Is NLP applicable to ESL?

1. INTRODUCTION

Neurolinguistic Programming came into being in the fall of 1977 in the USA. The originators of Neurolinguistic Programming (NLP hereafter) were a professor of linguistics, John Grinder and a psychology student Richard Bandler. They observed the counseling practices of four very famous counselors, Fritz Perls, Frank Farrelly, Virginia Satir and Milton Ericson who were very good at establishing good rapport with their clients. Therefore the techniques NLP used were borrowed from counseling practices.

However the use of NLP was not limited to counseling, on the contrary, its use was extended from counseling to marketing and from medicine/nursing to education, specifically second language acquisition. Scientists have long been trying to put the link between psychology, neurology and second language acquisition. They have looked for the ways to abridge not only psychological, but also neurological findings to second language acquisition. Scientists integrating the findings of psycholinguistics and neurolinguistics tried to explain how we perceive the world and language and how we process the language in our brains. Therefore, NLP became the perfect match to their attempts.

NLP was described as NLP was described as the “study of human excellence” and “the new technology of achievement” (Andreas and Faulkner, 1994) NLP serves us some techniques and assumptions to organize our lives more positively as well as it gives insight in how we can deal with our failures and depressions through a self-actualization process in the general sense. Specifically it is a technique that helps learners to internalize the incoming information by coding meaning into neurons in the second language acquisition (SLA hereafter) process.
Although NLP was an eclectic technique whose practices did have no scientific basis, but an experiential and intuitive basis, its implications in the second language acquisition were made use of in the ESL and EFL classrooms. While its techniques were applied by some educators, here we will ask a question “Is NLP (really) applicable in ESL learning?”
In this paper we will first deal with the background to NLP and underlying theories and hypotheses in order to answer our question “Is NLP applicable in ESL/L2 learning?”. Then we will analyze its classroom and native language context implications. Consequently what NLP connotes and gives way to will be analyzed.

2. BACKGROUND

NLP (1977) came into being after an era when behaviouristic views of SLA dominated. In the modern era (1960-1970) of second language acquisition research, technological inventions like EEG(1950) and CAT (1967) provided insight in how our brain processes through second language acquisition. Many researches on hemispheric lateralization were conducted and debates on which hemisphere we use while acquiring the second languge went on (Vildomec 1963, Genesee et al. 1978, Vaid and Lambert 1979).In this era neurological findings were applied to SLA as a rejection of behaviouristic theories and NLP borrowed its neurolinguistics basis from these studies.

The neurological studies of aphasia, studies initiating neurolinguistics, first came into being with the emergence of Broca’s area (1826),which is responsible for speech production and Wernicke’s area(1861), which is responsible for speech comprehension in the left brain. These findings lead to the three type of brain lateralization studies. Many studies on the use of different parts of the brain with a relevance to age of language acquisition (Genesee et al, 1978, Vaid and Lambert,1979), level of second language proficiency –the stage hypothesis- (Krashen and Galloway, 1978) ) and manner of second language acquisition.

The brain lateralization studies investigating the age basis and SLA relationship (Genesee et al, 1978) hypothesized that “there will be right hemispheric involvement in second language processing the later the second language is learned relative to the first, or, conversely, there will be greater left-hemispheric involvemnt in second language processing the earlier the second language is learnt relative to the first” (Genesee, 1988 p. 86). Briefly it was found that right hemispheric processing is more in late bilinguals than monolinguals and early bilinguals.
The studies relating the lateralization with the language proficiency hypothesized that “language skills of the learner may be compatible with the linguistic capabilities that have been demonstrated for the right hemisphere” (Genesee, 1988 p. 89). In specific terms adult beginners use more formulaic speech, which is a characteristic of right hemispheric processing. Krashen and Galloway (1978) put forward another hypothesis called stage hypothesis relating the right hemispheric involvement in second language processing. They hypothesized that right hemispheric involvement will be more in less proficient bilinguals.

Lastly the studies on the manner of SLA claimed that there may be more right hemispheric involvement in processing languages that are learnt informally and the vice- versa in processing languages that are learnt formally (Krashen, 1981) Krashen attributed the right hemispheric use in some ways to acquisition and left hemispheric use to learning. However he stressed on the fact that although right hemisphere use is dominant in childhood and in informal second language acquisition, left hemispheric use in language processing is dominant in general.
These findings gave NLP the basis for elucidation of how we perceive the world/information and how we process it. The holistic nature of the right hemispheric use accounted for how we perceive information and the analytic nature of left hemispheric use accounted for how we process it. Even if NLP does not thoroughly make use of these scientific findings in its techniques, its reference to representational systems (visual,auditory and kinaesthetic) calls for the phenomenon of brain lateralization. Here a thorough definition of NLP is necessary to understand this relationship even if it is too long.. Revell and Norman (1997) defined NLP as

“The neuro part of NLP is concerned with how we experience the world through our few senses and represent it in our minds through our neurological processes.
The linguistic part of NLP is concerned with the way the language we use shapes, as well as reflect our experience of the world.We use language –in thought as well as in speech- to represent the world to ourselves and to embody our beliefs about the world and about life.If we change the way we speak and think about things, we can change our behaviour. We can also use language to help other people who want to change.
The programming part of NLP is concerned with training ourselves to think, speak and act in new and positive ways, order to release our potential and reach those heights of achievement which we previously only dreamt of.” (p.14).

