icao language proficiency requirements

ICAO-Eurocontrol European Seminar on Language Proficiency for Aeronautical Communications,

Eurocontrol Brussels October 27th-28th 2005 1

ICAO language proficiency requirements

Dr Jeremy Mell

Head of Language Studies

ENAC, Toulouse, France

[email protected]



Language proficiency: general concepts

• single complex skill OR many sub-skills

• knowledge/competence

• competence/performance

• receptive/productive

• spoken/written

• accuracy/fluency

• general/special purpose (LSP)

• AND for aviation… phraseology/plain language



Communicative language competence

• linguistic competence

– lexical range, control

• single words, fixed expressions

– grammatical accuracy

• syntax, morphology

– phonological control

• phonemes, syllable structure, prosody

– interaction/fluency

• pragmatic competence

– relevance, rules for interpretation

– appropriateness of tone/register/dialect

– scripts, interaction schemata,

– appropriateness of response

– evaluation of outcomes

• impacts on safety

• impacts on efficiency



ICAO language proficiency : who is concerned?

• ALL partners in aeronautical communications (English and local language)

– foreign language speakers (FL)• training and testing

– first language speakers (L1) and second language speakers (L2)

• accommodation and monitoring

• Smith (1992) - a study of intelligibility using speakers of 9 national varieties of English:

– « native speakers … were not found to be the most easily understood, nor were they, as subjects, found to be best able to understand the different varieties of English »

• Yoshida (2004) - ICAO seminar Tokyo

– « There are no native speakers of English as an International language »

• English as an International language (EIL) arises from a mutual need for comprehensible input:

– refrain from using idioms/jargon

– modulate delivery

– be specific, explicit, direct



The rating scale: FAQ

• Why a rating scale?– Not applied in other fields of

aviation competency, but...– … well-established in the

language training/testing profession

• What are the benefits?– lower levels for

recruitment/training– higher levels to predict future

language loss– top level brings native-speakers

within the purview of LPRs

• Why an ICAO rating scale?– many general rating scales

world-wide, but...– …. associated with particular

tests (often commercial) or individual state, and...

– ...do not address specific requirements of aeronautical communications within a single level band

– ICAO scale ensures • acceptability to stakeholders

• efficiency in training/testing



ICAO language proficiency : foundations

• PRICE SG: operational and academic• subject-matter experts + language experts

• Evaluation of existing language proficiency scales• DLI/Council of Europe/….

• Findings of several job-specific linguistic needs analyses (cf. Appendix to Doc 9835):

• FAA

• Eurocontrol (PELA)

• DGAC/ENAC (F)



Language proficiency in aviation:what ICAO tells us (1)

• Concerns only– PIL/CTL radiotelephony

communications (Annex 1)

– communications between ATC units (Annex 11)

• Excludes other professional tasks:– PIL: intra-cockpit, cabin

announcements, ground staff…

– CTL: intra-unit, external services, ...

• Holistic descriptors – Proficient speakers shall:– communicate effectively in voice only and

in face to face situations. – communicate on common, concrete, and

work-related topics with accuracy and clarity.

– use appropriate communicative strategies to exchange messages and to recognize and resolve misunderstandings (to check, confirm, or clarify information.)

– handle successfully and with relative ease the linguistic challenges presented by a complication or unexpected turn of events that occurs within the context of a routine work situation or communicative task with which they are otherwise familiar.

– use a dialect or accent which is intelligible to the aeronautical community.



Language proficiency in aviation:what ICAO tells us (2)

• Annex 10, 5.1.1.1– « ICAO standardized phraseology shall be

used in all situations for which it has been specified. Only when standardized phraseology cannot serve an intended transmission, plain language shall be used. »

• Annex 1– minimum “operational level” = 4

• Attachment to Appendix to Annex 1: ICAO Rating scale

– 6 levels of proficiency – 6 skill areas (pronunciation, structure,

vocabulary, comprehension, fluency, interactions)

– “The language proficiency requirements are applicable to the use of both phraseologies and plain language.”

