Introduction

Social language, the informal, relational use of language that builds rapport and community, has long been associated with classroom climate, class culture, and learner engagement. In Module 2, Unit 3 (“Encouraging social language”) of the British Council’s TeachingEnglish: Organising the Classroom course, EFL teachers are invited to reflect on barriers to informal interaction and strategies for strengthening it in their contexts. While many examples provided in the course are designed for primary and secondary language classrooms, the principles underlying social interaction remain highly relevant for instructors working with young adults and working professionals in online environments.

As an online university and adult education instructor, I (Jonathan Acuña Solano) approach these ideas from a context distinct from child-centered classrooms. This essay critically reflects on the British Council course content, situates it within adult ELT pedagogy, and integrates theoretical support from scholars such as Lev Vygotsky, Stephen Krashen, and Malcolm Knowles to examine how social language can enhance cognitive, linguistic, and affective development among adult learners.

Barriers to Social Interaction: Cultural and Affective Dimensions

The British Council (n.d.) course highlights several barriers to informal interaction: learners’ age, proficiency level, school culture, and teacher identity. While some obstacles, such as “learners are too young to communicate clearly” (British Council, n.d.), are not applicable in adult contexts, others remain highly relevant. For instance, the course notes that learners may be reserved, reluctant to share personal details, or believe the teacher should “concentrate on teaching” (British Council, n.d.).

From my +15-year online teaching experience, shyness can be a decisive ingredient: “Shyness can be another factor that can prevent students to participate in some sort of social language. Additionally, learners may not be interested in engaging in conversations with their teacher for cultural or personal reasons” (Acuña Solano, 2026).

In intercultural contexts, such as when teaching Taiwanese, South Korean, and Costa Rican learners, I observed that some students were “very reserved at the beginning,” gradually becoming more open as trust developed (Acuña Solano, 2026). In Costa Rican classrooms, reservedness is less culturally pronounced, though individual shyness persists. Importantly, I have learned to recognize moments when interaction may threaten learners’ privacy. In such cases, “I’d rather refrain from interacting with learners to avoid making their affective filter move up” (Acuña Solano, 2026).

This reference to the “affective filter” draws directly from Krashen’s (1982) hypothesis that emotional variables such as anxiety, embarrassment, or low self-esteem can block language acquisition. Social interaction must therefore be intentional, respectful, and sensitive to learners’ psychological boundaries. It does not have to be perceived as something learners are forced to hop in but a personal choice where students can test what they have learned.

Social Language and Cognitive Development

The British Council’s (n.d.) course suggests that “some theories suggest that social development can aid cognitive development.” This assertion aligns strongly with Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory, which posits that learning is fundamentally mediated through social interaction. Language is not merely a vehicle for expressing thought but a tool for shaping it.

For adult English learners, either in online or face-to-face learning settings, this insight is particularly relevant. Unlike children, adults bring complex professional identities, prior knowledge, and established communicative patterns to the classroom. Social language in this context does not simply build “social skills”; it activates prior experiences and situates learning within meaningful interpersonal exchanges linked to their everyday routine personal or corporate life, or both.

For example, when I introduce a lesson topic by asking about learners’ work routines or professional challenges, I am not merely engaging in small talk. I am activating schema and creating what Vygotsky would describe as a socially mediated zone of proximal development. The conversation with my learners becomes a scaffold for academic language use. Thus, social interaction is not peripheral to learning—it is constitutive of it.

Adapting Primary-Level Techniques to Adult Online Contexts

Through the British Council’s (n.d.) course, several techniques are proposed such as greeting learners, asking about their day, drawing on the board, and building dialogues slowly through whole-class drills. While these are particularly suited to younger learners, their underlying pedagogical intention, confidence-building through structured interaction, remains valuable for any type of age group.

In my online teaching scenario, adaptation is essential. I “always greet first comers,” though I cannot interrupt a live online session to greet late arrivals individually (Acuña Solano, 2026). Rather than drawing on a board, I provide visual scaffolding through digital slides and shared screens.

With lower-level adult learners, the course suggests topics such as personal information, family, daily routines, and food. I adapt these by embedding them into professional contexts. For working adults, discussions about daily routines naturally expand into workplace communication. For university students, family and routines can segue into topics about time management or cultural expectations.

However, I have also noted that “the ideas proposed by the British Council” are quite appealing “if I were to teach in a primary school level. Many of their ideas don’t fit much with my young adult and working adult learners because of their level of mastery of English and due to their ages” (Acuña Solano, 2026).

