Mohamed Gacemi is a PHD in language sciences and linguistic.  He has mainly worked on the use by foreign language teachers of a language known to the students as a support for the teaching of a foreign language. He currently teaches French to adults. Email: gacemi20univ@gmail.comAbstarc

 

Abstract

If relying on a language known to learners as an aid to learning another language has proven to be beneficial, integrating it into teaching learning a foreign language in an educational context remains difficult to achieve. This article reports the experience of using native language in French classes with an audience of adult learners in a private school in Algeria. For the teacher initiating this experience, the objective is to show a different approach from that usually carried out in this type of training, fundamentally monolingual and ethno-centered. It is for the practitioner to allow these newcomers in training with a low level in French to rely on their mother tong, Algerian Arabic to facilitate interaction with the teacher and unlock communication in the classroom. The articulation of French and Algerian Arabic proved in this case extremely advantageous on the one hand for the reduction of the linguistic difficulty making communication more fluid and on the other hand to allow the learners to listen better in order to better understand and interact by relying their own tongue.

 

Introduction

The language difficulty in which the school provides its knowledge is one of the many problems, which, along with others, are at the root of school failure. If in African countries (particularly French-speaking sub-Saharan countries) French as the language of instruction is essential for the pursuit of studies, in Algeria it is different. Since French is no longer the language of schooling since the implementation of the Arabization of schools, which began in 1976, this language has been relegated to the status of a foreign language. This change in status is, to say the least, paradoxical. Let us not forget that it is always in French that knowledge is taught at university. This paradox is criticized by Taleb Ibrahimi who is surprised at the low level of Algerian high school graduates not only in French (which is all the more acceptable, French being taught as a foreign language) but also in Arabic, which is all the same implausible. When we know, that Arabic is the language of schooling, in which all knowledge is taught throughout the school curriculum.

“These baccalaureate holders, all sectors combined, enter university with notorious difficulties (…) and huge gaps in mastering the French language, the first foreign language taught at school but the language of instruction in scientific and technological disciplines at university” (Taleb Ibrahimi, 2015: 53). (I'm the one translating from French).

Two learner profiles show notable weaknesses in French: Firstly, university students in scientific and technical streams whom, to continue their studies in French at university, must justify a minimum of skills in this language. Then it was public service employees who, even with a low level of French, still managed to occupy administrative positions. If the Algerian linguistic and educational policy chose to arabize the school (1976), it did so without taking into account the consequences on the educational and socio-professional levels.

"The French language, on the other hand, benefits from a twelve-year course, without the students being able to master the fundamental skills, so much does the training of trainers suffer from its weakness and its inconsistency with regard to the evolution of the language practices of the Algerian speakers” (Ibid.: 56).

In this article, we will focus on a single profile: public service employees who, failing to have learned French at school, try training in private schools. These are civil servants who have entered the world of work ignoring the extent to which French is essential to the performance of the tasks incumbent on them in the positions they occupy in an administration that is supposed to be officially arabized.

As a reminder, in Algeria the teaching and learning of French in public schools is supervised by the institution, a formal teaching and learning, predetermined curricula forcing teachers to apply them as they are. This orientation has proved to be very little adapted to the teaching-learning situations of Algerian learners in search of learning French for communication. Ultimately, tens of thousands of students leave school frustrated at not having succeeded in learning this language traditionally present in the language practices of Algerians. As adults, these learners embrace professional careers (particularly in the public service) which require a minimum of knowledge of this language to carry out administrative tasks essentially. This includes writing reports, minutes, letters, emails, etc. The difficulty in carrying out these tasks pushes them (all sectors combined) to enroll in private schools that offer training to learn French, schools created from the 2000s to meet the strong demand for language training.