Psycholinguistics is another branch of linguistics in NLP background. NLP has not only a neurological but also a psycholinguistic basis. Çelik(2001) states that psycholinguistics in relation to cognition bases its research on three questions.

“-Is it possible to think without language?
-Is it possible to learn without language?
-Does language dictate the ways in which we think? “ (p. 348)

NLP also borrowed the findings of psycholinguistics in that both psycholinguistics and NLP relates cognition and language. Not only Sapir-whorf Hypothesis but also Vygotsky’s sociocultural approach (Vygotsky,1978) gave an insight in understanding of how language affect cognition or how they are interrelated. Chomkskyan psycholinguistics also elucidated how metalevels are formed with a relevance to transforming deep structure into surface structure by deletion, distortion and generalization strategies.

NLP making use of neurological and psycholinguistic findings of modern era was also affected by the birth of humanistic approach. NLP also aimed humans’ self actualization and self-awareness by using the inner sources. Humanism dealt with the child’s self concept and focused on the conditions in which the child will feel himself good. The self-concept issue accounted for being aware of one’s weaknesses and strengths and one’s belief in his ability to succeed. Therefore NLP served us some consciously belief changing processes in order to believe that we can be successful if we think that we will be successful (Hay, 1995). NLP’s widely known presupposition

“there is no failure, only feedback” refers to increasing one’s self-concept.

However, originators of NLP seldom made use of the emprical findings to base their views. Therefore, they seldom made a reference to scientific studies and especially rejected statistical methods to compute the constructs that may be relevant to the use of NLP. Dilts and Green(1982) summarized their view on the use of the statistical figures to prove NLP’s effectiveness as:
"Because NLP is concerned with the identification and utilization of behavioural patterns in an outgoing interaction, statistical quantities are of no value to us. Surely a statistical figure tells nothing of the unique individual before you.” (p.242)

Whereas NLP does not make use of statistical figures and emprical data its has some basic principles on which it bases its techniques and applications. All of these principle were derived from experiences and intuitions, and were widely refered to in many articles about NLP. As a consequence the goal of NLP can be described as “enhancing the quality of people’s life by helping them to identify and achieve their outcomes, and to interact more effecticely with others. It’s a means of achieving intra-personal and inter-personal excellence” (Revell and Norman, 1997 p. 14)

3. BASIC PRINCIPLES

NLP’s basic principles were not taken from science, but many scientists tried to find scientific basis for the principles. NLP tries to help learners to internalize meaning by decoding it into neurons. It accomplishes this phenomenon by the processes of rapport, modeling, sensory acuity, anchoring and metaprogrammes. Here we will closely analyze these principles.

3.1. Rapport

This is the core concept of NLP which provides constructive and successful communication. It is about “maximizing similiarities and minimizing differences between people at a non-conscious level”(Revell and Norman, 1997 p.16) Rapport is achieved in two ways in which we try to resemble our body postures and gestures, breathing and voice quality, dress, interests, accent, etc. These may be linguistic, non-linguistic and paralinguistic in nature. We achieve rapport through matching and mirroring. In matching we match the linguistic or nonlinguistic behaviours of the adressee by doing the same thing he does. For example we raise our right hand -without making the adressee aware of the thing we do- if he raises his right hand. In mirroring we do the opposite of the things that the adressee does. For example we raise our right hand if he raises his left hand. This process works just like a mirror. However it is important that the adressee not understand that he is being matched or mirrored. Sometime later we begin to establish a successful, flawless communication thanks to our maximising similarities and minimizing differences (Sandoval and Adams, 2001). This process takes place in the unconscious level.
The implication of this principle in the classroom may be its aid to establish rapport with disoriented children who disturbs the flow of the lesson. By matching and mirroring we may accomplish to catch their attention and orient them to the lesson. Here a referance may be made to Vygotsky’s sociocultural approach. According to Vygotsky (1978) children learn/develop their cognition in the zone of proximal development in which they interact with the elderly. These interactions may be the interactions between the teacher and the children in which rapport exists. Although these interactions can take many forms, Vygotsky stresses language dialogue. It is primarily through their speech that “adults are assumed to transmit to children the rich body of knowledge”(Kristinsdóttir, 2001). Throughout the learning process children learn to use their internal speech to direct their own behaviour in the same way that their teachers/parents’ speech directed once.This phenomenon leads to internalization process in which children accomplish cultural adaptation, namely learning. Only the interactions between the child and the teacher can give way to use his inner speech, that is the internalization process. Consequently rapport enables us to make these interactions successful by giving a chance to internalization process. Preventing communication to be cut by differences may be possible only by establishing rapport.

