Towards creativity in ELT: the need

to say something new

Tan Bee Tin

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014

What lies at the centre of the evolution of human language, according
to complex/dynamic theory, is the need for humans to innovate and use
language to construct new meaning. Language evolution studies propose
that language grows in complexity over time to deal with complex tasks.
Language goes through a trajectory of change in accordance with the needs
of language users as they innovate complex language to handle complex tasks
and communicate new meanings. However, in many language learning tasks
used in research and language teaching, language is employed primarily to
express ‘known meaning’ rather than to construct ‘unknown meaning’. In
order to increase the learner’s desire to explore and retrieve less accessible
language within and beyond their Zone of Proximal Development, this paper
discusses how language learning tasks can be transformed into creative tasks.
It proposes two conditions that facilitate creativity: the use of multicultural
experiences and constraints.

Introduction: The words ‘real’ and ‘meaningful’ are widely used and are much
meaningful tasks coveted terms in many discussions of ELT. In the communicative
and real world and utilitarian view of language that has dominated much recent
needs? ELT practice and discussion, language learning tasks should help
learners use language to express ‘meaning’ or to ‘communicate’; thus,
conditions need to be set up to promote ‘a communicative desire’ to
use language for a real purpose. However, the term ‘meaning’, which is
vital to such a communicative view of language, is rarely challenged.

Elsewhere, I have argued how such a ‘communicative’ view of

language and language learning is paradoxical and problematic (see
Tin 2012). In particular, I have argued that despite the claim of a focus
on ‘meaning’, the meaning many communicative language learning
tasks tend to focus on is ‘known meaning’ or meaning ‘known to self’,
although it may be unknown to the interlocutor. This can be found
in many ‘information-gap’ or ‘opinion-gap’ tasks where students
are provided with different pieces of information and are required
to bridge the information gap through communication. It can also
be found in many ‘free’ tasks where students are often required to
use language to talk about familiar topics (for example ‘Describe
your family’). Such tasks require learners to use language to express

ELT Journal Volume 67/4 October 2013; doi:10.1093/elt/cct022  385

© The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.
Advance Access publication May 20, 2013
 ‘known meaning’ (i.e. meaning they know) to their interlocutors
who may not have that information. This need to use language
to express known meaning can result in what Smith (2008) calls
‘signal redundancy’ (i.e. lack of desire to explore complex language).
Although such information-gap tasks may create a ‘communicative
desire’ in students (i.e. a need to use language for a communicative
purpose), such tasks may result in a lack of desire to explore, develop,
and retrieve less accessible language. Learners may lose a desire to
explore language utterances that are in the process of maturing or
in their Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Very often, learners
finish the task using simple, safe, and known utterances instead of
retrieving less accessible language and knowledge. The fact that the
meaning to be communicated is already ‘known to self’ can result
not only in a lack of desire among students to explore and challenge

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014

themselves but also in a lack of desire among teachers to teach new
and demanding language.
The ‘human need’ What lies at the centre of the evolution of human language, in complex/
to innovate and dynamic theory and emergentism, is the need for humans to innovate
use language to and use language to construct new meaning. Language evolution
construct new studies propose that language grows in complexity over time to deal
meaning with complex tasks (for example Lakkaraju, Gasser, and Swarup
2008). Language goes through a trajectory of change in accordance
with the needs of language users, as users somehow innovate complex
language to handle complex tasks and communicate about new
meanings. Linguistic signs are continually created to meet new needs
and circumstances (Toolan 2003). This view of language as a complex/
dynamic system is applicable not just to L1 (first language) but also
to L2 (second/foreign language) development (see, for example,
MacWhinney 2006; de Bot, Lowie, and Verspoor 2007). In other
words, emergentist thinking, despite the dangers and limitations that
can arise from misuse, is central to our understanding of the evolution
and development of various complex phenomena, including both L1
and L2 language development.