But the lessons in these private schools apply either formal public school programs or FLE (French as a foreign language) textbook programs such as alter ego, season, interaction... to name only the most common. In both cases, the learners have the impression of learning according to an "already seen" teaching method, with didactic practices where unilingualism (Boyer, 2007) is the rule and where the native model (Puren , 1988) is of such significance that the central parameters (essentially sociolinguistic and sociocultural) which characterize this particular socio-didactic context are unfortunately neglected. Very generally, this French sociolinguistic model, functional since Jules Ferry, has since been extended to the educational systems of the French colonies and has even been able to resist the political and linguistic changes initiated after the independence of certain formerly colonized countries. According to Henri Boyer, it is a model that tolerates neither competition nor deviance. These two taboos are the pillars that support the structure of French-style unilingualism. For the author, non-deviance is “(…) the other side of French unilingualism, complementary to the permanent struggle for the linguistic unification of the territory: the obsession with the standardization of the use of the language, by the scrupulous respect of a single standard, of Good Use” (Boyer, 2001: 385).

Failing to get rid of “(…) the [French] sociolinguistic ideology (…) which tolerates neither competition nor deviance” (Boyer, 1997), language training proposals for adults are not so different from education that advocates learning French through French. These formations follow and resemble each other, ignoring the socio-cultural specificities of the groups to be trained. Private school learners realize very quickly that this is in fact a public school education - bis. Annoyed, they give up hope of learning the language they lack in their work environment.

After one or even two sessions (one session = 2 months), they drop out of the training and resign themselves to their "illiteracy" because that's what it's about when you don't know French in the world of work in Algeria. A world of work where professional relations claim to belong to the traditional French school which renews know-how inherited from the French administration which remains rigid in this area. Despite the Arabization of many sectors (state in particular: administration, school, university, culture, etc.) in this country, proving proficiency in French is highly appreciated and even a major asset in job interviews. Often, staff training services offer à la carte training of the FOS type (like English for specific purposes –ESP-) but here too their effectiveness is very limited compared to the objectives set out in the training contracts: the poor results of these courses are measured by the yardstick of the low level of performance of the tasks carried out by the employees. It will be easily understood that the objectives that the learners must achieve linked to the punctuality of the duration of the training mean that these learners are a particular public that Mangiante and Parpette define as a "(...) adult public, professional or university, without training in French or with training to improve, has learning objectives that he must achieve within a limited period of time, rarely exceeding a few months” (2004: 6).

 

Articulation of foreign language (French) and mother tongue (Arabic) in training

French teacher in a private school in Saïda, I work with sections ranging from level A1 to B2. It took me a long time, more than ten years, to finally understand the difficulty that these learners face as soon as they start their training. The latter, although having followed a French learning course for at least ten (10) years at school, their entry profile still does not correspond to the level of training offered when they decide to resume their training. The teachers hold as indubitable the socio-cultural representation according to which the Algerian learners, whatever their social and cultural level, are able to grasp even weakly the message transmitted by the French teacher in the classroom. Yet this is an expectation that seems very modest compared to those included in the didactic contract, which "stipulates" that the learner "(...) must produce language, show that he knows how to speak, that he has acquired language skills and that he tests them in his discursive activity. It is incumbent on him to submit to the rules of the pedagogical ritual under pain of ‘sanctions’” (Moore and Simon, 2005: 2). But even if modest, this ability to understand the message in French is not the prerogative of all learners. This reality shows to what extent the method which advocates unilingualism by adopting the immersion of learners in a French linguistic bath to appropriate this language is not suitable for this type of context and a fortiori for this type of training.

If no one disputes the postulate that learners must “(…) both interact in order to learn and learn in order to be able to interact” (Vasseur, 1993: 26), how, in the absence of a linguistic base in French, will my learners be able to interact? From the outset, I understood the reason why they learn nothing and are bored from the first lesson sessions. Their entry into training with a low level of French does not allow them to understand the communication of teachers who most often speak only French.

Seeing that this method did not produce the expected effects, I then took the initiative to try an approach that could meet the needs of these particular learners without sinking into the "Arabization" of the French course. I tried the experiment of using Algerian Arabic, the mother tongue of the majority of Algerians. By adapting the courses of the program a French learning manual to this particular socio-didactic context, I realized that by relying on Algerian Arabic, I could radically change the configuration of the course making it more in tune with the learning reality of the sections for which I was responsible. In this case, resorting to the French/mother tongue articulation essentially allows:

• to unblock the situations of didactic breakdown (Moore, 2001) by dissipating the difficulties of comprehension which arise throughout the period of appropriation of the basics of French,
• to help learners better understand the meaning of my communication in French
• -to allow learners to interact with the teacher by alternating French and Algerian Arabic
• allow learners to interact with each other.