3.2. Modeling

Modeling is “the study of excellence” (Revell and Norman, 1997). This is about the notion that modeling excellent behavior leads to excellence. Revell and Norman (1997) state that some people are born teachers and the others can be made by NLP. By observing external behaviours of good models one may achieve excellence, find out his/ her internal mental processes, values, beliefs. By modelling, one can also know himself and learn by copying others. By modelling native speakers in an ESL context one may achieve native-like proficiency.

3.3. Sensory Acquity

This is about understanding what the other person is actually communicating whether consciously or non-consciously. This principle necessitates using five senses in order to understand what actually is happening. With relevance to sensory acuity NLP claims that we have three kinds of representational systems. The term representational systems in the NLP literature refers to the exact term ‘cognitive styles’
“VAKOG 1: How we experience/perceive the world.” (Revell and Norman 1997). We experience the world through our five senses and this is called the primary representational system. The multi-sensory experiences are visual, auditory, kinaesthetic (tactile, emotional and psycho-motor), olfactory, gustatory. We dominantly prefer one of them to get data from our environment and experiences.
“VAKOG 2: How we represent the world in our minds.” (Revell and Norman 1997). We access information internally in a multisensory way when we remember or imagine things and this is called the lead system. Primary system and lead systems may be different in one person. We may get data visually, but remember or imagine it auditorily.
“VAKOG 3”The third representational system is reference system by which we double-check the correctness of information by asking “Are you sure?” to ourselves.
According to NLP we take sensory information from our environment and we process this input sensorily by the lead system. The issue of storage of data were also analyzed by Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968), who put forward the earlier form of Information Processing Theory. According to them we gather information by our sensory stores/memory (iconic and echoic memory) and send it to short term memory to be processed. Lastly the information is stored in the long term memory from which we retrieve information when we want to remember something (Field, 2003). This theory matches with the propositions of NLP about gathering and processing information. Sensory store refers to primary representation system and short term memory refers to the lead system in NLP’s terms. Hence, NLP proposes that our language reflects our cognition that’s why we use sensory language such as “I see, that sounds great, I smell something bad in it, etc.” This phenomenon is a reflection of NLP’s presupposition that “mind and body are interconnected“ (Revell and Norman, 1997).

3.4. Anchoring

“Anchoring:recapturing good moments” (Revell and Norman, 1997) We associate things/new information to pleasant or unpleasant things. Pleasant ones ease remembering and unpleasant ones cause avoidance. By anchoring (associating) good moments to negative ones we are able to break them and increase the chance of remembering. By anchoring a pleasant thing to a steadily forgotten word we may ease remembering. In anchoring we not only associate pleasant things with the unpleasant ones but also previously known things to the newly learnt ones. We can even make use of native language and associate a new item to the learner’s L1. This strategy is a widely used NLP classroom technique in vocabulary teaching.

3.5. Metaprogrammes

“Metaprogammes:why we do what we do” (Revell and Norman, 1997). People react to the world in different ways. Our brains filter the multi-sensory information we receive and bring to our attention those things which seem important to us. Metaprogrammes are non-conscious filters our brains habitually use to select relevant information from our sensory experience and to produce language according to this selection (Brown, 2004 p.517).
Metaprogrammes takes its roots from Chomskyan psycholinguistics (Richardson, 2004a, 2004b). While we are transforming deep structure into surface structure, we delete, distort and generalize the information behind it. For Example: “I bought a Computer” is a surface structure representation of a deep structure. The deep structure contains all my memories of buying a computer, the strategies I used to decide which computer to buy, all the computers I discarded before choosing the one that I chose, how I felt buying the computer, how much it cost, was it value for money, what the shop/salesman was like. All of this has been deleted in my transformation from the deep structure to the surface structure statement and I produce language accordingly.

‘Metaprogrammes’ also determine how we are motivated. Different people are motivated by different metaprogrammes. Brown (2004) categorizes the types of metaprogrammes as visual, auditory, kinaesthetic, detail, general and options. For example a person with an options metaprogramme is motivated by the existence of many options and he seeks alternative ways to solve a problem. Meta programmes are not personality types, they are ways of processing information and communicating, but some researchers refered to it as ‘thinking styles’ (Beddoes-Jones, 1999), which “determine the form or structure of our thinking, how we think, and they exist at a level that is above, or ‘meta’ to, our thinking itself, what we consciously think” (Brown, 2004 p 518-519).

Brown (2004) claims that “awareness of the learners’ metaprogrammes contributes to the ability of the teacher to communicate with students better” (p 518). This enables to increase the opportunities of rapport, to create successful communication between students and the teacher and to design activities which are suitable to their metaprogrammes.

4. UNDERLYING APPROACH, THEORIES AND HYPOTHESIS IN NLP

Even if NLP does not have a proper scientific basis in its pure form, there were some conditions for it to develop. The scientific advances of the era, other claimed theories and hypothesis created the suitable environment for NLP to come into being. The theories which are relevant to NLP came into being almost at the same time with NLP, so they can’t be totally called underlying theories, however some of the assertions of these theories were also adopted by NLP and these theories can be called to underly NLP in that way.