In order to increase the learner’s desire to explore and extend

their language, I will discuss how language learning tasks can be
transformed into creative tasks, promoting the need to use language
to construct unknown meaning. In particular, I will propose how the
use of multicultural experiences and constraints can facilitate creative
language use. I will demonstrate how this can be done with reference to
one particular topic we are all familiar with in ELT materials (i.e. talking
about oneself and others). First, I will briefly discuss the meaning of
‘creativity’, its importance within language learning, and some features
that could be added to language learning tasks to make them more
creative.
Towards creativity ‘Creativity’ is the ‘ability to come up with new ideas that are surprising
in ELT: the need yet intelligible, and also valuable in some way’ (Boden 2001: 95), and
to say something it involves different types of creative thinking. Boden (ibid.) proposes
new three types of creative thinking through which new ideas can be
produced:

386 Tan Bee Tin

 ■■ combinational thinking: this produces new ideas by associating old
ideas in unfamiliar yet intelligible and valuable ways;
■■ exploratory thinking: this explores all possibilities inherent in a
current conceptual space using existing rules; and
■■ transformational thinking: this significantly alters one or more rules
of the current conceptual space.
Applying this view of creativity to language, language creativity
can be defined as the playful use of language to construct new and
surprising meaning. It involves various types of creative thinking and
is a ubiquitous feature of everyday language use. Various degrees of
language creativity ranging right across the spectrum are employed
by different language users. The following are some examples where,
through playful language use, the language user transforms the
familiar into somewhat unfamiliar, new, and surprising meaning:

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014

■■ ‘Because you’re mine, I walk the line’: a line from a song, producing
an unusual meaning through exploratory thinking, i.e. using the
existing rules of rhyming ‘mine’—‘line’.
■■ ‘Cats walk thin and sleep fat’: a line from a poem for children,
producing an unusual image of cats through combinational thinking
by associating ideas from different remote areas in an unfamiliar way
(‘walk, sleep’ versus ‘thin, fat’).
■■ ‘If there is a will, I want to be in it’: a paraprosdokian often used by
comedians, producing a surprising end to a familiar utterance (in
this case, ‘if there is a will, there is a way’) through transformational
thinking by significantly altering part of the current conceptual space.
■■ ‘Silence of the stomachs. The serious lamb burger’: used in an
advertisement promoting a new lamb burger, producing a new
meaning and phrase through transformational and combinational
thinking, transforming a well-known title of a movie (‘Silence of the
lambs’) and combining ideas from remote disciplines (‘movie title’
versus ‘advertisement’).
In recent years, many have emphasized the importance of language play
and creative language use in language learning and everyday language
(for example Cook 2000; Carter 2004). The need to use language to
construct new meaning facilitates language learning by helping to stretch
and destabilize learners’ language. It helps learners to retrieve less
accessible language and explore and transform their language. It prevents
cognitive fixation tendency and makes language memorable. The need to
say something new (in particular meaning ‘new to self’, which speakers
have not yet considered or ‘discovered’ and thus lack the language to
express) makes us broaden our existing vocabulary and grammar, retrieve
less accessible words and phrases, combine familiar words in unfamiliar
ways, and develop complex grammar (see also Tin 2011).

Applying a Vygotskian sociocultural framework, ‘creativity’ can be

reinterpreted as a core fundamental component for learning. Cross
(2012: 436), for example, notes that
the ZPD—the point at which the learner moves from a reliance on
others (other-regulation) to the independent capacity to perform or

Creativity in ELT 387

 know for themselves (self-regulation) [. . .]—is not a zone in the sense
of ‘place’, but a ‘creative, improvisational activity’.
It can be argued that ‘creativity’, i.e. the human ability and need to make
new meaning and ‘do things that are beyond them’, can initiate the ZPD,
helping learners to ‘stand a head taller than they are’ even in the absence
of scaffolding by a more capable peer. Such a creative zone is important in
language learning tasks, establishing the need for learners to say something
new and to make new meaning that they have not yet formulated.
Among several conditions that can help to establish a creative zone and a
creative desire, I will discuss two that could be set up to promote creativity
in language learning tasks: multicultural experiences and constraints.
Multicultural Research has suggested a connection between creativity and
experiences and multiculturalism (see, for example, Leung, Maddux, Galinsky, and