 

Profile of adult learners who participated in the French/Algerian Arabic experience

The group (section) that took part in the experiment is an adult audience (learners with fairly heterogeneous backgrounds), mostly Arabic-speaking, made up of civil servants and professionals in several fields (mainly administration but also other professions) . These learners have followed different school courses given the difference in the periods of their schooling linked to the difference in age of the latter.

On the economic level, if in public schools, free education is a right guaranteed by the constitution, when they enroll in private schools, learners pay large sums of money to learn French. And given the low level of their French, the results they obtain from the first evaluations prove to be very modest compared to the economic sacrifice made.

As soon as they enter training, they take “lightning” and poorly evaluated tests that place them at level A1, this level being considered the most basic on the CEFR competence scale. However, a large number of them do not even justify this A1 level. It is by giving his lessons generally in French, applying in all cases the avoidance of the mother tongue that the teacher realizes that the learners in his charge cannot understand his communication. In the best of cases, these learners become disillusioned after a few days. The choice of an immersive method to supposedly imbue them with the linguistic universe of formal French is a poorly studied choice. On the one hand, this linguistic universe is unfamiliar to them and, on the other hand, it has the effect of stepping back in time, to the time when they were at school, a time when they had trouble learning this language.

 

The current use of Algerian Arabic, a controversial issue

As a reminder, using a language other than the language to be learned (target) has greatly divided practitioners and didacticians. While some have been able to show the advantages of using another language known to learners to appropriate a foreign language, others have maintained that such use can disrupt the appropriation of this language. An opposition still relevant, if we stick to the didactic vagueness that the Algerian school maintains on the question. It is so complex that French teachers, inspectors, didacticians, parents of students do not agree on the choice of whether or not to use the mother tongue in class. Worse, the teachers themselves are divided between those who use the mother tongue (my case) and those who refuse. However, when we approach this place called the classroom, we quickly realize with Causa that in this place “(…) teachers and learners often use the native language. In fact, it is a natural practice consistent with any language contact situation” (Causa, 2002).

Many authors, Algerian in particular, have happily dispelled the doubt on the reality of the use of the mother tongue by teachers and learners in the classroom. More recently, a survey by questionnaires that I carried out, carried out among 93 teachers (at college level) carried out as part of my doctoral research confirmed the hypothesis according to which the majority of teachers in public schools resort to different ways and at different times during the course to the mother tongue. The question asked by the survey was the following: Do you use Algerian Arabic in your course: Never? Rarely ? Often ? The answers were unequivocal :

answers %	%
never	3.42%
rarely	68.40%
often	28.00%

                Table1: statistics around the question of use of Arabic by the french teachers.

The results presented in this table show that a majority (92.40%) of teachers use Algerian Arabic divided between rarely and often. Why would it be any different in private schools? Moreover, this same survey questioning these teachers on the reasons for this use of Algerian Arabic was able to establish that these reasons are generally motivated above all by the need to counter the urgency of misunderstanding.

 

Articulate French and Algerian Arabic in French training for adults

I carried out this experiment with a section of 20 learners. I was able to integrate the use of Algerian Arabic into the program for levels A1 and A2. I certainly relied on a FLE-type teaching-learning method, however the content was sorted and adapted to the real level of the learners in my sections.

The common criterion for these learners is the need to learn a French in which they can communicate and interact in situations where this language is essential as a working tool. It is clearly a need that the Algerian school can no longer satisfy given the complexity of the teaching and learning approaches to foreign languages ​​that it implements, generally essentially monolingual approaches centered on the teaching of French writing (pregnancy of writing at the expense of oral and communication). This insistence on writing places the interrogative method as a priority, particularly in activities dedicated to writing and where the method serves above all as a pretext to trigger learners to speak in French. Puren presents it as a “(…) guiding technique (…) which imposes the pattern of questions from the teacher / answers from the students as a quasi-permanent form of collective oral work” (Puren, 1989: 76). However, this method used massively in teaching learning in foreign language classes does not help learners who do not know French anyway.

