Sociocultural approach to learning to speak English
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.34142/2709-7986.2025.30.2.11Keywords:
cultural context, discourse analysis, guided participation, interaction, language development, peer communication, speech acquisitionAbstract
Purpose/Aim. This study investigates how sociocultural factors influence the process of learning to speak, with a focus on the interaction between learners and their social environments. The rationale stems from the need to understand language acquisition as a socially situated activity rather than a purely individual cognitive process. The paper also examines the impact of cultural identity, motivation, and community participation on language learning outcomes It is emphasized that the integration of the sociocultural component contributes to the development of interpersonal communication skills, understanding the norms and values of native speakers, and also increases motivation to learn a foreign language. Drawing on the sociocultural theories, the study highlights how communication in authentic settings, peer interaction, and scaffolding contribute to developing speaking skills in learners of English. Social speech, private speech, and inner speech are discussed as developmental stages in the internalization process, where learners move from guided conversation to self‑regulated use of English. The findings suggest that integrating sociocultural principles into English language teaching can enhance learners’ communicative competence and foster more meaningful engagement with the language.
Methodology. The research employed a qualitative case study approach involving students in multilingual urban settings. Data were collected through non-participant observation, audio recordings of interactions, and semi-structured interviews with educators and students. Discourse analysis and thematic coding were used to analyze the interactions and identify recurring patterns of language learning.
Results. Students’ speech development was significantly influenced by peer interactions and participation in culturally meaningful activities. Instances of guided participation and collaborative dialogue were more frequent in environments with structured routines and high adult involvement. Variability was noted in language output based on the students’ cultural backgrounds and their roles in the group.
Conclusions. The findings support the sociocultural theory that speech development is mediated through social interaction and cultural tools. Learning to speak is not only a cognitive task but also a relational and contextual one. Future research should examine the role of digital tools and transnational cultural practices in shaping early language experiences.
Downloads
References
Brown, G. (2010, April 7). Gordon Brown’s speech on new politics at Centre Point. The Labour Party. http://www2.labour.org.uk/gordon-browns-speech-on-new-politics-at-centre-point-2010-04-07
Butarbutar, R. (2025). Virtual Socio-Cultural Collaborative Learning for EFL Speaking Skills Classes. LatIA, 3, Article 95. https://doi.org/10.62486/latia202595
Cameron, D. (2010). The real choice in British politics. The Conservative Party. http://www.conservatives.com/News/Speeches/2010/02/DavidCameronTherealchoiceinpolitics.aspx
Dovzhenko, T., Kalashnyk, L., Levchenko, Y., Kholodniak, O., & Lakhmotova, Y. (2022). Pedagogical internship as a means of forming pedagogical self-identification of future primary school English language teachers in the PR China. AD ALTA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 12(1), 108–114. https://www.magnanimitas.cz/ADALTA/120127/papers/A_20.pdf
Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (2004). Critical discourse analysis. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction (Vol. 2, pp. 258–284). SAGE Publications. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ruth-Wodak/publication/238105100
Kharkovskyi, Ye. M. (2021). Orhanizatsiia inshomovnoi osvity v Ukraini: stan problemy ta shliakhy vyrishennia. [The organization of foreign language education in Ukraine: state of the problem and ways of solution]. Mizhnarodnyi naukovyi zhurnal «Hraal nauky», 11, 421–426. https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.24.12.2021.075 [in Ukrainian].
Lavrynenko, T. P., & Usenko, L. M. (2005, February 2–4). Sotsiokulturnyi pidkhid do vyvchennia inozemnykh mov [Sociocultural approach to foreign language learning]. In A. M. Kolot, S. V. Stepanenko, O. O. Subina, & T. V. Hut (Eds.), Udoskonalennia zmistu ta form orhanizatsii navchalnoho protsesu vidpovidno do mizhnarodnykh standartiv – Improvement of the content and forms of organization of the educational process in accordance with international standards: Proceedings of the scientific-methodical conference (Vol. 1, pp. 150–151). Kyiv National Economic University. https://ir.kneu.edu.ua/handle/2010/14257 [in Ukrainian].
Polikarpova, Yu. O. (2017) Suchasni tendentsii u vykladanni anhliiskoi movy v Ukraini. [New trends in English language teaching in Ukraine]. Narodna osvita: Elektronne naukove fakhove vydannia. https://www.narodnaosvita.kiev.ua/?page_id=4870 [in Ukrainian].
Semotiuk, O. (2020). Discourse analysis vs. content analysis: Methodological similarities and differences. Visnyk Lvivskoho universytetu. Seriia Zhurnalistyka – Visnyk of the Lviv University. Series Journalism, 47, 37–43. https://doi.org/10.30970/vjo.2020.47.10503
Serazhym, K. (2002). Dyskurs yak sotsiolinhvalne yavyshche: metodolohiia, arkhitektonika, variatyvnist. [Discourse as a sociolinguistic phenomenon: Methodology, Architectonics, Variability]. KNU. https://jti.donnu.edu.ua/article/view/9142/9094 [in Ukrainian].
Slavova, L. L. (2014). Movna osobystist polityka u dzerkali obrazno-asotsiatyvnoho spryiniattia: SShA–Ukraina [The linguistic personality of a politician in the mirror of figurative-associative perception: USA–Ukraine]. Movni i kontseptualni kartyny svitu – Linguistic and conceptual worldviews, 47(2), 335–345. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Mikks_2014_47%282%29__40 [in Ukrainian].
T. A. van Dijk. (2009). Critical discourse studies: A sociocognitive approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 62–86). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://discourses.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Teun-A.-van-Dijk-2015-Critical-discourse-Analysis.pdf
Tsepko, T., & Androsiuk, H. (2020). Suchasni tendentsii u vykladanni anhliiskoi movyu zakladakh vyshchoi osvity [Modern trends of teaching English in universities]. Innovatsiina pedahohika – Innovative Pedagogy, 3(21), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.32843/2663-6085/2019.21.3-8 [in Ukrainian].
van Leeuwen, T., & Kress, G. (2011). Discourse semiotics. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse semiotics (2nd ed., pp. 107–125). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446289068.n6
Yatsyshyn, N. V. (2001). Ideolohichni stereotypy v anhlomovnomu mediinomu dyskursi: dosvid kontseptualnoho analizu. [Ideological stereotypes in English-language media discourse: a conceptual analysis experience]. Problemy semantyky slova, rechennia ta tekstu, 7, 320–325 [in Ukrainian].
Yavorska, H. M. (2000). Prescriptive linguistics as discourse: Methodological, sociolinguistic, and ethnocultural aspects [Doctoral dissertation, Institute of Ukrainian Language, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine]. Kyiv, Ukraine [in Ukrainian].
Young, G. (2010) New politics. The Conservative Party. http://www.conservatives.com/News/Speeches/2010/02/SirGeorgeYoungNewPolitics.aspx
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Yana Levchenko

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.