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014

creativity Chiu 2008). Being simultaneously exposed to different experiences can
lead to cognitive flexibility and creativity. ‘Culture shock’ experienced
in multicultural encounters can generate opportunities for creativity,
allowing one to see new perspectives on familiar things. According
to Leung et al. (ibid.: 172), multicultural exposure can destabilize and
transform
. . . structured and routinized responses to the environment.
Through multicultural experiences, people are also exposed to
a range of behavioural and cognitive scripts for situations and
problems. These new ideas, concepts, and scripts can be the
inputs for the creative expansion processes because the more new
ideas people have, the more likely they are to come up with novel
combinations. (op. cit.: 172)
Creativity can be enhanced when one is exposed to multiple experiences
either on a small scale (for example having different experiences in
our daily life such as teaching versus playing sports) or on a large scale
(for example living in different countries). In addition, multicultural
experiences can vary from ‘little M[ulticultural]’ to ‘big M[ulticultural]’
and can facilitate combinational creativity where new ideas are
produced by combining ideas from different remote disciplines.

An example of a ‘little M’ experience can be found in Excerpt 11 below,

which uses the language of recipes to write about friendship:
Excerpt 1
Recipe poem: friendship
A drop of humour
A cup of kindness
A kilo of tolerance
Two pounds of understanding
A bunch of communication
A clove of laughter and silliness

388 Tan Bee Tin

 A tablespoon of trouble-making.
Put them all in a blender
To make a mayonnaise of friendship.
(By Tan Bee Tin, Li Wei, and Hoai An)
(Reproduced from Asian Poems for
Young Readers Volume 7 (2008) by A. Maley and
J. Mukundan with permission from Pearson
Longman Malaysia.)
Creative language use or language creativity through combinational
thinking is manifested not only in creative writing, such as poems, but also
in other domains of language use. For example, the following introduction
from my own teaching portfolio (Excerpt 2) was written at the time of the

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014

2012 Olympic Games. It demonstrates the creative use of language to
articulate something new about my teaching philosophy, by combining
two different experiences (Olympics versus teaching), and by combining
words such as ‘gold medal’, ‘personal worst’, and ‘personal best’, which
are frequently used during the Olympics, with ‘teachers’, ‘courses’, and
‘evaluation results’, the typical language of a teaching portfolio:

Excerpt 2

My teaching profile here will highlight the process of becoming an

inspiring teacher with particular reference to a difficult course where
I was at my ‘personal worst’ according to the course evaluation results
compared to my other ‘personal best’ courses [. . . ]. By comparing the
course evaluation results I received recently in 2012 with the results I
received in 2008 in that ‘personal worst’ course, I will reflect on how
far I have come, the changes and improvement I have made, and how
far I still need to go in my pursuit of the ‘great teacher’ gold medal.
Similarly, in Excerpt 3 below, students write about their most/least
favourite teacher using the poetic form of acrostics:
Excerpt 3
Acrostics: most/least favourite teacher
Thoughtful The same thing
Efficient Everyday,
Always there Annoying
Caring Crap
Heart so big Heard in
Endangered species to be Every
Rescued. Room.
Trained The
Educators who Endless
Always Agonizing
Create Criticism
High achieving Helps
Enthusiastic Educate . . .
Recipients of their knowledge. Really?