4.1. Neurofunctional Theory

Neurofunctional theory (1977), whose originator is Lamandella came into being in the same time with NLP in the USA. Comprehension and production of language is thought to be related to the involvement of right and left hemispheres of the brain in neurofunctional theory. It also focused on age differences, formulaic speech, fossilization, and pattern practice in second language (Ellis,1999 p.271). Lamendella (1979) asserts that neurofunctional theory tries to attribute the responsibility of the use and the development of language to the neurolinguistic processing systems .

As we have just mentioned Genesee et al. (1978) found that the profieciency level of the learner affects which hemisphere he uses most for language processing and they claimed that adult beginners used more right hemisphere. Seliger (1982) also found that right hemisphere of brain is responsible for pattern practice and is used more in the early stages of second language acquisition. Right hemisphere is also used by adults in pattern practice and minimal pair drills, but they hypothesized that if the succeeding analysis by the left hemisphere does not take place, then those patterns cannot be utilized in creative speech and in communications.

This phenomenon connotes the idea that right brain gets the information holistically and it is the left brain that processes and analyses it. This is the point where brain lateralization and NLP overlaps. NLP proposes that we experience the world multisensorily, namely by our five senses. Our right brain takes the data by our representational systems/modalities and the left brain analyzes the data, produce creative language, makes syntactic and semantic processing and produces motor operations involved in speaking and writing. This process may elucidate the fact that why we use sensory language in speech.

Sensory language reflects our dominant representational system. Visual, auditory and kinaesthetic modalities produce sensory language accordingly(ex: I see what you mean, that doesn’t sound right, I feel it’s wrong, I don’t like the smell of this, It’s left a bad taste in my mouth). There are different sensory predicates, nouns, adjectives and expressions/idioms whose existence may be attributed to different representational systems or cognitive styles.

4.2. Neurosemantic Theory

Neuro-Semantic Theory began in 1997 as the brain-child of Michael Hall and Bobby Bodenhamer as they engaged in various conversations about Meta-States, NLP, and General Semantics in the USA (Hall, 2001). Hall and Bodenheimer integrated these three fields to discard the limits of NLP. It is a model that describes how we humans get meaning (semantics) incorporated into our body (neurology) so that we feel meanings and do so in terms of our emotions and states. Neurosemantic Theory (NSP hereafter) is an “enrichment of NLP with the meta levels. (Hall, 2001) Hall and Bodenheimer’s contribution to NLP was that they created the term metastates (1998) “Meta levels are programmes or filters we unconsciously use in determining what we pay attention to and one of the basic building blocks that make up our personality (Brown, 2004 p.517). Metastates (metaprogrammes, metalevels) was the term to elucidate how our thoughts govern our thoughts, beliefs, concepts, feelings and values. This was regarded to be “levels above levels” which are responsible to control our cognition. Hall (2001) provided us types of metalevels as
· Beliefs — Validated Thoughts-about-Thoughts
· Values — Valued Thoughts-about-Thoughts
· Understandings— Extensive systems of Thoughts-about-Thoughts
· Decisions — Choiced Thoughts-about-Thoughts
· Identity — Beliefs about Thoughts-about-"Self" Concepts
· Concepts — Extensive (simple or complex) Understandings about Domains of Understandings
· Categories — conceptual sorting of Concepts
· Reasons —higher level structures used as explanatory constructs (http://www.masteringstuttering.com/Articles/Neuro-Semantics_Defined.htm).

They explained learning as geting meaning and incorporating it into our bodies. This process takes place place by thinking (creating metalevels) about our thoughts, beliefs, feelings and values. According to neurosemantic theory this is a mental process and we encode meaning into our neurons by metalevels, namely by thinking about our experiences and thoughts. Second language acquisition process takes place in this way.

NST postulates there are higher levels governing the lower levels (of thought) and these are called metastates. Metastates is the result of the NSP’s understanding of the human body and human cognition in a dialectical and a cirricular way. Learning also takes place in a dialectical way. NST sees individuals as a whole and the thing that is needed to learn is thought to take place only by the self-reflexive exploration of the frames. Hall (2001) proposes that “The whole determines the parts and from the parts, the whole emerges” By creating a like or dislike metastate in our minds we motivate or demotivate ourselves and ease learning or make it difficult.

4.3. Psycholinguistics Basis

NLP has not only a neurological but also a psycholinguistic basis. Çelik(2001) states that psycholinguistics in relation to cognition bases its research on three questions.
“-Is it possible to think without language?
-Is it possible to learn without language?
-Does language dictate the ways in which we think?” (p. 348).

In Revell and Norman’s (1997) definition of NLP in the linguistic part, we not only use language to express ourselves or to communicate but also to think. According to NLP we think with our language, so our language reflects our thoughts, that’s why NLP analyzes sensory language. Also according to the psycholinguistic research our cognition/ thoughts are related to our language.

