近年、生成AIおよびそれを用いたLLM（大規模言語モデル）の発展により外国語学習の意義についての議論が活発になっている(大木他, 2025； 李・青山, 2025; 隅田, 2022； 瀧田・西島, 2019）。そこで、本論考では、認知言語学とLLMとの関係性およびそこから得られる帰結としての今後の外国語学習の方向性について考察を行う。結論として、外国語学習には、その言語共同体に固有の慣習的な世界の捉え方を学ぶという教養的側面があり、したがって、今後どれほどAIによる通訳機能が発達したとしても、外国語学習の意義が完全に失われることはないと主張することになる。本論考では、日本で大多数を占める単一言語話者 (monolinguals) を想定して主に議論を進めるが、本論考の主張に従うならば、単一言語話者こそ外国語を学習する意義が大きいということになる。 Recent advances in generative artificial intelligence, particularly large language models (LLMs) and neural machine translation, have prompted renewed debate about the significance of foreign language learning. As AI-mediated communication increasingly enables speakers to interact across languages without directly acquiring those languages themselves, some have questioned whether foreign language education will remain necessary. This paper reconsiders this issue from the perspective of Cognitive Linguistics and argues that foreign language learning retains an essential intellectual and cultural value that cannot be outsourced to AI technologies. First, the paper explores theoretical affinities between Cognitive Linguistics and contemporary LLMs. Usage-based approaches in Cognitive Linguistics conceptualize linguistic knowledge as a structured network emerging from repeated exposure to vast numbers of usage events. Similarly, LLMs simulate linguistic competence through large-scale statistical learning over massive corpora. Moreover, recent developments in predictive coding models in neuroscience suggest that human cognition itself may operate through probabilistic prediction and error minimization, lending further plausibility to parallels between human language processing and generative models. From a constructive research perspective, therefore, LLMs can be viewed not merely as engineering tools but as experimental hypotheses about how linguistic knowledge may be organized and processed. Second, drawing on the notion of construal and the “Thinking for Speaking” framework, the paper argues that languages differ not only in form but also in how they habitually direct speakers’ attention to particular aspects of experience. Each language encodes culturally and historically sedimented patterns of categorization, profiling, and perspective taking. Acquiring a language thus entails learning a community-specific way of attending to and conceptualizing the world. In this sense, language learning is inseparable from learning alternative cognitive styles. Usage-based semantics further suggests that such patterns are internalized through accumulated exposure to authentic linguistic instances, embedding collective cultural knowledge within the learner’s cognitive system. Third, the paper examines the impact of AI translation through the lenses of economic rationality, psychological adaptation to technology, and the outsourcing of cognitive functions. While communicative functions of language may increasingly be delegated to AI devices—much like memory has been partially outsourced to smartphones—this outsourcing risks reducing language to a mere instrumental tool. If language learning is evaluated solely in terms of communicative efficiency, AI solutions may appear sufficient. However, such a view overlooks the formative role of language in shaping thought and perception. The central claim advanced here is that foreign language learning possesses an irreducible educational function: it enables learners to recognize that their native way of construing the world is not universal and to develop a meta-cognitive, pluralistic perspective. This cultivation of multiple “ways of thinking for speaking” fosters intellectual flexibility and intercultural understanding—capacities that cannot be replicated by external translation technologies. Consequently, even in an era of highly sophisticated AI interpretation, the significance of foreign language learning will not disappear but should be reconceptualized beyond communication toward cognitive and humanistic development.
As English-Medium Instruction (EMI) continues to expand across higher education systems worldwide, its limitations have become increasingly evident, particularly in its neglect of students’ language development needs. In response, this article explores the concept of CLIL-ized EMI, a flexible pedagogical orientation that integrates language support into content instruction without requiring the full structural transformation associated with traditional CLIL. We conceptualize CLIL-ized EMI as a form of pedagogical negotiation driven by lecturers’ localized responses to linguistic diversity, institutional constraints, and disciplinary priorities. It identifies key features of CLIL-ized EMI practice, analyzes the tensions that arise when language becomes part of content teaching, and highlights the emotional, cognitive, and institutional labor often rendered invisible. The article also outlines practical strategies for implementation and emphasizes the need for teacher awareness, pedagogical adaptation, and systemic support. Rather than offering a prescriptive model, it positions CLIL-ized EMI as a dynamic, context-sensitive response to the evolving demands of multilingual higher education—one that invites deeper reflection on what it means to teach, learn, and support disciplinary engagement through English. 英語を媒介とする教育（English-Medium Instruction: EMI）が世界各地の高等教育機関で拡大を続ける中、その限界も次第に明らかになってきている。特に、学生の言語発達のニーズが十分に考慮されていない点は深刻である。本稿では、従来型の内容言語統合型学習（Content and Language Integrated Learning: CLIL）に伴う制度的な全面改革を必ずしも必要とせず、内容指導の中に言語的支援を柔軟に組み込むCLIL化されたEMI（CLIL-ized EMI）という概念を取り上げ、その教育的可能性を探る。CLIL-ized EMIは、講師が言語的多様性、制度的制約、学問分野ごとの優先事項に応じて行う教育的な交渉の一形態として位置づけられる。本稿は、CLIL-ized EMIの実践に見られる主要な特徴を明らかにし、言語が内容教育の一部として扱われる際に生じる緊張関係を分析する。また、こうした実践においてしばしば見過ごされがちな感情的・認知的・制度的な労働にも焦点を当てる。さらに、CLIL-ized EMIの具体的な導入方略を提示するとともに、教師の意識、教授法の柔軟な調整、そして制度的支援の重要性を強調する。本稿が提示するのは、処方的な教育モデルではなく、多言語化が進む高等教育の現場において、教育者が文脈に応じて動的かつ柔軟に対応する一つのアプローチである。英語を通じて専門的な内容に取り組むとはどういうことなのか――教えること、学ぶこと、支援することの意味を、改めて問い直す契機となるだろう。