Creativity in ELT 389

 The strange and unfamiliar scenes one encounters in a foreign land
(‘big M’ experiences) can also promote language creativity, enabling
one to transform a familiar topic in an unfamiliar way. For example, a
strange and unfamiliar scene of seeing shops selling coffins of small
sizes along the streets of Hanoi, during a writing trip, led me to look at
life in an unfamiliar way as follows (Excerpt 4):

Excerpt 4
A ready-made life
Even before my birth,
A name’s already given,
A career’s already chosen,

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014

A dress is already woven,
Coffins of different sizes
Are already carved—
Ready to carry my body
To earth no matter the age
I am destined to die.
(By Tan Bee Tin)
(Reproduced from Asian Poems for
Young Readers Volume 7 (2008) by A. Maley and
J. Mukundan with permission from Pearson
Longman Malaysia.)

However, just the mere presence of multicultural experiences is not

sufficient for creativity. Another condition, namely constraints, needs to
be present to facilitate creativity and this is discussed in the next section.

Constraints and Constraints are defined as any limitation on freedom and choice such as
creativity rules, boundaries, and scarcity (Joyce 2009). Constraints are two sided
or paired: one element of the constraint prevents searching in particular
areas of the problem space, while the other element of the constraint
promotes searching in other parts of the problem space (Stokes 2006).
Therefore, for constraints to facilitate creativity, they need to direct the
search for novel solutions while limiting the search among the known.

Thus, constraints desirable for creativity differ from the kind of

limitations found in ‘controlled’ language learning tasks. In these
‘controlled’ tasks, limitations often prompt learners to review what they
already know to express known meaning while limiting their search for
riskier, unknown areas (for example using a given sentence structure
‘there is . . ./there are . . .’ to express what is seen in a picture or given
as known information). In contrast, a constraint that leads to creativity
needs to prompt learners to search among the unknown to construct new
meaning, while limiting their search through what they already know.

390 Tan Bee Tin

 The principled, imaginative use of constraints is important for creativity
(Boden op.cit.). Some examples of such imaginative use include the
selection of types of constraints imposed, as well as the manner or
timing of constraint imposition (for example Joyce op.cit.). Finding new
constraints to work with has been a feature of many famous creative
works. In terms of language creativity, this involves not just satisfying
existing constraints but also finding new constraints or transforming
some or parts of existing constraints or rules to facilitate creativity.
In terms of timing, constraints do not need to be revealed at the
beginning of a task as the presence of a clearly defined goal at this
stage can backfire and is likely to activate known past experiences
instead of broadening learners’ language. There are two phases in a
creative task: idea generation and idea exploration (Finke, Ward, and
Smith 1992). In the idea-generation phase, a social actor is presented

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014

with an ill-defined problem and is required to generate ideas or ‘pre-
inventive forms’ without knowing the final outcome, the goal of the
task, or the meaning those forms will take. In the idea-exploration
phase, a new constraint is discovered or revealed, and the social actor
is pushed to interpret the previously generated ‘pre-inventive forms’
in accordance with the new constraint, constructing new meaning
and making meaning in retrospect. Example 1 illustrates this:

Example 1
Idea-generation phase
1 On a piece of paper, write: ‘Names of objects’ (e.g. mobile phone,
watch, etc.); ‘Natural elements’ (e.g. storm, sun, flower, etc.);
‘Names of animals’ (e.g. kangaroo). (The words students generate
in this idea-generation phase here are regarded as pre-inventive
forms that are produced without knowing what meaning and
function they will serve or what they will be used for.)
Idea-exploration phase
1 After words have been generated, new constraints are revealed:
a  Formal constraint: students need to write sentences using the
structure given below and using words generated above. They are
required to use the words generated in the previous phase (input
requirement):
‘If I were a (insert the word generated above), I would . . . ’
b  Semantic constraint: students need to fulfil the semantic
constraint, i.e. to produce sentences/lines following the formal
constraints above to express their emotions to someone they love.
(e.g. ‘If I were a kangaroo, I would put you in my pocket, keep
you close to my heart, and would hop around the town’; ‘If I were
a candle, I would burn bright for you all the time’; ‘If I were a
window, I would find every crack to get inside your heart’.)