• Words and phrases (vocabulary)– « common, concrete and work-related

topics »– “paraphrase successfully”

• Grammatical structures– « relevant grammatical structures and

sentence patterns are determined by language functions appropriate to the task »

• Phonology (pronunciation)– « accent which is intelligible to the

aeronautical community »

• Interactions– «voice-only and face-to-face situations »– «general or work-related context »– « complication or unexpected turn of

events »– « apparent misunderstandings »



Work related topics: aviation

• Domains– accident investigation, aerial work,

aerodrome, aeronautical information, air transport management, aircraft, approach, ATC automation, ATC staff, cartography, collision risk, en-route, fuel management, ground movements, in-flight incidents, landing, liaison, meteorology, navaids,organizations, position reporting, private flying, radar, radio communications, regulations, search and rescue, take-off and departure, telephone monitoring, traffic information (source AIRWORD ENAC/Eurocontrol,)

• Sub-domains – aerodrome

• status• management• general terms• amenities• facilities• services• surface conditions• runways/taxiways• security problems• water aerodrome



Work related topics: non-aviation• Abbreviations, acronyms• Animals, birds, • Behaviour, activities• Cargo, merchandise, packaging• Causes, conditions• Geography, topographical features, • Health, medecine• Language, spoken communication• Modality (obligation, probability,

possibility)

• Numbers

• Perception, senses• Problems, errors, accidents,

malfunctions• Rules, enforcement, infringement,

protocol• Space, movement, position,

distance, dimension• Technology• Time, duration, schedules• Transport, travel, vehicles• Weather, climate, natural disasters



Grammatical structures: overview• “grammatical structures and sentence patterns are determined by language

functions appropriate to the task ”• communicative function

– speaker’s intention in producing a given utterance (a “speech act”)

– e.g. … “request information”, “thank”, “deny approval”,…

• intentions are linked to activities being undertaken, so we can identify a limited predictable range of frequently occurring functions

– same functions can be realised in professional OR non-professional contexts– distinguish different functions for comprehension and production

• 4 major function groups in aeronautical R/T (Doc 9835, Appendix B)– triggering actions (orders, requests/offers to act, advice, permission/approval, undertakings,...)– sharing information (states, actions, events in the past, present or future, necessity, feasibility,…)– managing the relationship (satisfaction, complaint, reprimand, concern, reassurance, apologies,…)– managing the dialogue (opening/closing, self-correction, readback, acknowledgement, checking,

repetition, confirmation, clarification, relaying,…)



Individual functions (example)

• Triggering actions:– orders - controller

• give an order• give an amended order• give a negative order• give alternative orders• give a sequence of orders

• cancel an order

– orders - pilot• announce compliance• announce non-compliance

• « give an order »:– phraseology

• TURN LEFT

– plain language • NOW, I WANT YOU TO TURN

LEFT ABEAM THE SHOPPING MALL AT YOUR 1 O ’CLOCK. DO YOU HAVE IT

IN SIGHT?



DISTRIBUTION OF LANGUAGE FUNCTIONS IN AVIATION RADIOTELEPHONY (MELL, 1992)

TRIGGERING ACTIONS

SHARING INFORMATION

MANAGING RELATIONSHIP

MANAGING DIALOGUE



Interaction schemata• Simple (2 moves)

– Maintain flight level 2 7 0– Maintain 270

• Simple (3 moves) CTL initiative:– Say heading– 1 7 3– 1 7 3 roger

• Simple (3 moves) PIL initiative:– Requesting descent– Descend flight level 1 3 0– Descend flight level 1 3 0

• Complex move– I ’ve got an emergency, short on fuel, and

I ’m steering to the beacon on II2.3, and I ’ve been told to tune onto the IFR to get me into an airfield. I have less than 15 minutes fuel supply sir. Have you copied? Over.









