2021 年 1 巻 p. 121-
This paper argues that the L2 language teaching field has struggled to implement communicative language teaching (CLT) as it was originally conceived because theorists and practitioners have not reflected on the concept of communication deeply enough. As a result, the term CLT has come to mean very different things to different people. In order to move the field forward, the authors recommend that practitioners adopt VanPatten's (2019) definition of communication. This paper first explains VanPatten's definition in detail and gives examples of what kinds of practices and materials are communicative and uncommunicative. Next, the paper reviews other scholars' criteria for judging communicativeness and discusses their relative merits in comparison to VanPatten's definition. Finally, the paper states why VanPatten's definition of communication, although it may appear narrow and constraining, is so necessary for current language teaching.