This observation resonates with Knowles’ (1984) theory of andragogy, which argues that adult learners are self-directed, goal-oriented, and internally motivated. They expect relevance and practicality. Therefore, social language activities must respect their maturity and professional identity.

Increasing Interaction Through Task Design

The British Council’s course includes testimonies from teachers such as Wyll, Halsina, Stella, and Roland, who emphasize research-sharing, professional development sessions, daily check-ins, and think-pair-share strategies. Although these examples come from primary and secondary contexts, Roland’s emphasis on designing academic tasks that naturally generate informal interaction is particularly transferable.

In my online classes, breakout rooms serve this function. During communicative tasks, I make brief “interventions” by asking each participant a slightly more personal follow-up question. This technique subtly blends academic and social language. It allows me to learn more about students while reinforcing spontaneous speaking.

Such practices align with Long’s (1996) interaction hypothesis, which posits that negotiation of meaning during interaction facilitates language acquisition. Informal exchanges during structured tasks often produce authentic clarification requests, reformulations, and elaborations.

Additionally, digital platforms, recommended by the British Council as tools for promoting less direct or even anonymous interaction, are especially effective in online adult education. Discussion boards, collaborative documents, and chat features enable learners to share opinions without the pressure of immediate oral performance. For some reserved learners, written social interaction becomes a bridge toward oral participation.

Building Class Culture and Rapport

One of my key reflections in designing an action plan for social language was: “How this can help build and boost the class culture” and “Getting to know your learners is a maxim to foster learning” (Acuña Solano, 2026). Rapport has been consistently linked to motivation and engagement in adult education (Dörnyei, 2001). In online environments, where physical presence is absent, intentional rapport-building becomes even more critical. A short check-in question, a shared anecdote, or recognition of a learner’s professional achievement can significantly humanize the virtual space.

Importantly, I have not experienced institutional discouragement of informal interaction in Costa Rica. However, I recognize that in other cultural contexts, hierarchical norms may discourage teacher-student familiarity. In such cases, demonstrating professional warmth, rather than excessive familiarity, may help reconcile institutional expectations with relational pedagogy.

A “sign of friendship and true interest,” as I noted, can resolve interaction barriers (Acuña Solano, 2026). Yet this friendship must remain pedagogically grounded, avoiding oversharing or boundary crossing. Adult learners value authenticity but also professionalism.

Integrating Social Language Throughout the Lesson

The British Council’s course invites teachers to consider when social language can be integrated beyond beginnings and endings of lessons. In online adult classes, opportunities arise:

• During breakout-room monitoring
• In chat-based quick polls
• In feedback sessions
• Through asynchronous discussion boards
• In reflective exit tickets

These micro-moments allow social language to coexist with academic objectives. Rather than isolating “social time” from “learning time,” integration ensures that relational interaction enhances linguistic practice. For example, after a formal presentation task, asking, “Was this topic connected to anything you experience at work?” transforms evaluation into dialogue. The academic task becomes personally meaningful.

Implications for Adult Online ELT

Encouraging social language in adult online ELT requires:

1.    Affective sensitivity (Krashen, 1982)

2.    Social mediation awareness (Vygotsky, 1978)

3.    Respect for adult identity and autonomy (Knowles, 1984)

4.    Task-based interaction design (Long, 1996)

5.    Intentional rapport-building (Dörnyei, 2001)

Unlike children, adults do not require simplified routines to develop social competence. Instead, they require meaningful, relevant opportunities to use language relationally within professional and academic contexts.

The British Council course provides foundational strategies. However, their successful implementation depends on contextual adaptation. For online instructors of young and working adults, social language should not resemble primary-school circle time. It should resemble authentic professional and interpersonal discourse.

Conclusion

The British Council’s TeachingEnglish: Organising the Classroom course underscores the pedagogical value of social language. While many examples are tailored to younger learners, the underlying principles, rapport, confidence-building, and social mediation, are equally applicable to adult online education.

My reflections reveal that encouraging social language requires cultural awareness, affective sensitivity, and task integration. When thoughtfully implemented, informal interaction lowers anxiety, activates prior knowledge, strengthens class culture, and enhances communicative competence.

Ultimately, social language is not an optional embellishment to adult ELT. It is a relational infrastructure that supports cognitive and linguistic growth. In online environments especially, intentional social interaction transforms digital spaces into learning communities.

San José, Costa Rica

Saturday, March 21, 2026

 

📚 References

Acuña Solano, J. (2026). Personal reflections on TeachingEnglish: Organising the classroom (Module 2, Unit 3). Unpublished course notes.

