ÅÍÓ ã. Àñòàíà, Êàçàõñòàí
TEACHING GRAMMAR THROUGH
A COMMUNICATIVE WAY
It is known that the term “grammar” has
meant diverse things at various times and sometimes several things at one time.
This plurality of meaning is characteristic of the present time and is the
source of confusions in the discussion of grammar as part of the education of
children. There have been taking place violent disputes on the subject of
teaching grammar at school.
The ability to talk about the
grammar of a language, to recite its rules, is also very different from ability
to speak and understand a language or to read and write it. Those who can use a
language are often unable to recite its rules, and those who can recite its
rules can be unable to use it.
Grammar organizes the
vocabulary and as a result we have sense units. There is a system of
stereotypes, which organizes words into sentences. But what skill does grammar
develop?
First of all, it provides the
ability to make up sentences correctly, to reproduce the text adequately.
The knowledge of the specific
grammar structure helps pupils point out the discrepancies between the mother
tongue and the target language.
Grammar is central
to the teaching and learning of languages. It is also one of the most difficult
aspects of language to teach well.
Many people,
including language teachers, hear the word "grammar" and speculate on
a fixed set of word forms and rules of usage. They associate "good"
grammar with the prestige forms of the language, such as those used in writing
and in formal oral presentations, and "bad" or "no" grammar
with the language used in everyday conversation or used by speakers of non-prestige
forms.
Language teachers
who adopt this definition focus on grammar as a set of forms and rules. They
teach grammar by explaining the forms and rules and then drilling students on
them. This results in bored, disaffected students who can produce correct forms
on exercises and tests, but consistently make errors when they try to use the
language in context.
Other language
teachers, influenced by recent theoretical research on the difference between
language learning and language acquisition, tend not to teach grammar at all.
Believing that children acquire their first language without overt grammar
instruction, they expect students to learn their second language the same way.
They assume that students will absorb grammar rules as they hear, read, and use
the language in communication activities. This approach does not allow students
to use one of the major tools they have as learners: their active understanding
of what grammar is and how it works in the language they already know.
The communicative
competence model balances these extremes. The model recognizes that overt
grammar instruction helps students acquire the language more efficiently, but
it incorporates grammar teaching and learning into the larger context of
teaching students to use the language. Instructors using this model teach
students the grammar they need to know to accomplish defined communication
tasks.
Communicative teaching is based on the work of
sociolinguists who theorized that an effective knowledge of a language is more
than merely knowing vocabulary and rules of grammar and pronunciation. Learners
need to be able to use the language appropriately in any business or social
context.
Over the last three decades, theorists have discussed
the exact definition of communicative competence. They do agree, however, that
meaningful communication supports language learning and that classroom
activities should focus on the learner’s authentic needs to communicate
information and ideas.
When teachers first
began to adopt a communicative approach to foreign and second language
teaching, “learning communication” was often presented as an alternative to
“learning grammar”.
However, the notion
that grammar and communication are incompatible opposites is based on serious
misconceptions about the nature of language and language use.
Grammar, pronunciation, and vocabulary are, undoubtedly,
necessary parts of effective communication. With the communicative method two
primary approaches may be taken. Some teachers prefer to teach a rule, then pursue
it with practice. Most, though, feel grammar will be naturally discovered
through meaningful communicative interaction.
The communicative approach is a flexible method rather
than a rigorously defined set of teaching practices. It can best be defined
with a list of general principles. In Communicative Language Teaching (1991),
expert David Nunan lists these five basic characteristics:
1. An emphasis on learning to communicate through
interaction in the target language.
2. The introduction of authentic texts into the
learning situation.
3. The provision of opportunities for learners to
focus, not only on language but also on the learning process itself.
4. An enhancement of the learner’s own personal
experiences as important contributing elements to classroom learning.
5. An attempt to link classroom language learning with
language activities outside the classroom.
As these features depict, the communicative approach
is concerned with the unique individual needs of each learner. By making the
language relevant to the world rather than the classroom, learners can acquire
the desired skills rapidly and agreeably.
The best way to teach any points of English grammar is to teach it in the context
of and using examples from a real-life like language. Context is crucial in
teaching grammar, although important and potentially very useful, only makes
sense if it facilitates functional use of language in actual communication.
Communicative activities can be used to teach any grammar point, as all
grammar is expressed in language. Among other uses, communication activities
can be used to:
1) Practice the target language point by eliciting the target language
during the communication activity.
2) Enable the teacher (or students themselves) to actively correct the
use of the target grammar point.
3) Use the input form the communication activity to discuss, elaborate
and check that students correctly understand the target grammar point.
There are two approaches to using communicative activities for grammar
teaching, one that might be described as bottom-up and another of a more
top-down character.
The bottom-up approach introduces the target language point in a
communicative form first and ensures that the point is comprehended in this
particular context. The grammar point can be then elaborated and explicated; to
be followed by a structured output and then communicative activities designed
to elicit the target language from relatively unstructured output.
The top-down approach starts with introducing the grammar point in a
formal manner, to the practice it in a structured way and only potentially
include communicative activities later on in the process of consolidation.
As an example, Past Simple tense might be introduced by an audio tape of
a story being told. Students are then asked questions by the teacher and may
use the tape script to answer them. Then a grammar point is introduced and
explained. Structured drills follow, and then a free-speaking activity in pairs
when students ask each other what they did yesterday, what they did a week ago
and what they did last year. Students are encouraged to use the specific
expressions for time and to answer both in negative and positive statements.
Teacher monitors language produced, and makes notes of the most common mistakes
to then correct and elaborate on.
Obviously, some grammar points are easier to teach and reiterate in
natural communication activities than others. One of the mistakes that are
often made when trying to teach grammar using communicative exercises is attempting
to fit too much grammar into one activity. This often makes it an artificial
activity that starts to resemble an old fashioned drill rather than natural
language, and deifies the point of the communicative activity, so should be
avoided.
In this article we have tried to delineate that in a
communicative approach to language teaching, grammar is not an insignificant
side-issue: it is the very means by which learners become able to fulfil their
communicative needs.
In deciding how to
approach grammar in our teaching, we should not repeat the mistakes of the
past, when grammar has often been taught as an end in itself, divorced from the
role it performs in communication. This
approach has enabled only a small proportion of learners to use the language
for real communication. Rather, we should make full use of recent insights and
adopt an approach which affirms the importance of grammar but never loses sight
of why it is important: because it enables people to communicate meanings.
List of Literature
1.
Harmer, J.: Teaching and Learning Grammar. Longman, 1987
2.
Ur, P.: Grammar Practice Activities: A Practical Guide for Teachers.
Cambridge University Press, 1988.
3.
Littlewood, W.: Communicative Language Teaching : An Introduction.
Cambridge University Press, 1981.
4. Rinvolucri, M.:
Grammar Games: Cognitive, Affective and Drama Activities for EFL Students. Cambridge
University Press, 1984.
5.
Alam, Sarwar. (2011). Grammar
studies: Undergraduate English Teaching in Bangladesh. JU,
Bangladesh.
6.
Celce-Murcia, M.(1991). Grammar
Pedagogy in Second and Foreign Language Teaching. TESOL Quarterly,
25(3): 459-480
7. Cowan,
R.(2008). The Teacher's
Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
8. Larsen-Freeman,
D.(2001). Teaching Grammar.
In M.Celce-Murcia(ed.), [3rd edn.], Boston, Mass, Heinle & Heinle
9. Leech,
G. & Svartik,J.1975.A Communicative Grammar of English. London: Longman.
10. Widdowson,
G.G.1978. Teaching Language
as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.