4.3.1. Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

One of the hypotheses in psycholinguistics relating language and cognition is Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (1929). According to this hypothesis our thoughts are shaped by the language. “The hypothesis postulates that a particular language's nature influences the habitual thought of its speakers. Different language patterns yield different patterns of thought.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapir-Whorf_hypothesis). According to Whorf we isolate (grammatical) categories and “the world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds - and this means largely by the linguistic systems in our minds.” (Whorf, 1940 p. 213-14) Using these impressions, we cut, organize and shape the nature by using the language. Therefore, our language shapes our thoughts in a sense. Brown (2001) summarizes Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in these words:

“The background linguistic system (in other words, the grammar) of each language is not merely reproducing instrument for voicing ideas, but rather itself the shaper of ideas, the programme and the guide for individual’s mental activity…” (p. 139).

Sapir and Whorf attribute the hypothesis to the fact that different languages shape different thoughts, so consequently cognition will be shaped by our own language or culture. However this hypothesis can be abridged to NLP in that they both ascribe a role on language to shape our thoughts. Here we can say that NLP’s first presupposition “mind and body are interconnected” may account for the cognition and the language relationship.

4.3.2. Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Approach

Vygotsky’s sociocultural approach becomes the other psycholinguistic basis for NLP, for sociocultural approach binds the cognitive development and language in that cognitive development and language are related to each other, even if they develop independently in the first stages. Lev Vygotsky contributed to the area by two terms, one of which is the Zone of Proximal Development and Private Speech. Zone of proximal development describes the environment where the children encounter people older than them and learn from the interactions taking place between them. This learning process involves cultural adaptation, however, for cultural adaptation to take place children learn to use the language first to direct their own behaviours as their parents once did (Kristinsdóttir, 2001) The mental development, the develoment of thought and reasoning, becomes interrelated with the development of language after the age of two (Çelik, 2007) In the learning processes language turns out to be the primary tool for intellectual development in the child. Language acts as a tool for intellectual development/ development of cognition first by private speech, which shows the child’s ability to use language to direct speech behaviour without parental help. As the time passes private speech turns into inner speech by which the child directs his own thoughts without voicing the ideas. However the child’s primary goal in using language is not only directing his speech behaviours or cognition, his main goal is to adapt to society in a socialization process, then the phenomenon of internalization takes place. Second language acquisition also takes place in such a social environment where second language is used as a socialization tool.

Vygotsky’s approach has close links with NLP. Both NLP and Sociocultural Approach claims that language and cognition are related. While the latter asserts that cognition and language are interrelated and trigger each other’s development, the former asserts that we use language not only for communication but also for thinking, in that way meanings are incorporated into our bodies.

5. CONTRIBUTIONS OF NLP TO ESL/L2 LEARNING

Generally what we should do to use NLP is to take its principles as tecniques and apply them in our teaching. The humanistic side of NLP requires us to establish learner-centered environment to help them create self-reflexivity to frame their own thoughts and to reframe the thoughts to establish the newly learnt things. In these circumstances we may explain how NLP contributes to ESL learning in the classroom and in the native language context.

5.1. Contributions to ESL/L2 Learning in the Classroom

NLP as a humanistic technique in education provided insights in the learner part of second language acquisition, but not only the learners but also the input and context parts of language learning is important according to Krashen (1981). He distinguishes “exposure” type and “intake” type environments. Only in the intake type environments is there true input to activate language acquisition device. True input is only possible by using language realistically. In an intake type ESL classroom where language is used realistically both acquisition and learning take place. Thus, classroom serves as both a formal linguistic environment and an “intake” informal environment. In a classroom whose learners are exposed to the target language outside the classroom NLP may provide some opportunities to use the target language realistically. These may be some kinds of activities that may be used in skills teaching and language areas.
Two books “In your hands” and “Handing Over” by Revell and Norman provide an understanding of NLP and its reflections to classroom teaching. However they don’t give a concrete idea other than some specific techniques and activities that are applicable in classrooms.

Vocabulary learning, as the most convenient part of language to introduce by using NLP, is obtained by the techniques of anchoring and chunking (Revell and Norman, 1997). In anchoring a new word is associated to another thing that is pleasant or that is already known to remember easily. Moreover, chunking/grouping is the strategy we use in remembering the long numbers. Learners may group the sensory language in terms of adjectives, predicates, metaphors and in terms of five senses. The words are not stored in an isolated way in our minds (Field, 2003), on the contrary they are stored in a semantic field in which every kind under a word (subordinates and hyponyms) exists. The proof for the existence of semantic fields in the mind is that we utter all the names of the fruits when we just want to remember the fruit “pear”. Therefore while learning vocabulary, words shouldn’t be isolated and should be given as lexical items.

We may make use of both semantic and pragmatic mapping in vocabulary teaching. Semantic mapping is a strategy for graphically representing concepts. Semantic maps shows the schematic relations that a concept consists of. It assumes that there are multiple relations between a concept and the knowledge that is associated with the concept. In order to create a semantic map we may develop such a conversation

Teacher: Tell me some things that come to mind when you think of the word "ecology."
Student(s): Environment. Pollution? Conservation! Recycling. Has it got anything to do with the

"-olgy" on the end of the word?
Teacher: (listing words on chalkboard) You've got some good ideas here and I think you've studied this before. Since you mention the "-olgy" part of the word, it might help if I tell you that the "eco-" part of the word comes into English from a Greek word for "house."
Student(s): Ha! It's the study of our house!
Teacher: Sounds good to me, but we don't mean house in the usual sense here, do we. It's more like the idea of where we live, right?
Student(s): But isn't it about how we treat the house? Like respect for our environment? And cleaning up after ourselves?
Teacher: O.K., let's put that down, too. Anything else you remember about this idea of ecology? (Estes, 1999).

Grammar teaching may occur by guided fantasy technique in which the target grammatical structure is embedded to a highly multisensory expression of the situation. Revell and Norman gives a biscuit example to teach present perfect tense. Pronounciation practising may occur depending on one of the basic principles of NLP, modeling. Learners by modeling the teacher and native speakers around them are thought to achieve native like pronounciation, for modeling is the key to excellence.

Other contribution of NLP is the establishment of congruguency in the classroom (Winch, 2005) Congruency is achieved when interaction is flawless and learners get a thorough understanding of both verbal and non-verbal cues. The presupposition “communication is non-verbal as well as verbal” accounts for congruency issue. Fluency isn’t thought to be achieved without the understanding of non-verbal communication. In order to develop fluency in the second language

a thorough understanding of non-verbal communication is essential, which is a result of congruguency established in the classroom.

Using NLP tecniques gives way to changing classroom discourse of the teacher. Even if this is relevant to the contribution of NLP to general education, there are some parts that we may take advantage of in the second language classrooms. How we should change our classroom discourse using NLP is provided by Millrood (2004). He advises us to verbalize these techniques.

· “Establishing a rapport between the teacher and learner/s (building an interpersonal contact with the learner through support, interaction, and empathy).
· Modeling the learner (offerering strategies for the learners to achieve better results).
· Creating a learner filter (monitoring ‘correct’/‘incorrect’ knowledge or behaviour).
· Pacing with the learner (achieving harmony of teaching and learning in rate, style, and production).
· Leading the learner (introducing a cognitive challenge for the learner).
· Elicitation with learner (guiding the learner to an output).
· Calibration of the learner (recognizing individual differences in learners).
· Re-framing the approach (stopping unproductive teaching strategies, and providing better alternatives so as to improve learning opportunities).
· Collapsing an anchor (reinforcing learner achievement by emphasizing success)” (p30).

NLP techniques contribute to ESL learning in an eclectic way. NLP taking its roots from many branches of sciences adds to our way of teaching language areas and classroom discourse with its techniques. However it provides little insight in how skills will be learnt in the classroom, which we will try to explain here.

5.2. Contribution to Four Skills

In NLP classrooms, for speaking and listening to be both realistic, anecdotes are widely employed. Because conversations incorporate both listening and speaking, they give opportunities for meaningful converstations that are generally created in NLP classrooms. Learners tell their anecdotes to each other during which they improve their rapport skills.

For writing, learners may be asked to draw their lifeline (NLP tecnique involving learners’ views about themselves) and write a small autobiography. In the reading part only reading the words relevant to sensory language is given. Tests which are designed to determine the learners’ lead system are advised to use as reading activities. (Revell and Norman, 1997) In the reading classes we may also use shadow reading in which the teacher reads a sentence and the learners repeat. The use of this technique is a reflection of NLP principle modeling. By using modeling learners are able to achieve excellence according to NLP.

Also as a reflection of the presupposition “communication is non-conscious as well as conscious” activities providing opportunity for unconscious communication such as games and peripheral learning are prefered. Realias and audiovisual materials, which appeal to the five senses of learners are also indispensible parts of NLP classrooms. Teachers may also use music in the classroom which may appeal to the learners whose representational system is auditory. Techniques such as mime and drama, which may create a relaxed atmosphere and creativity and which add body language to speech acts may also be used. Other techniques such as story telling, role play and simulation are widely used in NLP classes(Darn, 2005).

As for teacher roles, they resemble those of the methods of humanistic approach. Teacher is sometimes a counselor not only by motivating and creating less stressful and an encouraging environment but also by establishing rapport. While providing a model herself she should model good teachers to reach excellence. Teacher’s other role is to identify student’s lead system and help them find their own way of learning and initiate them to self-express themselves, but not superficially in contrast, by full expression of their thoughts and feelings which correspond to their representational systems. Learner roles are building successful communication through the use of NLP and developing self-esteem and self-efficacy in terms of belief in their own success (Thompson et al, 2002). Revell and Norman(1997) about how to improve learning state that “…learning is more effective when it is multisensory and when it appeals to the non-conscious as well as the conscious mind” (p. 95).

5.3.Contributions to L2 Learning in a Native Language Context

According to Krashen (1981) for both language learning and language acquisition to take place it is necessary that learner takes realistic and comprehensible input. This requires an intake type environment in the native language context. According to Krashen this may be supplied by helpful friends and an outgoing, social personality in the learner.