This experience began timidly given the weight of the educational tradition in French training, which advocates the linguistic exclusivity of French. From the first contacts with the group, I took care to explain the method, which consists in articulating French and Algerian Arabic for understanding purposes, a method that I was going to apply in the training. But a feeling of embarrassment ostensibly hovered over the class as soon as it was a question of resorting to Algerian Arabic, a practice which derogated from the sacrosanct pedagogy of the avoidance of the mother tongue. The astonishment was at its height as the practice was never debated so to speak in a classic French course. The reactions were not verbal, but I could read on the faces of my learners their concern: “How was this trainer going to teach us French using Algerian Arabic? »

I did not take long to react to allay their concern. I reassured them about the approach that was going to be mine to articulate French and Algerian Arabic.

 

Use the mother tongue to what extent?

If no duration determines the use of French/mother tongue articulation due to the heterogeneity of learner levels, considering a certain trend in its implementation is possible. In practice, when I articulate the two languages, I cannot stick to a precise deadline because of the heterogeneity that characterizes the sections to be formed. However, this articulation must not be prolonged indefinitely. By using articulation, the more I progress in learning French, the more the use of Algerian Arabic decreases. The articulation of the two languages ​​must meet a specific need to support the appropriation of French without turning into a translation course. Here is a diagram to visualize the progression of the French/Arabic articulation.

100%

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Fr

90%

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Fr

Fr

80%

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Fr

Fr

Fr

70%

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

60%

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

50%

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

40%

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

30%

Ar

Ar

Ar

Ar

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

25%

Ar

Ar

Ar

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

20%

Ar

Ar

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

15%

Ar

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

10%

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

Fr

levels

A1

A2

                Figure 1: French/Arab articulation process towards a progressive emancipation from Arabic

The figure above illustrates the process of articulation of French and Arabic, which gradually tends to make the learner gradually appropriate French to free him from the use of Arabic to achieve in the end learning tasks mainly in French. For example, the linguistic articulation will extend from level A1 to level A2, a level where I will have reached a certain threshold of freedom from Arabic. It is a progressive process concerning the use of French but degressive concerning Arabic. The teacher up to a crucial point will manage this articulation, that of no return allowing the learner to communicate and interact in the language to be learned. If in my experience, the passage through Arabic lasted the time of two levels (A1 + A2), it is not a standard meter for other training in other places. If we talk about the emancipation of Arabic, it only concerns the activities of learning French and with a specific purpose, that of directing training towards communication using more and more French. This idea of ​​an early abandonment of the mother tongue before having ensured a transition to French directly or a transition to French based on an L2 is in line with the concern of B. Maurer (2007):

“The last two years, which outline parity between the national language and French, make it possible to move away from a general pattern oriented towards early transitional bilingualism which eliminates L1 as soon as the baton is handed over to L2. This type of bilingualism does not take full advantage of the role of the L1 in the construction of knowledge, because the mother tongue is abandoned too quickly” (Maurer, 2007: 109).

 

Difficult but promising beginnings

In my course, I went from French to Arabic (mainly) to explain/ clear the meaning reformulate/translate/comment/evaluate. This passage through Arabic could relate to a task to be carried out, a question of comprehension, a replica in a dialogue, the culture of the order of interaction in the French language-culture, a word or an expression (idiomatic for example), a fact linked to the history and/or culture of France, a cliché, a stereotype, figures of speech (very difficult to explain in French).

In the first moments of the training, I felt the learners reserved in speaking. But some time later, the method settling slowly and encouraged to take part in the communication even in Arabic if they wished, some expressed the desire to speak, to answer certain questions in Arabic. Their desire to answer even in Arabic assured me that they understood my question asked in French. If I tolerated some answers in Arabic in this way at first, it was to take them up immediately in French. In this way, on the one hand, I comforted the speakers in the accuracy of their speaking (in Arabic) and on the other hand, I offered others the opportunity to learn the answer but this time in French (an opportunity which, it should be remembered, was not offered to them in the monolingual method).