Creativity in ELT 391

 The above creative task is different from a so-called ‘meaningful’ drill found
in many ELT materials, where students are required to use the sentence
structure to talk about familiar events (for example ‘If I won a million
dollars, I would . . .’). In such cases, the presence of a clearly defined goal as
well as the use of a familiar topic could lead students to fall into a cognitive
fixation tendency, retrieving known utterances and meaning (for example
‘If I . . ., I would buy a house/travel around the world’, etc.). We often hear
teachers’ complaints, such as ‘I thought the students would come up with
imaginative responses but the responses were very simple, safe, boring
and the task was over very quickly!’. The need to use language to construct
new, surprising meaning within constraints as in the creative task above
can make language memorable. For example, students are more likely to
remember new words such as ‘hop’, ‘crack’, and so on.
Further examples of creative tasks are given below (Examples 2–4) with

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014

particular reference to a familiar topic found in ELT materials (talking
about and introducing people):

Example 2
Idea-generation phase
1 Write a few sentences about your brother (or a family member).
(In a traditional language task, this stage is the end in itself. Students
are asked to use language to express known meaning or to write about
someone they know. However, in a creative task, the sentence they
produce here can act as a pre-inventive form and not an end in itself.
Teachers can then reveal new constraints that would help students to
use the ideas generated to construct some unknown meaning about
the topic. The following are some examples of constraints that can be
revealed after students have produced pre-inventive ideas.)

Idea-exploration phase
The following constraints can now be revealed.
1  Choose some words you have used to describe your brother.
Write an alphabet poem about him.
a  Formal constraints:
Line 1: all content words in Line 1 start with the same alphabet
letter (e.g. A).
Line 2: all content words in Line 2 start with the next letter of the
alphabet e.g. B).
b  Semantic constraint: to produce an interesting poem.
Example:

Big brother: alphabet poem

Amy’s amazing and all-knowing
Big brother brilliantly boasts:

392 Tan Bee Tin

 ‘Can carry cows, can cure cancer, can chop carrots!’
During dinner, during date, during driving
Every day, every evening, every event!
Family’s, friends’ and father’s favourite fan.
Gifted, gallant, generous giver,
He’s harmless, humorous and has a huge heart.
(By Tan Bee Tin)
2 Alternatively, another constraint can be set up: take some lines
you like from your earlier description about your brother and use
them in your poem. For example, a sentence about a brother who

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014

likes fixing broken things can be used as follows:
Big brother
You are the one we come and see
When we have a broken toy
A broken chair and broken stuff
And you fix them with sheer joy.

Whenever we have a need

You are the one we come and see
You don’t charge us any fee
You fix everything for free.
(By Tan Bee Tin)

Example 3
Idea-generation phase
1 The teacher prepares pieces of blank paper and three boxes:
adjective box, noun box, and verb box.
2 Students are asked to write two adjectives, two nouns, and two
verbs that start with the same letter (e.g. ‘m’) each on a separate
piece of paper and then asked to put them in the appropriate box.
3 Next, get the students to pull out two words from each box: they
will have two adjectives, two verbs, and two nouns, all of which
start with the same letter.
Idea-exploration phase
1 Formal constraint: combine all six words in an interesting way. If
possible, write one single sentence including all those words.
2 Semantic constraint: talk about someone you know or about
yourself, using all six words you have.

Creativity in ELT 393

 Example:
M for Mary: my name is Mary who likes music, and I can make
you feel mean even if you are a magnificent person.
C for Caroline: I am very cool under pressure, a bit like a chicken
who might be fried to a crisp. I like to call out at Bingo and cry
when my counters are wrong.
J for Jenny: Jenny’s jaw dropped when she tried to juggle whilst
she was jumping. Her children thought they had put a jolly jinx
on her and were joyful when she fell over.

