Chapter 5

THE GRAMMAR TRANSLATION (1850’s-1950’s) “What is taught is learned” Medium of instruction: mother tongue Emphasis on reading & writing

Audiolingual Method Structural linguistic theory Contrastive analysis Aural-oral procedures Behaviorist psychology

Speaking and listening competence preceded reading and writing competence. Use of L1 is highly discouraged in the classroom. The development of language skills is a matter of habit formulation. Students practice particular patterns of language through structured dialogue and drill until response is automatic.

Structured patterns in language are taught using repetitive drills. The emphasis is on having students produce error free utterances. This method of language learning supports kinesthetic learning styles. Only everyday vocabulary and sentences are taught.

Backward build up drill (expansion drill) Repetition drill Chain drill Single-slot substitution drill Multiple-slot substitution drill Transformation drill Question-and-answer drill Use of minimal pairs Complete the dialogue Grammar game

Common misconceptions concerning CLT not teaching grammar, teaching only speaking, expecting too much from teachers Fluency at the expense of accuracy

Q: Do learners learn what they have been taught? Does formal instruction have any effect on interlanguage? How can we know? (p.80)

Q: Discuss Pica’s study. What does it suggest? (p.80)

Q: What is the difference between item learning and system learning? (p.81)

Item learning is a process that deals with learning separate and discrete items System learning deals with the learning of the abstract rules that underlie the use of linguistic items.

Cruttenden (1981)’s distinction for L1 acquisition. Before systems can be learned, a number of items have to be known. Initially, learning takes place on an item-by-item basis in all areas (phonological, morphological, syntactic, lexical etc.). However, both learning new items and the complex ways in which the items are linked to other items are important.

Q: Discuss Pienemann’s study. Explain teachability hypothesis Q: Discuss Pienemann’s study. Explain teachability hypothesis. What is the problem we have as a teacher? (p.82)

Q: Explain the reasons why some linguistic structures may be permanently influenced by instruction and others are not (pp.82-83)

Q: Can the teaching one grammatical structure trigger acquisition of other structures? (p.83)

Q: Can we expect an effect of instruction on communication beyond the simple manipulation of language? (p.83)

Q: Which one is more effective, input-based or production-based instruction? (pp.84-85)

Q: What is consciousness-raising? How can we promote it? (p.85)

Q: Is positive evidence in the input-based instruction sufficient for adult L2 learners? (p.86)

Q: Does the input-based instruction always work for all L2 learners? (p.87)

Q: Do teachers teach strategies (learning strategies, communications strategies etc.)? (p.87)

It must be noted that if learners are taught the strategies explicitly as metalinguistic knowledge without incorporating such knowledge into implicit competence through their own observations in classroom activities, positive effects cannot be expected.

To promote learners’ realization that ill-chosen strategies may cause undesired outcomes and thus help them to find more effective strategies

Long (1991) distinguishes between focus on forms and focus on form Long (1991) distinguishes between focus on forms and focus on form. Focus on forms---similar to traditional grammar teaching (primary purpose is to teach language forms in isolation). Focus on form--- attempts to draw the student's attention to linguistic forms as they arise in activities whose primary focus is on meaning.