Along the way, acquiring the habit and confidence of listening and expressing themselves in both languages, the learners immersed themselves in the method and attempted interventions sometimes in Arabic, sometimes in French, sometimes in an alternation of the two; the main thing is to understand and to be understood. After level A1, I gradually changed my language practice to level A2: I expressed myself more in French while my use of Arabic only concerned the difficult parts of the course. The learners did not realize that they were asking me less and less for resources in Arabic. I had concluded that a new stage was beginning: while the cognitive abilities of learners in French were strengthening, the need to go through Arabic was less pressing. Astonishing as it may seem, the latter hardly felt the change that was taking place in their language practice in class.

The method having settled in, it was now up to me to control the French/Arabic articulation. The more we advanced in the training, the more I made sure that the articulation was practiced to the advantage of French. The current approach itself was modified. For example, when the learners all wanted to participate and give answers, I prioritized them by classifying the answers respectively in an order ranging from the answer most expressed in French to the least expressed in French. That is to say a response entirely in French then a response with more or less a French/Arabic alternation and finally a response in Arabic in the latest development when the responses are not given in the first two linguistic configurations.

 

Learning French and identity tensions

My professional experience as a French teacher in middle school and high school, then later as a trainer of French teachers, taught me how much learning a foreign language carried representations, stereotypes and even prejudices about the language of a country, its culture and the speakers who speak it. The experience of the learners with learning French has had a profound effect on them. No one can say how frustrated they are at not having managed to learn it in time to assert themselves socially in all kinds of situations that put the speaker in front of his “linguistic” failure. For years, this failure to learn French weighed heavily on their relationship to this language. They are caught between their desire to learn it and their rejection of a language that did not want to be learned. Often French is caught in the whirlwind of Franco-Algerian diplomatic vicissitudes. And when the political tensions between Paris and Algiers often worsen, the media only exacerbate the identity tension against France and its culture seen as an nth "attempt at interference by the former colonizer". As long as the dispute and the doxa will last, discredit is thrown on the French. Those who were so eager to learn it some time earlier found there a good pretext for putting up with his ignorance.

When years later and a completely Arabized curriculum, these learners finally opt for a training that gives hope of appropriation of french while years separate them from school, hope quickly gives way to disillusion. If the certainly exhilarating private school formula nourishes the hope of success in learning French, a few days are nevertheless enough to convince the suitors of the incompatibility of the level of training and their own level in French. It is at this level that the use of Arabic (in our case), comes to soften from the first contacts the identity tension (Belkaïd, 2002) that these learners feel with regard to French.

 

The use of Arabic in expression and comprehension activities

In oral expression/comprehension activities

Concerning oral expression/oral comprehension activities, I first choose a didactic support adapted to the activity and the level of the learners, which can be for example a comic strip, a presentation video, a short text…. I then prepare a questionnaire (generally but not exclusively) which takes into account the level of difficulty of the content of the didactic material. It is out of the question to apply the traditional interrogative method which, according to Puren, had the function of “(…) planning questions in such a way that the series of students' answers correspond to the ideal spontaneous comment to which he (the teacher) wishes the questions train” (1989: 79).

By way of preparation, not only do I adapt the activities to the level of the learners but also I try to anticipate ideas (which seem difficult to understand a priori) certain words, certain expressions... that can block understanding. I thus foresee a transition from French to Arabic. I prepare this passage by choosing the best translation in Arabic, the best version with the best rendering possible. Usually, teachers who use Arabic do so in a hurry, therefore the use of Arabic is done in improvisation with a possible loss of meaning or even quality.

Moreover, the use of Arabic is never systematic. When I ask a question in French, I first wait for possible answers. If the latter do not come or are slow to come and I feel that the meaning of such a word or expression in the question poses a problem that is where the French/Arabic passage comes into play. In this case, go to Arabic consists of translating the content of the question from French to Arabic. However, it is also possible to ask a learner capable of translating the question that he understood to his classmates. If he manages to do it correctly, so much the better, otherwise I correct his version for a better understanding in Arabic.

It is rare that all the content of the question is misunderstood from the outset. Sometimes it's just a word or two that's missing meaning and blocking, blurring understanding. The passage through Arabic dispels this vagueness. By doing so, the difficulties of understanding around the subject on which the learners will have to express themselves are ironed out beforehand, allowing the learners to enter into the understanding of the document without hindrance. In general, it is the lexical difficulties that are at the origin of the misunderstanding of the text and the questions whose preliminary overcoming helps the learners to interact with the teacher. For this adult level in particular, learners generally enjoy a certain level of knowledge and general culture that differentiates them from the level of school learners. They are better able to grasp the overall meaning of the communication, the aim and the general idea…of a document (oral or written). This is the reason why the questions are asked in an order that goes from the overall understanding of the theme to the detail, the objective being a perception of the communicative aim in the first place before anything else. Understanding the sub-ideas presented in the material will complete the understanding.

As is often the case when the interrogative method is implemented, the learner is placed in a difficultly interchangeable position, that of being questioned but rarely, if ever, that of asking the questions. In this case, his action on his learning is limited. Hence the futility of emphasizing the notion of “learner-centredness” in formal language learning teaching.

 

In written expression activities

Two difficulties make it difficult to carry out the task in written expression. The first difficulty lies in the misunderstanding of the writing subject proposed by the teacher, a subject generally expressed in French. And when most often the learners have not understood and ask the teacher for a (re)explanation, the latter repeats it (possibly in a different way) but always in French, which in no way meets the learners' expectations. A second difficulty also arises for learners. Often, unfortunately, they cannot write much given that some ideas they have on the subject, they have them in mind but in Arabic and even if they had ideas that they would have liked to express in French, they would not be able to do so for lack of linguistic input in French. It is a frustrating situation for these learners who resign themselves to the sad reality that they cannot write in French and for the teacher who convinces himself that his efforts are in vain. In this case, the articulation in the Arabic/French direction can prove to be effective if it is carried out effectively. What form can linguistic articulation take in this type of activity?

The production of writing is most often related to an activity of evaluation of learning, which is why it occurs a posteriori. In other words, this activity corresponds for the teacher to an evaluation session where the latter evaluates the degree of effectiveness of the teaching he provides and at the same time the level of success of the learners. Pregnance of writing helping, it is a situation where success in the production of writing is equivalent to success in the appropriation of French in general. In this case, the teacher adopts a posture of evaluator more than that of the trainer. When he ask learners to write, often he is content to present the subject or even the writing plan to them, possibly some advice in the process to follow, rarely he will check the progress of the learners' writing when they are in the midst of production. However, learners who most often show a deficit in words and expressions in French manage as best they can but do not have too many illusions about the final quality of their production. This lack of words and expression in French is observable on their copies in the form of “empty”, words written in Arabic, semantic interferences…

However, the teacher can very well consider an approach to help them write their written production. In my experience, I decided to provide them with the words and expressions they lacked in French, all kinds of grammatical and spelling precision to write the words, sentences, ideas. I took advantage of their concentration on the passage they had chosen to write to provide them with the appropriate words, the spelling of a word, the meaning of a word or an expression, the ideal syntax of the different syntagms of the phrase, mode and tense of conjugation that best suited their idea…

I even agreed to translate into French for them a term, an idea expressed in Arabic. The advantages of such an approach are unsuspected. This articulation in the Arabic/French direction allowed them on the one hand to advance in the writing, which represents for them a real exploit, a success which will motivate them, further for the learning of French. Moreover, they will have learned the meaning of a word, an expression, or even an idea that they themselves wanted to express (contextualized learning) and not a choice made by the teacher. In this type of teaching-learning situation, cognitive aptitude is stimulated and the appropriation of French is further reinforced.