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014

Example 4

Idea-generation phase
1 In this activity, students’ first names in the class act as
pre-inventive forms.
Idea-exploration phase
1 The formal constraint: add two adjectives (that start with the letter
of the first name) in front of the student’s name (e.g. bright and
beautiful Betty).
2 The semantic and discourse constraint: produce a name poem
to introduce classmates and to help them remember each other’s
names. Add an introduction.
An example of a name poem:

Friends are like gifts,

I keep them well in my precious list:
Calm and Cool Caroline
Marvellous and Mesmerizing Mai
Fabulous and Fashionable Fay
Chatty and Cute Christine
Adorable and Admirable Amy
Nice and Notable Nui
Bubbly and Best Bob
Last but not least,
Not to be missed out from my list,
Thoughtful and Tidy Tan Bee.
3 Transformational thinking: altering or finding new constraints.
After students have produced poems that satisfy the constraints
introduced, the teacher can get students to transform some of the

394 Tan Bee Tin

 formal constraints in order to produce a more unique name poem
to introduce their classmates. In the following example, the formal
constraint (two adjectives + name) is transformed, resulting in new
information about people in class:
I often learn from the Nerdy Nui,
Admiring Neat Nancy’s handwriting,
Discussing with the Curious Caroline,
Giggling with Funny Fay.

I got to know the Dainty Daisy,

And I think Bubbly Bob is quite nice.

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014

I will hide behind Mighty Mai,
To avoid questions from the Talkative Tan Bee.

Conclusion Table 1 shows how we can transform a communicative task into a

creative task and it summarizes the key differences between the two
types of tasks.

First, in a communicative task, the type of meaning focused on is often

known meaning or meaning ‘known to self’ (for example ‘Talk about
your brother to your classmates’), whereas in a creative task, the focus
is on constructing unknown meaning or ‘meaning new to self’ (for
example ‘Say something new about your brother which you have not
yet discovered’). Second, in a communicative task, teachers often set
up an information gap between students to promote a communicative
desire to use language. In a creative task, it is important to set up
conditions to enhance a creative desire. Discovering and revealing
new constraints is one such condition that will help prevent the search

Features A communicative task A creative task

Types of meaning focused on
Conditions created
Cultural experiences created
Stages involved
table 1 
Communicative tasks
versus creative tasks
Communicating known meaning
(meaning known to self) to others.
Promoting a communicative desire
through information gap.
Using familiar topics to
compensate for lack of language
(creating an environment of
monocultural experiences or
familiar setting).
Controlled phase; free phase.
Constructing unknown meaning
(meaning new to self).
Promoting a creative desire to
explore and transform language
through adding/finding new
constraints.
Making the familiar unfamiliar
to extend language (exposure to
multicultural experiences: little
‘M’ and big ‘M’).
Idea-generation phase; idea-
exploration phase.

Creativity in ELT 395

 among the known while simultaneously directing the search among
the unknown. Third, communicative tasks often attempt to establish
a familiar experience by helping students to relate a topic to their own
lives. Using familiar topics and helping students to activate familiar
experiences compensates for the students’ lack of language. In other
words, a kind of monocultural experience is created or activated. On
the other hand, in a creative task, familiar topics are made unfamiliar
to help students to extend their language. The experience created is
similar to the kind of ‘culture shock’ one undergoes when exposed to
different multicultural encounters. Finally, language learning tasks in
a traditional sense can often be divided into two phases (controlled and
free). Similarly, a creative task also involves two phases: idea generation
and idea exploration.
The notion of the creative task proposed in this article is not meant

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014

to replace the communicative task. A large part of our language
use still requires the need to use language to communicate about
known meaning. Many communicative tasks and traditional
tasks still have an important role to play in language learning to
increase language fluency and accuracy. However, this article
aims to raise language teachers’ awareness of language as a tool
not just for communication but also for making new meaning. In
language learning tasks, promoting a creative desire and the need
for learners to say something new is as important as the need to
communicate known and given meaning. There should be room
for communication as well as creativity in ELT classrooms, and it
is indeed possible that creative tasks and communicative tasks can
complement each other. This can be found in Example 2, where
the need to use language to talk about known meaning in the
idea-generation phase (for example writing about your brother) is
followed by more creative language use in the idea-exploration phase
(for example saying something new about your brother applying
some formal and semantic constraints). Although many of the
examples used in this article come from adult language users with
high levels of language proficiency, the ideas are relevant to other
contexts. Similar conditions can be set up to help establish a creative
zone where learners of various ages and levels need to use language
to construct new meaning. Thus, language teachers and researchers
can experiment with many design features of creative tasks, in
particular the need to use language to construct new meaning,
the principled use of constraints, and the use of multicultural
experiences to make the familiar unfamiliar.
Final version received March 2013

