DO PARADIGMA DA COMUNICAÇÃO AO PARADIGMA DA ACÇÃO: será que a abordagem da acção favorece a aprendizagem da compreensão e produção da escrita em língua francesa para fins específicos (F.F.E.)?
Palavras-chave:
paradigma da comunicação, paradigma da acção, língua francesa para fins específicos, relações internacionais;, diplomacia, ensino/aprendizagem, francês, língua estrangeiraResumo
In this study, the central question is whether the Action paradigm is favorable to the learning of French in the field of International Relations and Diplomacy. In this context, we test the Action paradigm against the Communicative method through the results achieved by learners after teaching programmes carried through with each approach. Two questionnaires, one for Communicative method and the other for the Action paradigm, were built and submitted to a sample of sixty students, where thirty students attended underwent the Communicative method teaching and paradigm and an equal number for the Action paradigm teaching. The difference between the pre-test and the post-test in terms of marks achieved, differential achievement and mark distribution are conclusive. The Communicative method yields overall average results of 100% against 96.7% for of the Action paradigm and The Action paradigm yields overall average results of 36.7% against 30.3% for of the Communicative method. It thus favors in a statistically significant way the learning of French for specific purposes. Interestingly, its support was greater for aural and spoken tasks than for the written medium. This suggests that the use of different methods is still a commendable approach in the foreign language classroom.
Referências
CECRL. Division des Langues vivantes. Strasbourg: Conseil de l’Europe, DidacTICLangue, 2000..
CUMBANE, D. Du paradigme de communication au paradigme de l’action: est-ce que l’approche actionnelle favorise l’enseignement du français sur objectifs spécifiques F.O.S. ?, 2016. Thèse (doctorat sous de direction de Pierre Larrivée). CRISCO, Université de Caen Normandie, France, 2016. 355 p.
Evelyne B. L’approche communicative : théorie et pratiques, 1991. pp 62-63.
MARTINET, A. Eléments de linguistique générale. Paris: Armand Colin, 2005.
BERARD, E. L’approche communicative, théories et pratiques. Paris : CLE international, 1991.
BOURDIEU, P. Ce que parler veut dire, Economie des échanges linguistiques. Paris : Fayard, 1982.
CARRAS, C., KOHLER, P., SJILAGYI, E., TOLAS, J. Le français sur objectifs spécifiques et la classe de langue. Paris: CLE International, 2007.
CECRL. Apprendre, enseigner, évaluer. Paris: Conseil de l’Europe, Didier, 2001.
CUMBANE, D. Une proposition de curriculum de français sur objectifs spécifiques pour la première année de F.L.E de l’institut supérieur des relations internationales de Maputo, Mémoire de Master Sous la direction de Souchon M. Vol I : texte principal, 88 p. et Vol II, Annexes, 300 p.2008.
LEHMANN, D. Objectifs spécifiques en langue étrangère. Paris: Hachette, 1993.
MANGIANTE, J.M., PARPETTE, C. Le français sur objectif spécifique : de l’analyse des besoins à l’élaboration d’un cours. Paris: Hachette, 2004.
MOURLHON-DALLIES, F. Enseigner une langue à des fins professionnelles. Paris : Didier, 2008.
PUREN, C. De l’approche par les tâches à la perspective co-actionnelle. Les Cahiers de l’Apliut, v 23, n 1, p. 10-26, 5-7 juin 2003.
PUREN, C. Perspectives actionnelles et perspectives culturelles en didactique des langues: vers une perspective co-actionnelle co-culturelle. Les langues modernes, n.3, 2002. p. 55-71.
RICHER, J.-J. Le français sur objectifs spécifiques (F.O.S.), une didactique spécialisée ? Synergies Chine, n.3, p. 15-30. 2008.