Therefore NLP’s contribution to L2 learning in a context where the target language is used as the native language, can be its advices on how to build rapport as a key to communication. With a knowledge of NLP and techniques to establish rapport (mirroring and matching) the learner can be in communication in which realistic and comprehensible input is provided naturally and “automatically” (Krashen, 1981).

6. CRITICISM OF NLP

NLP as an accumulation of techniques from counseling and individual experiences, is not an ELT method actually. NLP is generally criticized, since it lacks a scientific theory to base its views. Researches on the techniques of NLP generally fails the tests of validity, reliability and tests of significance.

NLP was not only criticized in terms of its shortness in basing its views on emprical data but also its lackness in elucidating the meta levels (Hall, 2001). Only when Bodenheimer and Hall created the term metalevels, could NLP have a chance of binding the role of language with the cognition processes. Before the development of metalevels NLP was only an accumulation of assumptions and techniques derived from experiences and intuitions.

6.1. Weak Sides of NLP
· NLP is limited in terms of techniques to introduce new topics.
· NLP provides good opportunities to practise the already known points in that it uses many teachniques which ease remembering, not learning.
· NLP is short in a scientific theory to base its views

6.2. Strong Sides of NLP

· NLP classes provide positive reinforcement which provide motivation
· NLP incorporates a humanistic philosophy in which L2 learning takes place in learner-centered way.
· NLP has a wide range of underlying theories and hypothesis, which provide it to create insight in many aspects of language learning and acquisition.

NLP, if we overlook its limitations, provides us a prolific way of second langauge learning both in the classroom and in the native language context. By the help of NLP we are able to establish rapport –the most important principle of NLP- , which is the key to ongoing uninterrupted communication. Such kind of a communication enables us with the comprehensible input automatically, which Krashen (1981) always stresses on for second language acquisition.

7. CONCLUSION

NLP is a humanistic theuropatic technique which appeals to many branches of sciences from marketing and sales to tourism and education. However its use in the ESL classrooms can be associated with different methods and learning models. Its interdisciplinary basis enables us to associate many methods to the use of NLP.

The first one is brain based learning asserting that as long as the brain is not prohibited from fulfilling its normal processes, learning will occur. According to brain based learning everybody does learn (http://www.cainelearning.com/). Brain actually is a perfect processor but formal schooling inhibits learning by discouraging, ignoring and punishing the brain’s natural processes. NLP here can be associated with encouraging, accentuating and positively reinforcing this process by creating a humanistic environment and rapport. Bandler(1985) also rejects the existence of learning disability and asserts that this is teaching disability namely “teaching dysfunction” (p 125) This rejection corresponds to the views of brain-based learning.

Representational systems (cognitive styles, indeed) in NLP and the concern of NLP teachers’s to teach according to representational systems connotes the idea that multiple intelligences and NLP can be abridged together. Instructing according to the different kinds of intelligences by using various types of activities has a relevance to the application of NLP in ESL courses.

The Lexical Approach can also be abridged to the techniques by which vocabulary is taught using NLP. Both in NLP and and Lexical Approach vocabulary is taught in chunks or collocations though the goals are different. In NLP vocabulary is taught in chunks to ease learning and as a reflection of the principle anchoring and in the classrooms where lexical approach is adopted activities in which the new vocabulary is introduced in chunks to enhance the level of retention (Richards and Rodgers, 2001).

Even though they have different roots one communicative/interactionist and the other humanistic Cooperative Language Learning and NLP can be resembled to each other in terms of the use of exchanging of experiences and creating a cooperative (with rapport) environment for L2 (ESL) learning. While these are aimed to be applied for the minority and immigrant students, the implications of Cooperative Language Learning applications create the same as those of NLP

· Raise the achievement of all students, including these who are gifted or academically handicapped
· Help the teacher build positive relationships among students
· Give sts the experiences they need for healthy social, psychological and cognitive development
· Replace the competitive organisational structure of most classrooms and schools with a team-based, high-performance organisational structure (Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec 1994:2)

To sum up, we have tried to answer the question “is NLP applicable in ESL?” in this paper and found that while it provides insights in the ways of building successful and constructive human communications, it does not specify any methods, techniques or idea on L2 learning due to its not being a teaching method or a learning approach actually. It only provides some specific activity types that can be used, but does not supply a second language learning theory. However, it is applicable by no means and it provides insight in how we can create successful communications, which is crucial in language classrooms.