British Council. (n.d.). TeachingEnglish: Organising the classroom (Module 2, Unit 3: Encouraging social language). https://open.teachingenglish.org.uk/Team/UserProgrammeDetails/699499?stepId=2

Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge University Press.

Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon.

Knowles, M. (1984). The adult learner: A neglected species (3rd ed.). Gulf Publishing.

Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). Academic Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Encouraging Social Language in Online ELT for Young and Working Adults by Jonathan Acuña

“It is not histories I am writing, but lives.” — Plutarch, Lives

Introduction

When we modern readers encounter the term dictator for the first time in Plutarch’s Lives, particularly in biographies such as that of Marcus Furius Camillus, we often experience a moment of semantic dissonance. Dictator!? Nowadays the word dictator evokes images of authoritarian leaders who cling to power indefinitely, suppress dissent, and undermine democratic institutions. In contrast, in the political vocabulary of the Roman Republic, the dictator was a legally appointed magistrate entrusted with extraordinary but temporary authority during times of crisis. This paper, my 544th post on this blog, examines the evolution of the term dictator from its original institutional meaning in Roman political life to its contemporary usage, which carries overwhelmingly negative connotations. Additionally, the essay surveys the principal political and military offices of the Roman Republic to provide modern readers with a clearer framework for understanding Plutarch’s portrayals of Roman noble figures.

The Roman Dictatorship: Origin and Function

In the Roman Republic, the dictatorship was an extraordinary magistracy established to address emergencies that threatened the survival of the state such as war, invasions, and the like. According to Roman tradition, the office was created in the early Republic, possibly in response to military crises or internal unrest (Lintott, 1999). A dictator was appointed by one of the consuls, usually following authorization by the Senate, and was granted supreme authority (imperium) for a strictly limited term, typically no more than six months, or as long as the crisis was present.

Plutarch’s account of Camillus exemplifies this earlier understanding. Camillus is appointed dictator not as a usurper of power but as a savior of the Republic during moments of existential danger, such as the Gallic sack of Rome (Plutarch, trans. 1914/2001). The dictator’s authority superseded that of all other magistrates, yet this power was bounded by legal, religious, and temporal constraints. Crucially, the Roman dictator was expected to relinquish authority once the crisis had passed, and many did so well before the expiration of their term.

Thus, in Roman political culture, dictatorship was not inherently tyrannical. Instead, it was viewed as a necessary suspension of normal republican procedures in service of restoring civic stability. The legitimacy of the office depended precisely on its temporary nature and its subordination to the res publica rather than personal ambition.

The Semantic Shift: From Emergency Magistrate to Absolute Ruler

The transformation of the word dictator began within Roman history itself. The late Republic witnessed figures such as Lucius Cornelius Sulla and Julius Caesar stretching, and ultimately breaking, the traditional limits of the office. Sulla’s dictatorship (82–79 BCE) was unprecedented in duration and scope, as he used his authority to enact constitutional reforms and purge political enemies. Caesar’s appointment as dictator perpetuo (dictator for life) marked a decisive rupture with republican norms and contributed directly to his assassination in 44 BCE (Goldsworthy, 2006).

These developments permanently altered the moral and political resonance of the term. By the time of the Roman Empire, the dictatorship as an office had become obsolete, replaced by imperial authority that avoided the title while exercising far greater power. In modern political discourse, especially following the experiences of the twentieth century, dictator has come to signify illegitimate, often violent, personal rule; leaders who resist institutional checks and perpetuate their hold on power through coercion rather than consent.

Thus, the modern meaning of dictator reflects not the early Roman magistracy but rather its degeneration in the late Republic and its echoes in modern authoritarian regimes. This semantic shift underscores the importance of historical context when interpreting classical texts such as Plutarch’s Lives.

Understanding Roman Offices in Plutarch’s Biographies

To fully appreciate Plutarch’s Roman biographies, readers must be familiar with the complex hierarchy of Roman political and military offices. These roles were embedded in the cursus honorum, the customary sequence of public offices pursued by Roman elites.

a)    The consul was the highest regular magistrate of the Republic. Two consuls were elected annually, sharing executive authority and commanding armies. Their mutual veto power symbolized the Roman commitment to preventing unilateral rule.

b)    The praetor ranked below the consul and was primarily responsible for judicial matters, though praetors could also command armies and govern provinces. Their legal expertise often features prominently in Plutarch’s accounts of Roman administration.

c)    The tribune of the plebs was a uniquely Roman institution designed to protect the interests of common citizens. Tribunes possessed the power of intercessio (veto) and were considered sacrosanct, meaning any harm against them was religiously forbidden. Figures such as the Gracchi illustrate how tribunes could become powerful and controversial agents of reform.

d)    The censor held a moral and administrative role rather than military command. Censors conducted the census, regulated public morals, and could expel senators deemed unworthy. Though lacking imperium, the office carried immense prestige.

e)    Other offices, such as the aedile (responsible for public works and games) and the quaestor (financial administrator), served as stepping stones within the political career of Roman nobles. Military titles, including legatus and tribune militum, further complicate Plutarch’s narratives, as political and military authority were often intertwined.

Understanding these distinctions helps modern readers avoid anachronistic interpretations and better appreciate the institutional framework within which Plutarch’s subjects operated.

Conclusion

The word dictator offers a compelling case study in how political language evolves over time. In Republican Rome, the dictator was not a symbol of tyranny but a constitutional instrument designed to preserve the state during emergencies. Plutarch’s portrayal of figures like Camillus reflects this original meaning and highlights values such as civic duty, restraint, and service to the common good. However, historical abuses of the office, most notably in the late Republic, transformed its connotations, paving the way for the modern understanding of dictatorship as illegitimate and oppressive rule.

By situating the term dictator within its Roman institutional context and clarifying the roles of other Republican offices, readers can approach Plutarch’s Lives with greater historical sensitivity. Such awareness not only deepens literary interpretation but also reminds us that political concepts are neither static nor universal; they are shaped by historical experience, cultural memory, and the enduring tension between power and responsibility.

San José, Costa Rica

Friday, March 20, 2026

📚 References

Goldsworthy, A. (2006). Caesar: Life of a colossus. Yale University Press. https://archive.org/details/caesarlifeofcolo00gold

Lintott, A. (1999). The constitution of the Roman Republic. Oxford University Press. https://archive.org/details/constitutionofro0000lint_r1i1

Plutarch. (2001). Lives of the noble Grecians and Romans (B. Perrin, Trans.). Harvard University Press. (Original work written c. 1st–2nd century CE) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.282597/page/n5/mode/2up

Glossary of Roman Political and Military Offices

(For Reading Plutarch’s Lives)

Dictator	An emergency leader appointed during a serious crisis, such as war or internal unrest. A Roman dictator had complete authority over the state but only for a short, fixed period (usually six months). Unlike modern dictators, Roman dictators were expected to give up power once the crisis ended.
Consul	The highest regular political office in the Roman Republic. Two consuls were elected each year and ruled together to prevent abuse of power. They commanded armies, led the government, and represented Rome in foreign affairs.
Praetor	A high-ranking magistrate mainly responsible for legal matters, especially court cases. Praetors could also command armies or govern provinces. This office was often held before becoming a consul.
Tribune of the Plebs	An official elected to protect the rights of ordinary citizens (plebeians). Tribunes could block laws or decisions they believed were harmful by using their veto power. They were considered sacred and harming them was a serious crime.
Censor	An official responsible for conducting the census (counting citizens and assessing property). Censors also supervised public morals and could remove senators for unethical behavior. Although they had no military power, their position was highly respected.
Quaestor	A financial officer who managed public funds, taxes, and military finances. This was usually the first step in a Roman political career and a required position before holding higher office.
Aedile	An official in charge of public buildings, markets, and public games. Aediles also helped maintain order in the city. Many used this office to gain popularity by sponsoring public events.
Legatus	A deputy or representative, often appointed by a consul or dictator. Legates commonly served as senior officers in the army or as governors of provinces.
Military Tribune (Tribunus Militum)	A junior military officer who assisted in commanding Roman legions. Young aristocrats often served as military tribunes early in their careers to gain experience.
Imperium	The legal power to command an army and govern. Only certain magistrates, such as consuls, praetors, and dictators, possessed imperium. It was a key concept in Roman political authority.
Senate	A council made up of Rome’s most experienced and influential men, usually former magistrates. The Senate advised magistrates, controlled finances, and influenced foreign and military policy, though it did not pass laws directly.
Cursus Honorum	The traditional order of public offices that Roman politicians followed, beginning with quaestor and rising to consul. This system structured political careers and limited how quickly someone could gain power.
Patricians	Members of Rome’s old aristocratic families. In early Roman history, patricians held most political power, though over time plebeians gained access to public offices.
Plebeians	The common people of Rome, including farmers, merchants, and workers. Although originally excluded from high office, plebeians gradually gained political rights through reforms and institutions like the tribunate.
Res Publica	Literally “the public matter” or “the public thing.” This term refers to the Roman Republic and emphasizes the idea that political power belonged to the state, not to one individual.