Jayarathna, G.A.R.C.Wijesekera, H. D2026-01-102025-10-10978-624-6010-15-72783 – 8862https://rda.sliit.lk/handle/123456789/4495This paper explores the role of Soft Content and Language Integrated Learning (Soft CLIL) in developing academic language functions (ALFs) among tertiary level learners, focusing on speaking skills. Soft CLIL integrates language with subject-related content, prioritizing language development while introducing subject concepts lightly. ALFs refer to the specific language required for academic tasks such as describing, explaining, comparing, and arguing. This qualitative action research was conducted in a Sri Lankan state university, involving fourth-year students following the Bachelor of Arts (Honors) degree in Pali and Buddhist Studies, and their English language teachers. It employed a single-cycle action research design of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting, to examine learner and teacher perceptions of Soft CLIL and its impact on developing ALFs. Multiple data sets were gathered for corroboration. To probe into learner perceptions, focus group discussions, reflective diary entries, and guided essays were utilized. Teacher perceptions were elicited through self-reflections and peer classroom observations. The analysis followed a deductive approach, and the interpretation was supported by Krashen’s Theory of Second Language Acquisition. Though more demanding to plan than general English for Academic Purposes (EAP) lessons, the approach proved effective. The findings show that Soft CLIL positively impacted learner comprehension, interaction, confidence, and the development of ALFs. Learners showed progress in using key ALFs needed for their degree. Thus, this study highlights the need to promote Soft CLIL among curriculum developers and English Language Teaching (ELT) practitioners. The findings offer insights for stakeholders, advocating for the wider adoption of the approach within the faculty and beyond to enhance ALFs among tertiary-level learners.enContent and Language Integrated LearningAcademic language functionsTertiary educationAction researchArticlehttps://doi.org/10.54389/KFMN7230