 

Conclusion

Far from claiming to provide a recipe for what could be the best method for teaching learners a foreign language, this article aims to stimulate reflection on the possibilities of solving various problems that arise in a teaching-learning context, in particular that French in Algeria and more widely in the Maghreb countries. If it focuses on the French/Arabic linguistic articulation in the Algerian context of teaching and learning French, it is not however reduced to it. In the context of teaching and learning languages ​​in the Maghreb, this approach could be adapted to also suit other areas such as Morocco, Tunisia, Mauritania where other varieties of Arabic and other varieties of Amazigh are used.

This way of considering the appropriation of a foreign language in contact with a mother tongue can open up a new field of language learning teaching that takes into account the contexts of appropriation where multilingualism is a tangible reality. The linguistic articulation foreign language / mother tongue in progress proves to be a didactic approach which facilitates learners' entry into the socio-cultural universe of the language to be learned by bringing it closer to that in which they express themselves and live every day. This passage between one and the other (often intercultural) considerably reduces the socio-cultural tension often felt when learners do not understand the other who speaks in a language that is foreign to them.

 

References

Boyer Henri (1997) – «“Nouveau français”, “parler jeune” ou “langue des cités” » in Henri BOYER (dir.), Langue Française n° 114, “Les mots des jeunes : observations et hypothèses” ? P. 6-15.

Boyer Henri (2001). « L’unilinguisme français contre le changement sociolinguistique. Travaux neuchâtelois de linguistique, 2001, 34/35, p.383-392.

Belkaïd Malika (2002) « La diversité culturelle : pour une formation des enseignants en altérité - Université de Genève. www.unige.ch › fapse › files › Pages_de_205_APPINT

Castellotti, V. (2001) « Retour sur la formation des enseignants de langues : quelle place pour le plurilinguisme ? », Ela. Études de linguistique appliquée 2001/3 (n° 123-124), p. 365-372.

Gacemi, M. (2021). « L’entretien biographique, outil d’identification des pratiques didactiques plurilingues chez les enseignants de français de Saïda. Doctoral thesis in language sciences. HAL. https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr › tel-03265458

Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: an essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper and Row.

Feussi Valentin, (1019) « Laurent Puren et Bruno Maurer, 2018, La crise de l’apprentissage en Afrique francophone subsaharienne. Regards croisés sur la didactique des langues et les pratiques enseignantes, Peter Lang, 449 p. », Recherches en didactique des langues et des cultures [En ligne], 16-2 | 2019. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/rdlc/7146 ; DOI : https:// doi.org/10.4000/rdlc.7146

Mangiante, J.M., Parpette, C., 2004, Le Français sur Objectif Spécifique : de l’analyse des besoins à l’élaboration d’un cours, Hachette.

Maurer Bruno. (2007). De la pédagogie convergente à la didactique intégrée. Langues africaines-langue française, Paris, L’Harmattan.

Moore Danièle et Simon Diana-lee (2005). « Déritualisation et identité d’apprenants », Acquisition et interaction en langue étrangère [En ligne], 16 | 2002, mis en ligne le 14 décembre 2005.  http://journals.openedition.org/aile/1374 ; consulté le 07 septembre 202. DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/aile.1374

Puren, Christian (1988). Histoire des méthodologies dans l’enseignement des langues. Clé International, 347 pages.

Puren Christian (1989). « Méthode interrogative et commentaires de textes : de la perspective historique à la prospective ». Les Langues modernes n° 2-1989, "Les techniques de guidage". Paris : APLV, 126 p. http://www.christianpuren.com/mes-travaux-liste-et-liens/1989c/.

Vasseur Marie-Thérèse (1993). « Gestion de l’interaction, activités métalangagières et apprentissage en langue étrangère ».  Interaction et acquisition d'une langue étrangère n°2 | 1993 : p. 25-59 https://doi.org/10.4000/aile.4855.

Taleb Ibrahimi Khaoula, « L’école algérienne au prisme des langues de scolarisation », Revue internationale d’éducation de Sèvres [En ligne], 70 | décembre 2015, mis en ligne le 01 décembre 2017, consulté le 22 juin 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/ries/4493 ; DOI : https://doi.org/ 10.4000/ries.4493.

 

Please check the Pilgrims f2f courses at Pilgrims website.

Please check the Pilgrims online courses at Pilgrims website