• Complex exchange– Are you direct BRC?– Yes sir. Do we need to come right a little?– I think you proceed initially to Abbeville, if

you wish Abbeville by the right.– Understand turn right. We could go to

Abbeville VOR, BRC– Negative. Proceed Abbeville, BRC or if

you prefer BRC direct.– Direct to the BRC









• Complex exchange– Are you direct BRC?– Yes sir. Do we need to come right a little?– I think you proceed initially to Abbeville,

if you wish Abbeville by the right.– Understand turn right. We could go to

Abbeville VOR, BRC– Negative. Proceed Abbeville, BRC or if

you prefer BRC direct.– Direct to the BRC



Phonology - the problem

• phonology is a crucial parameter for intelligibility, – sound channel imperfections – absence of visual channel– non-native speaker (NNS) reliance on acoustic input

• but phonological features are:– least described by linguists– strongly influenced by mother tongue– most closely linked with personal identity– least susceptible to conscious control



Phonology - some solutions• All stakeholders follow ICAO recommendations

• standardised phraseology/standardised pronunciation of alphabet, numbers

• NNS renounce a pure native speaker (NS) target for pronunciation– linguists define core phonology e.g. Lingua Franca Core (Jenkins) combining crucial

features of regional variants • vowel length distinctions, • correct placing of nuclear stress,• marking of tone boundaries, • avoid simplification of some consonant clusters

– learners practise paired interactions (different first language backgrounds)

• NS cultivate skills of accommodation in speaking• perception of interlocutor’s possible linguistic difficulties• replacement of ‘ high-risk ’ L1 features to increase communicative efficiency

– a natural inclination if intelligibility is a salient feature of the interaction

• NS + NNS develop skills of “convergence”



Spontaneous convergence, if...- Productive convergence:

- intelligibility is most salient aspect of interaction (eg Information transfer)- speaker appreciates listener's difficulties in using extra-linguistic context- target LFC item is within speaker's repertoire and can be produced

effortlessly- no processing overload to prevent focus on pronunciation

• Receptive convergence:- motivated to understand (eg. Information transfer)- prior exposure to speaker's accent- prior exposure to a range of L2 accents and tolerance of difference- no fear of acquiring speaker's transfer errors- linguistically and affectively able to signal non-comprehension



Level 4: implementation issues• A licensing requirement:

– level 4 = operational (the safety standard)

– levels 4-6: re-test intervals

– supplementary descriptors for ICAO phraseology?

• A training objective:– intermediate levels (3.5…)

– aim higher to:• increase safety margins?• facilitate maintenance

– unstable vs. consolidated levels• variability of performance (mood, stress,…)• one or more skills are borderline

• A benchmark for:– monitoring performance in aeronautical commmunications

– analysing occurrences, incidents,...



Level 4: application to phraseology

• Possible descriptors:– Mostly uses standard ICAO phraseology accurately and

appropriately, even when switching between phraseology and appropriate plain language.

– Pronunciation of phraseology conforms to ICAO recommended pronunciations when available, or otherwise to a natural model of pronunciation which is intelligible to the aeronautical community.

– Speech transmitting technique (enunciation, rate of speech, pausing, and speaking volume) is adequate to fulfil ICAO recommendations for intelligibility.



Further reading • ICAO (2004), Doc 9835 AN/453, Manual on the Implementation of

ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements.

• Jenkins, J (2000), The Phonology of English as an International Language, Oxford University Press.

• Mell, J (1992), Etude des communications verbales entre pilote et contrôleur en situation standard et non-standard, Editions de l’ENAC.

• Websites– www.icaea.pata.pl (International Civil Aviation English Association)– http://culture.coe.fr (Common European Framework for Modern Languages)

icao language proficiency requirements

Documents

language speakers l1

international language

native speakers of english

future language losstop

icao rating scale

directthe rating scale

single level bandicao

icao seminar tokyothere