This article presents a comprehensive overview of Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT), tracing the author’s professional evolution from Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research to a dedicated focus on this pedagogical approach. Motivated by a desire for practical application and a response to the limitations of traditional structural methods observed in contexts like Japan, TBLT is defined as an approach where the “task” is the central unit of syllabus design and lesson planning. The article delineates core principles distinguishing TBLT from task-supported teaching, including the primacy of meaning, the absence of prior explicit instruction, and the integral role of focus on form. It confronts common misunderstandings about TBLT before addressing significant “real issues” necessary for its advancement. These include defining a task, measuring performance and learning, sequencing tasks, utilising lesson stages, integrating explicit instruction, and accommodating individual differences. The discussion advocates for a flexible, context-sensitive implementation of TBLT, potentially through hybrid curricula, and underscores the need for longitudinal research and teacher education to consolidate its theoretical foundations with classroom practice. 本稿はタスクベースの言語教育（TBLT）の包括的概説を提示し、著者の専門的発展を第二言語習得（SLA）研究からこの教育手法への専念に至る経緯を辿る。実践的応用への意欲と、日本などの文脈で観察された伝統的な文法・構造中心の教授法の限界への対応を動機として、TBLTは「タスク」をシラバス設計と授業計画の中心的単位とするアプローチと定義される。本稿では、意味の優先性、事前の明示的指導を前提としない点、フォーカス・オン・フォーム (focus on form) の不可欠な役割など、タスク支援型指導（task-supported teaching）とTBLTを区別する中核的原則を明確化する。TBLTに関する一般的な誤解を整理した後、その発展に不可欠な「実践上の課題」に取り組む。これには、タスクの定義、遂行（performance）と学習の測定、タスクの順序付け、授業段階の活用、明示的指導の統合、個人差への対応が含まれる。議論では、ハイブリッドカリキュラム（hybrid curriculum）などを通じた柔軟で文脈に応じたTBLTの実施を提唱し、その理論的基盤を教室実践と統合するために、縦断的研究と教員教育の必要性を強調している。
Class has always been a key mediating factor for access to and performance in education, even if the attention it has received has varied: In some cases, it has been minimal, and in other cases, the construct has suffered a kind of erasure (i.e., it has disappeared from the lexicon of researchers). The trend toward the latter has been particularly pronounced in research in language education, and in particular, English teaching and learning. This chapter argues that class is a useful construct in such research. It is divided into 2 parts of unequal length. The first part presents and discusses thinking about class and the author’s current understanding of it. The second part is a speculative discussion of a possible new direction for future research on English-language teaching and learning which incorporates class as a key construct. 階級は常に教育へのアクセスと成績の重要な仲介要因として機能してきました。ただし、それに対する注目度は場合によって異なります：一部の状況では最小限に留まり、他の状況ではこの概念が研究者の用語から消え去るような「消去」という現象が見られました（つまり、研究者の用語から消えてしまいました）。後者の傾向は言語教育の研究、特に英語の教授と学習に関する研究において特に顕著です。この論文では、階級がこのような研究において有用な概念であるとの主張を展開します。論文は不均衡な長さの2つのパートに分かれています。第1部では、階級に関する著者の現在の理解を提示し議論します。第2部は、階級を主要な概念として組み込んだ英語教育と学習の将来の研究における新たな方向性に関する推論的な議論です。
How can teachers help their students to learn English effectively? What are the skills important for their growth as language learners? These are fundamental questions that many English teachers have. To keep students motivated and engaged, teachers may wonder if there are important skills other than English language proficiency. In this paper, I propose that non-cognitive skills should be studied, and I introduce three well-operationalized terms: (1) grit, (2) optimism, and (3) resilience which might help language teachers interested in dealing with the questions posed above. After I discuss the importance of focusing on non-cognitive skills in language teaching, I introduce grit, optimism, and resilience, three noteworthy research topics which are important for understanding students who are studying foreign languages in Japan. While grit has been studied extensively in recent years within the field of Applied Linguistics, the other two topics, optimism and resilience, have received less attention. Towards the end of this paper, I take another look at non-cognitive skills using insights from the field of Positive Psychology and discuss how these topics can be studied in Applied Linguistics. It is hoped that this paper informs how language teachers can better work with students. 本稿では、日本における英語学習者の非認知能力に関して研究することの重要性に関して議論をする。非認知能力をどのように定義できるかを議論したのち、グリット、楽観性、レジリエンスの３つの非認知能力を取り上げ、可能な限り応用言語学関連の先行文献を中心に紹介する。言語テストでよい成績をとるために重要な認知的能力を身に着けると同時に言語学習者としての成長に重要な非認知能力とはどのようなものであろうか、また教師はどのように効果的に英語を学習できるように手助けができるだろうか。そういった疑問に関して本稿では議論を行う。最後に国内の英語学習者の非認知能力を研究する際の注意点や留意点に関して取り上げる。