Note creative writing trips. Others are written by

1  The excerpts and examples used in this article
come from various sources. Some come from
writing produced by the author (a non-native
English speaker) and other non-native English-
speaking Asian participants during various
students who participate in various classes
taught by the author. Pseudonyms are used to
refer to student names. All the excerpts and
examples are written by adult language users
with high levels of language proficiency.

396 Tan Bee Tin

References
Boden, M. A. 2001. ‘Creativity and knowledge’
in A. Craft, B. Jeffrey, and M. Leibling (eds.).
Creativity in Education. London: Continuum.
Carter, R. 2004. Language and Creativity: The Art
of Common Talk. London: Routledge.
Cook, G. 2000. Language Play, Language Learning.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cross, R. 2012. ‘Creative in finding creativity in the
curriculum: the CLIL second language classroom’.
The Australian Educational Researcher 39/4: 431–45.
de Bot, K., W. Lowie, and M. Verspoor. 2007. ‘A
dynamic systems theory approach to second
language acquisition’. Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition 10/1: 7–21.
Finke, R. A., T. B. Ward, and S. M. Smith. 1992.
Creative Cognition: Theory, Research and
Applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Joyce, C. K. 2009. ‘The blank page: effects of
constraint on creativity’. Unpublished PhD
thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
Lakkaraju, K., L. Gasser, and S. Swarup. 2008.
‘Language scaffolding as a condition for growth in
linguistic complexity’ in A. D. M. Smith, K. Smith,
and R. Ferrer i Cancho (eds.). The Evolution of
Language: Proceedings of the 7th International
Conference. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.
Leung, A. K., W. W. Maddux, A. D. Galinsky,
and C. Chiu. 2008. ‘Multicultural experience
enhances creativity: the when and how’. American
Psychologist 63/3: 169–81.
MacWhinney, B. 2006. ‘Emergentism—use
often and with care’. Applied Linguistics 27/4:
729–40.
Creativity in ELT
Maley, A. and J. Mukundan. 2008. Asian Poems for
Young Readers, Volume 7. Selangor Darul Ehsan,
Malaysia: Pearson Longman.
Smith, K. 2008. ‘Is a holistic protolanguage a
plausible precursor to language? A test case for
a modern evolutionary linguistics’. Interaction
Studies 9/1: 1–17.
Stokes, P. D. 2006. Creativity from Constraints:
The Psychology of Breakthrough. New York, NY:
Springer Publishing.
Tin, T. B. 2011. ‘Language creativity and
co-emergence of form and meaning in creative
writing tasks’. Applied Linguistics 32/2: 215–35.
Tin, T. B. 2012. ‘Freedom, constraints and
creativity in language learning tasks: new task
Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universitatsbibliothek on February 8, 2014
features’. Innovation in Language Learning and
Teaching 6/2: 177–86.
Toolan, M. 2003. ‘An integrational linguistic
view’ in J. Leather and J. van Dam (eds.). Ecology
of Language Acquisition. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
The author
Tan Bee Tin currently teaches in the Department
of Applied Language Studies and Linguistics
at the University of Auckland. She has a strong
interest in language education in Asia and has
conducted research in Nepal, Indonesia, and
Burma (Myanmar). She acts as webmaster of
the Asian English Language Teachers’ Creative
Writing Project (http://flexiblelearning.auckland.
ac.nz/cw).
Email: tb.tin@auckland.ac.nz
397