Monday, January 14, 2019
Grammar translation method Essay
Both the grammar adaptation rule and communicatory style commandment be teaching methods for acquiring a unconnected run-in. W hereas the grammar transmutation method focuses on the explanation of certain grammar rules and the translation of vocabulary, the communicatory feeler aims for acquiring the skill of intercourse for the pupil copyist (2011). Both methods argon good in their own elan, although the communicative uprise focuses on the effective last of vocabulary, namely communication between human beings. In this adjudicate the grammar translation method and the communicative approach will be compargond and contrasted, lay special emphasis on the assertion that the communicative approach is to a greater extent than effective for the acquisition and accord of a foreign lyric than the grammar translation method. First of all, a remarkable difference in nomenclature habit is noticeable when comparing the ii methods.While the grammar translation method entirely uses the assimilators mother tongue, the communicative approach uses nothing else however the actual target dustup. With the use of the mother tongue, it is easier to understand grammar and meaning of spoken language. (Rhalmi, M. (2009). This is a demand skill to decipher pen texts. When only using the foreign language, the level of oral communication increases. (Rhalmi, M. (2009). To find out which of both outcomes has a bigger value, it ask to be clear what the generatoral goal of language is. Communicating is a required skill to survive. Oral communication is something that dates from the origin of the human kind. The invention of written language is a lot more recent. (Bright, W. (n.d). This proves that language is originally used for communication. Given this point, there can be concluded that the outcome of the communicative approach has bigger value to languages actual goal. In contrast, a really attractive property on the grammar translation method is its easily understandable explanation of grammar, words and phrases. Because of the fact that all the explanation happens in the mother tongue, it is easy for the assimilator to understand what is being said.Also, learners acquire a better capacity of understanding synonyms in the foreign language, due to the fact that they have already well-educated the meaning. Secondly, the communication between instructor and learner is flawless. Since the instructor and the learner announce the same language, the teacher can easily verify whether the pupils have wise to(p) what is just explained. (Fitriyanti, R. (2011). Within the communicative approach, the communication between student and teacher is a lot more difficult and tedious in the beginning, which has to do with the use of target language only. However, the communication between teacher and learner is from much more value as the learner becomes more acquainted(predicate) with the foreign language (Abradi, C. (n.d). Becau se of goal aimed teaching in communicative language teaching, the communicative competence improves quickly (this will be explained later).What this says is that the tedious communication at the beginning can better be seen as a learning moment, rather than a disadvantage. Thirdly, in both methods there is a completely different way of acquiring skills. With the grammar translation method the students are supposed to learn the rules rough the target language when sitting flock and listening to their teacher. Grammar structures are explained and vocabulary is taught through word lists with a translation. The learners practice to apply what theyve learned exists out of exercises where the learner needs to translate sentences or texts from the native to the target language and the other way around. (Rahlmi, M. (2009).Thus, this is a rather passive way of learning. The communicative language teaching lessons are instead different. These lessons contain meaningful activities in which the learner is required to interact. The activities are base on the interest of the learner to boost learning motivation. (Rhalmi, M. (2009). So, whereas the grammar translation method is rather passive, communicative language teaching is quite active. Passive learning is not really effective for the learner. (Ebbens, S (2013) states that a much better result of learning is caused by (inter)active practice.To go on, the teachers role is quite different in both methods. With the grammar translation method, the teacher is basically the guide for the learning process. The method is teacher centred, which pith that the class focuses just on the explanation of the teacher. The role of the teacher here is to provide in fashionation to the students (Fitriyanti, R. (2011). Teachers in communicative classrooms will find themselves public lecture less and listening morebecoming active facilitators of their students learning (Larsen-Freeman, 1986) The communicative approach is a student cen tred method. Although the teacher sets up the exercise, it is the learners performance which fills up most(prenominal) of the lesson (Orellana. (2007). The learning process is less effective when the teacher does most work in the classroom (teacher centred method) instead of the students doing most work in the classroom. (student centred method) (Ebbens, S (2013).A fifth issue, on which the two methods can be compared and contrasted on, is its historical background. The fact that learners of the grammar translation method are not able to produce comprehensive output in the form of oral communication, became evident in the years 1939 until 1945 (World War II) when the grammar translation method was not teaching students the foreign language effectively enough to declare with allies or to understand the communications of the enemy, which was required to survive. When this occurred, a late approach appeared known as the audio lingual method which was based on structuralism and (The Grammar-Translation Method, n.d,).In 1957 the audio lingual method was criticised by the prominent linguist Noam Chomsky for its inability to teach learners to creatively apply language (Rhalmi, M. (2009). Partly because of this criticism, during the 60s of the 20th century, commutative language teaching was introduced in the classroom. (Rhalmi, M. (2009). This states that communicative language teaching was invented as a reaction on an alternative method for the grammar translation method. Thus, the communicative approach is actually already a more modern and adapted method of teaching the core goal language has.To summarise the main points mentioned in this essay The difference of language usage in both methods, the advantage in language usage of both methods, the way of acquiring skills in both methods, the teacher and students role, and the historical background of both methods. These points given, I can conclude that the communicative approach of teaching a language is m ore effective to teach the learner languages original goal, communication, than the grammar translation method. Although, if one is talking about comprehensive output in the form of letters and/or written text translations, the grammar translation method is superior to the communicative approach.BibliographyRhalmi, M. (2009). Communicative style Teaching (The CommunicativeApproach). on tap(predicate) http//www.myenglishpages.com/blog/communicative-language-teaching-communicative-approach/. Last accessed 05/06/2014. Bright, W. (n.d). Whats the deflexion between Speech and Writing?.Available http//www.linguisticsociety.org//resource/whats-difference-between-speech-and-writing. Last accessed 05/06/2014. Rahlmi, M. (2009). Grammar Translation Method. Available http//www.myenglishpages.com/blog/grammar-translation-method/. Last accessed 05/06/2014. Fitriyanti, R. (2011). Grammar Translation Method. Available http//novaekasari09.wordpress.com/2011/06/12/grammar-translation-method/. Las t accessed 05/06/2014. Abradi, C. (n.d). Advantages and disadvantages of communicative language teaching. Available https//www.academia.edu/4743392/Communicative_Language_Teaching_theories_lesson_plan_and_application. Last accessed 05/06/2014. Orellana. (2007). The Communicative Approach in side of meat as a Foreign Language Teaching Leer ms http//www.monografias.com/trabajos18/the-communicative-approach/the-communicative-approach.shtmlhowixzz33uLe7fXe.Available http//www.monografias.com/trabajos18/the-communicative-approach/the-communicative-approach.shtmlhow. Last accessed 07/06/2014. The Grammar-Translation Method. (n.d). Available http//hlr.byu.edu/methods/content/text/grammar-text.htm. Last accessed 02/06/2014. Scrivener (2011). Learning Teaching. 3rd ed. Londen Macmillian. 31-32. Ebbens, S (2013). Effectief leren. Houten Noordhoff uitgevers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment