
Birmingham,U.K.
Vaughan, A., & Heyen, N. (1990). Ready for business. Harlow, England:
Longman.

314

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 121.52.154.147 on Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:24:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions