English Grammar Teaching Class: 碩研英語二甲 Instructor : 王鶴巘 Presenters: 李佩樺 M97C0256 林亭蓉 M97C0102 林亭蓉 M97C0102 蔡文豪 M97C0103 蔡文豪 M97C0103

As teachers, we need to deal with errors The reasons are as follows: ． Language learners make mistakes ． This seems to happen regardless of the teacher ’ s skill and perseverance the teacher ’ s skill and perseverance errors errors ． Errors play a necessary and important part in language learning

Having to make a number of on-the- spot decisions Is there an error here? What kind of error is it? What caused it? Does it matter? What should I do about it?

Take for example: I had a big surprise. (Wrong or Correct?) I had a big surprise. (Wrong or Correct?) It ’ s a grammatically well-formed sentence. The meaning is clear and unambiguous.

The answer is “ wrong ” The reasons are as follows: According to corpus evidence According to corpus evidence ‧ Something can be a big surprise ‧ Something can be a big surprise ‧ A person can be in for a big surprise ‧ A person can be in for a big surprise ‧ You can have a big surprise for someone ‧ You can have a big surprise for someone

To classify the error Errors include: ‧ Lexical errors ‧ Lexical errors ex 1:My brother was stopping in the door instead of standing. ex 1:My brother was stopping in the door instead of standing. ex 2: The Sunday night past instead of last Sunday night. ex 2: The Sunday night past instead of last Sunday night.

． Grammar errors ex 1: the doorbell rangs → wrong verb form ex 1: the doorbell rangs → wrong verb form ex 2: we speaked → wrong tense ex 2: we speaked → wrong tense ex 3: was the four o ’ clock → the subject of the clause has been left out ex 3: was the four o ’ clock → the subject of the clause has been left out

‧ Discourse errors Definition: Discourse errors relate to the way sentences are organised and linked in order to make whole text Definition: Discourse errors relate to the way sentences are organised and linked in order to make whole text ex: at last; eventually (based on the meaning of words in the context) → ex: at last; eventually (based on the meaning of words in the context) → See page 113 See page 113

Transfer or interference Definition: Influence from the learner ’ s first language on the second language Definition: Influence from the learner ’ s first language on the second language ex: The learner ’ s pronunciation was full of sounds from his own language ex: The learner ’ s pronunciation was full of sounds from his own language

Positive transfer Definition: No difference or contrast is present between the two languages. Definition: No difference or contrast is present between the two languages. ex 1: S ＋ V ＋ O; S ＋ be ＋ SC ex 1: S ＋ V ＋ O; S ＋ be ＋ SC 約翰喜歡瑪莉 ; 她是個美麗的小姐 約翰喜歡瑪莉 ; 她是個美麗的小姐

Overgeneralising Definition: The process of generalizing a particular rule or item in the second language. Definition: The process of generalizing a particular rule or item in the second language. ex: The doorbell rangs ex: The doorbell rangs ex: We speaked (Ved → played, breaked, goed, speaked, etc) ex: We speaked (Ved → played, breaked, goed, speaked, etc)

What is a developmental error? Learners are unconsciously working Learners are unconsciously working out and organising language, but this process is not yet complete. This kind of error is called a developmental error. ex: All beginners confuse the tenses in English

What are systematic errors? These errors seem to show evidence of a rule being fairly systematically applied These errors seem to show evidence of a rule being fairly systematically applied ex: My brother was stopping, he was changing, he was having a long hair → a verb form (past continuous) being over-used, but in a systematic way.

How to deal with systematic errors Correction can provide the feedback the learner needs to help confirm the learner needs to help confirm or reject a hypothesis, or to tighten or reject a hypothesis, or to tighten the application of a rule that is being the application of a rule that is being applied fairly loosely. applied fairly loosely.

One way of testing learners failing to apply the rule Self-correct: Could the writer change speaked to Could the writer change speaked to spoke, for example, if told that speaked was wrong? If so, this suggests that the rule is both systematic and correctly formulated in the learner ’ s mind, but that spoke, for example, if told that speaked was wrong? If so, this suggests that the rule is both systematic and correctly formulated in the learner ’ s mind, but that it hasn ’ t yet become automatic it hasn ’ t yet become automatic

The question of priorities Which errors really matter, and which don ’ t? ex: un banane; une pomme → nouns are distinguished by gender These errors are likely to distract or even irritate the reader or listener

Attitudes to error and correction Attitudes to error run deep and lie at the heart of teachers ’ intuitions about the heart of teachers ’ intuitions about language learning. Many people still language learning. Many people still believe that errors are contagious, and believe that errors are contagious, and that learners are at risk of catching that learners are at risk of catching the errors other learners make. the errors other learners make.

It is often this fear of error infection that underlies many students ’ dislike of that underlies many students ’ dislike of pair and group work. On the other hand, pair and group work. On the other hand, many teachers believe that to correct many teachers believe that to correct errors is a form of interference, especially errors is a form of interference, especially in fluency activities. in fluency activities.

Some teachers go further, and argue that correction of any sort creates a judgmental – and therefore stressful- correction of any sort creates a judgmental – and therefore stressful- classroom atmosphere, and should be classroom atmosphere, and should be avoided altogether. avoided altogether.

Responding to errors He has a long hair. Possible responses: “No”: negative feedback, no clue for what is wrong. Without saying No: facial expression, shake of the head etc. Soften the negative force of No: making a mmmm noise to indicate “Well, that’s not entirely correct but thanks anyway.” results in students wonder whether he is right or wrong.

“He has long hair.”: strict correction. Teachers should remind students not to focus only meaning at the expense of form. “No article”: the application of metalanguage (grammatical terminology); pinpoint the error to promote self- correction or peer-correction. “No. Anyone?”: unambiguous feedback and invitation for peer-correction, but risking humiliating the original student.

