Plenary speakers

 Roger Pouivet, Université de Lorraine (France)

Roger Pouivet is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Lorraine, honorary member of the Institut Universitaire de France. He belongs to the Henri-Poincaré Archives (UMR 7117). He has been a visiting professor in Iceland, Poland, Scotland, Italy and the United States. His work is more in the field of what is known as "analytical philosophy". In aesthetics and philosophy of art, notably: Aesthetics and Logic, 1996; The Ontology of the Work of Art, 2000, 2nd ed. 2010; Aesthetic Realism, 2006; Art and the Desire for God, 2017. In Philosophy of Religion, notably : After Wittgenstein, Saint Thomas, 1997, 2nd ed. 2014; What is belief? 2003; Epistemology of religious beliefs, 2013. He has also published Philosophie contemporaine (2008, 2nd ed. 2018), L'Éthique intellectuelle, une épistémologie des vertus, 2020. He has translated several books from English (Nelson Goodman, Jerrold Levinson, Paul O'Grady). Some of his works have been translated into English, Chinese, Italian, Romanian, Spanish, Polish, Czech, Bulgarian and Arabic. 

Abstract: Do scientists and literary scholars share a common language? School and university systems often sort their students between the ‘science-minded’ and ‘literature-minded’. There are said to be two kinds of minds or, for C.P. Snow, ‘two cultures’ that are almost irreconcilable. Couldn’t it also be the case that there are two languages?  On the one hand, the language of science, clear, precise and rigorous, dealing with reality; on the other, the language of literature and the humanities, metaphorical, poetic, full of emotions and feelings? The first one goes towards the world, to describe it, to know it and to transform it through technique. On the other hand, the language of the literary mind goes in the opposite direction: from reality towards the mind and symbols. Nelson Goodman proposed a distinction between denotation and exemplification. Is it the same?  Let us note that for Goodman, this distinction does not separate two kinds of mind, two cultures or two languages, but between two uses of language. Moreover, these two uses do not correspond to an opposition between the sciences and the arts (including literature). Is it then appropriate to argue against the distinction between scientists and literary scholars – or even between a specialized use of language, that of the sciences, and another, considered less specialized, that of the humanities?

Thomas Tinnefeld, Hochschule für Technik und Wirtschaft des Saarlandes (Allemagne)

Dr. Thomas Tinnefeld is a full professor of Applied Languages at Saarland University of Applied Sciences (Saarbrücken, Germany). He studied English and French and earned his doctorate degree in French linguistics at Duisburg University (Germany) . His thesis focused on the Syntax of the Journal officiel. From 1993 to 2005, he worked at the language center of Göttingen Universiy as a lecturer of French. From 1995 on, he was also an adjunct lecturer of French and Spanish linguistics and methodology at the Romance Department of Göttingen University, from 2004 to 2005 as a regular faculty member. From 2005 to 2008, he held a guest professorship in Taiwan. Thomas is Editor of the international Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching and Chair of the biennial Saarbrücken Conferences on Foreign Language Teaching. He has made numerous publications on linguistics and the teaching of French, English, German, and Spanish, and given guest lectures in Europe, Asia and the U.S.

Abstract: Teaching LSP in the Third Decade of the 21^stCentury - A Model for Discussion. Teaching Languages for Specific Purposes (LSP) has been in the centre of linguistic and methodological interest for more than half a century. However, as is the case for language teaching in general, the golden rule of teaching LSP has not been found. In this plenary talk, the interplay of a given number of highly complex factors which need to be fulfilled for teaching LSP efficiently will be described, analysed and transferred to a model of LSP teaching which may serve as a basis for discussion in this decade. The reflections made in this context refer to the speaker’s personal impression of the recent developments of teaching LSP. They may show in what way the factors that come into play may be put into practice fruitfully. The most relevant of these factors are form and function, and language correctness as linguistic items, the importance of communication and (inter)cultural knowledge, and the teacher and the learner as (inter)personal items, the technology used for virtual teaching as a methodological item and the orchestration of teaching as a comprehensive item. 

Shona Whyte, Université Côte d'Azur (France)

Shona Whyte is professor of English at the Université Côté d'Azur where she teaches English as a foreign language (EFL), translation, and second language acquisition and teaching. Her research interests include CALL (computer-assisted language learning, particularly classroom interaction and teacher integration of technologies) and ESP didactics, that is, research in teaching English for specific purposes. She codirected a special interest group on language teacher education research within GERAS (GT DidASP, with Cédric Sarré 2014-20).She has led the French team in two EU projects: iTILT, on interactive whiteboards in language education, and iTILT 2, on interactive language teaching with a variety of technologies. Her current project is SHOUT4HE on the integration of technology in pedagogical practice in higher education.

Abstract: A "golden age" of ESP teaching: materials, practice, and teacher education in 20thC sciences and technology education. In our increasingly interconnected world where English-language competence has long been a basic skill, English as a Lingua Franca is firmly established in many academic and professional domains, and English Medium Instruction continues to develop in myriad disciplines. During the current pandemic, which constitutes both a hiatus and a powerful disruption, it seems worth pausing to reflect on what might be learned from previous experience in the rapid expansion of English teaching, which led to the creation of the field of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) as we know it today. More specifically, this talk looks back to the last quarter of the 20th century, when British universities and the British Council invested heavily in the development of English for Science and Technology (EST), both in the UK and overseas. The emergence of this new field was not institutionally driven via what Cuban (2013) terms the intended (or official) curriculum, nor indeed was it driven by learner needs, or via a language testing programme. Instead, EST was shaped from the bottom-up, through Cuban’s “taught layer,” by the efforts of “a splendid cohort of applied linguistics specialists” (Swales 2013), whose work continues to influence ESP to this day. These ESP pioneers include Tim Johns, Tony Dudley-Evans, John Swales himself, and John Ewer, hailed as “the father of teacher education in ESP” (Howard & Brown 1997). This talk examines their innovations in terms of a) materials development, including tailored pedagogical resources as well as textbooks; b) classroom practice, particularly team-teaching with content and language specialists, and c) teacher education, considering questions of broader professional development. These early EST teachers and researchers developed a number of groundbreaking strategies to straddle the divide between literary and scientific cultures, whilst avoiding the presumption of the language teacher, who, as “an expert on communication” and “with a smattering of knowledge in the subject area,” presents as “an expert on how the subject ought to be taught, and even on what the subject ought to be” (Johns & Dudley-Evans, 1980). I conclude by comparing this golden age with our contemporary context, to consider how the legacy of our early forerunners can inform ESP education in today’s universities.