BIBLIOGRAPHY
*Andreas, S. & Andreas, C. (1989) Heart of the mind. Utah: Real People Press.
*Andreas S. & Faulkner(1994) The new technology of achievement. NewYork: William Morrow.
*Atkinson, R. C. & Shriffin, R. M. (1968) Human memory: a proposed system and its control processes. In B. Kaplan and S. Wapner (eds) Perspectives in psychological theory. New York: International Universities Press.
*Bandler, R. (1985) Using your brain –for a change. Utah: Real People Press.
*Beddoes-Jones, F. (1999) Thinking styles, relationship strategies that work! Stainby Lincolnshire: BJA Associates Ltd.
*Brockopp, D. (1983) What is NLP? The American Journal of Nursing. 83: 1012-1014.
*Brown, N. (2004) What makes a good educator? The relevance of metaprogrammes. Assessment and Education in Higher Evaluation. 29: 515-533.
*Caine, G.& Caine, R. (2005) Caine Learning Institute. [On-line] Available: http://www.cainelearning.com/principles.html .
*Caplan, D. (1980) Neurolinguistics and linguistic aphasiology. Cambridege: Cambridge University Press.
*Çelik, M. (2007)Linguistics ffor students of English. Ankara: Edm Publishing.
*Danesi, M. (1990) Retrospective Review Article: the contribution of Neurolinguistics to second and foreign Language Theory and Practice. System. 18: 373-396.
*Dastoor, B. & Reed, J. (1993) Training 101. Training and Development. 47:17-22.
*Darn, S. (2005) Neurolinguistic Programming in ELT. [On-line] Available: http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/methodology/nlp.shtml
*Dilts, R. & Green, T. D. (1982) Application of neurolinguistic programming in family therapy. In *A. M. Horne& M. M. Ohlsen (Eds) Family counseling and therapy. Itasca: FE Peacock.
*Dominey, P., Hoen, M. & Inui, T. (2006) A neurolinguistic model of grammatical construction processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 18: 2088-2107.
*Dorn, F. (1983) Assessing primary represetational system (PRS) preference for neurolinguistic programming (NLP) Using three methods. Counsellor Education and Supervision. 23(2): 149-156.
*Ellis, R. (1999) Understanding second language acquistion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
*Estes, T. H. (1999) Reading in Content Areas. [On-line] Available: http://www.readingquest.org/edis771/semantic_maps.html
*Field, J. (2003) Psycholinguistics: a resourcebook for students. London: Routhledge.
*Genesee, F. (1988) Neuropsychology and second language acquisition. In Beebe, L. (ed) Issues in second language acquisition. NewYork: Newbury House Publishers.
*Genesee, F., Hamers, J, Lambert, W. E., Monomen, L., Seitz, M. & Starck, R. (1978) Language processing strategies in bilinguals: A neurophysiological study. Brain and Language. 5: 1-12.
*Hall, M (2001) Neuro-Semantics. [On-line] Available: http//www.masteringsstuttering.com/Articles/Neurosemantics Defined.htm.
*Hay, J. (1995) How NLP locations work? Management Development Review. 8:30-31.
*Knowles, R. (1981) dealing with feelings: Handling Depression through Positive Reinforcement. The American Journal of Nursing. 81:1353.
*Knowles, R. (1983) Building rapport through neoro-linguistic programming. The American Journal of Nursing. 83:1010-1014.
*Krashen, S. (1981) Second languge acquisition and second languge learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
*Krashen, S. & Galloway, L. (1978) the neurological correlates of language acquisition: Current research. SPEAQ Journal. 2: 21-35.
*Kristinsdóttir, S. B. (2001) Lev Vygotsky. [On-line] Available: http://starfsfolk.khi.is/solrunb/vygotsky.htm
*Kurzer, M.(1995) Enhanced communications can be mastered. Chain Store Age Executive. 17:1-2
*Lamendella, J.T.( 1979) The neurofunctional basis of pattern practice. TESOL
Quarterly 13 (1): 5-19.
*Michael, B. (1993) Internalization of social discourse: A Vygotskyan account of the development of children’s minds. (Paper presented in at the biennal mettings of the Society for Research in Child Development: New Orleans.)
*Millrood, R. (2004) The role of NLP in teachers’ classroom discourse. ELT Journal. 58:
l28-37.
*Revell, J. & Norman, S. (1997) In your hands, NLP in ELT. London: Safire Press.
*Richardson, A. (2004a) NLP for testers: A brief introduction. [On-line] Available:
www.compendiumdev.co.uk/nlp
*Richardson, A. (2004b) NLP For Testers - The Meta Model. [On-line] Available:
www.compendiumdev.co.uk/nlp
*Richards, J. & Rodgers, T. (2001) Approaches and methodes in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
*Sandoval, V., Adams, S. (2001) Subtle skills for building rapport: using NLP in the interview room. FBI Law Inforcement Bulletin. 70: 1-5.
*Seliger,H. W. (1982) On the possible role of the right hemisphere in second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly. 16: 307-314.
*Thompson, J, Cortney, L.& Dickson, D. (2002) the effect of neurolinguistic programming on organisational and individual performance. Journal of European Industrıal Training. 26: 292-298.
*Timothy, S. (1997) Tri-coding of ınformation. Edrs document.
*Vaid, J. & Lambert, W. E. (1979) Differential cerebral involvement in the cognitive fıunctioning of bilinguals. Brain and Language. 8: 92-110.
*Vildomec, V. (1963) Multilingualism. Leyden: A. W. Sythoff printing Division
*Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind and society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
*Winch, S.(2005) From Frustration to Satisfaction: Using NLP to Improve Self-Expression.(paper presented in the 18th Annual EA Education Conference 2005.Whorf, B.L. (1956) Language and Thought and Reality: selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. New York: Wiley