“He has”: replay the student’s utterance up to the point where the error occurred to isolate the error as a clue for self-correction. Technique: finger-coding. “He has a long hair.”: echo the mistake with a quizzical intonation. Less threatening than saying No, but students often fail to self-correct and think the teacher merely questions the truth they said.

“I am sorry. I didn’t understand.” Variations: Sorry? He what? Excuse me? etc. clarification requests; friendly signal students the meaning of their message is unclear, and suggest it might have been distorted by the form. “Just one? Like this ?”: [ draw bald man with one long hair] literally interpret the student’s utterance to show his unintended error.

“A long hair is just one single hair, like you find in your soup. For the hair on your head you wouldn’t use an article: He has long hair.”: impromptu teaching point; reactive teaching in respond students’ error, not trying to preempt them. Teacher-centered and passive students.

“Oh, he has long hair, has he?”: covert feedback (reformulation) 重製, 重組, 再形成 ; expansion and reformulation provide a temporary scaffold for children’s developing language competence. Drawback: students might not notice the differences between the utterance from theirs and teachers’. E.g.: child: Teddy hat. Mother: Yes, Teddy’s got a hat on, hasn’t he? Mother: Yes, Teddy’s got a hat on, hasn’t he?

“Good.”: ( OK) intention is to acknowledge students’ contribution, irrespective of either accuracy or meaning; lull them into a false sense of security, and fossilization. Teacher says nothing but writes down error for future reference. Intention is to postpone the feedback so as not to disrupt the talk. (Real operating conditions)

The choice of feedback strategy will depend on factors as the following: The type of error: major effect on communication? Learners can self- repair? The type of activity: focus on form or on meaning? The type of learner: discourage or humiliate learners? Learners feel short-changed if no correction?

Sample lesson Lesson one: using learners’ errors to review cohesive devices (intermediate) Participant: a class of mixed nationalities in Australia Goal: sentences and parts of sentences are connected by words like and, but, however, so etc.

Step 1: the teacher hands out a worksheet which consist of sentences collected from students’ previous written work, and he asks them to attempt to correct in pairs and identify one feature in common.

Step 2: the teacher helps them to pick out some peripheral problems (went substitute for has dropped into) and avoids dealing with despite and nevertheless. Step 3: the teacher distributes a handout about grammar and ask them to study before returning to the sentence correction task.

Step 4: the teacher elicits corrected versions of sentence and writes on the board, underlining the linking devices and ask individuals to explain the usage. Step 5: the teacher has out the exercise about linking devices.

Discussion: fluency practice can be targeted at latter stage, but accuracy may be best dealt with a reactive and reflective approach. Using students’ errors for consciousness- raising purpose is suitable for the specific problems of the students.

Evaluation: The E-factor: collecting learners’ errors from written work is easy by computers while capturing spoken errors. Self-study grammars books or reference notes are available, so making grammar handout is unnecessary. Error-analysis is effective for L1 transfer mistake. Error-analysis is effective for L1 transfer mistake.

Grammar lessons should be taught around errors the learners actually made, but not taught to preempt the errors might make. Error-driven approach: focus instruction on what really matters, in favour of effectiveness. The A-factor: a focus on errors may discourage learners. However, most students accept explicit feedback on error between focused instruction and random acquisition.

Sample lesson 2 Teaching grammar through reformulation (Elementary) Participant: a group of Japanese students Goal: the impetus underlying reformulation is more: This is how I would say it.

Reformulation It is the process by which the teacher takes the meanings the learners are attempting to express in English and “translates” these into an acceptable form.

Step 1 Teacher introduces the theme; such as “disaster”, and without giving explicit prompts, but indicating that students should say anything with the topic. Teacher encourages the production of isolated words, phrases and sentences.

Step 2 When students are starting to run out of idea or start departing to widely from the topic, the teacher stops the activity and draws a line down the centre of the board. Asks one student as the class scribe, collate the ideas that students have produced about the topic, write up on to the board.

Step 3 Teacher read the students’ text aloud, without commentary, but asking any questions where the meaning is unclear. Teacher reformulates this text on to the other half of the board while he always insisting that this is the way I would say it.

Step 4 Students then, working individually, write their own texts about similar topic. They compare these in pairs, suggesting changes and improvements, before submitting their texts to the teacher for correction.

Discussion In step 1, the focus at this stage is simply on brainstorming ideas. In step 2, the teacher renounces any active role in the construction of the text. In step 3, the students are involved in the text reformulation process. In step4, using students’ original text (erase or cover up) as a prompt. It will force attention of form, as well as encouraging greater attentiveness during the reformulation stage.

Evaluation The E-factor: 1. It requires no materials preparation since the texts are created entirely by the students. 2. This process requires only a board, although overhead projectors are very useful for this purpose. 3. The greatest demand is on the teachers’ skill at on-the-spot reformulation.

The A-factor: 1. The reformulation of learners’ texts is likely to have greater relevance to learners than the study of “imported” texts. 2. It has to be handled sensitively, so that learners see it as an empowering activity rather than an exercise in humiliation. 3. Any activity that allows the teacher prolonged control of the blackboard runs the risk of becoming perilously “chalky-talky”.

Conclusions Not all errors are caused by L1 interference. Not all errors are grammar errors, and not all grammar errors are simply tense mistakes.

Not all errors matter equally: nor do they all respond to the same kind of treatment. Correction is not the only form of feedback that teachers can provide. Other options include positive feedback, clarification requests, and reformulation.

Failure to provide some negative feedback may have a damaging effect on the learner’s language development in the long run; on the other hand, providing only negative feedback may be ultimately demotivating. Learners’ errors offer a rich source of material for language focus and consciousness-raising.