TU Braunschweig
Englisches Seminar
Seminar:
Teaching English Grammar and Lexis
Referentinnen: Beke Reddig, Kathrin Sindern & Nadja Kamrowski
Dozentin:
Dr. F. Intemann
Datum:
9. Mai 2006
Why teach grammar?
The question “Why teach grammar?” implies teaching grammar explicitly. This approach is
in opposition with the concept of letting the learner rather unconsciously acquire the
underlying grammar structures of language.
The problem is not constituted by the question whether we can completely dismiss the issue
of grammar. As soon as you teach language, you teach grammar as grammar is an internal
part of language that cannot be divided from any attempt to use language. Otherwise, the
result would be a simple accumulating of words. No matter which approach you choose, you
can never leave out at least an implicit use of grammar. Even without explicitly talking about
it, grammar is always taught.
In order to evaluate the different approaches, arguments in favour of and against explicit
grammar teaching will be discussed.
Note: · In this presentation, grammar is understood to include syntax and morphology.
· The discussion concentrates on the language teaching in institutional contexts.
Arguments in favour of teaching grammar
· The fine-tuning argument
- Grammar enables the learner to convey a more intelligible and differentiated
meaning than the simple stringing together of words.
- The knowledge of syntax and morphology contributes to a better understanding of
discourse as it provides semantic clarification.
- Grammar improves production skills especially in written language (punctuation).
· The sentence-machine argument
- It is impossible to use language creatively without grammar.
- Grammar enables the learner to create an infinity of sentences.
· The fossilisation argument
- Without attention to form the learner usually does not progress beyond the most
basic level of communication (linguistic competence “fossilises”).
- Grammar enables the learner to reach a higher level of language proficiency as the
learner is aware of the underlying framework of the language.
· The advance-organiser argument
- Grammar serves as a prerequisite for language acquisition as it prepares the learner
to notice and thereby acquire language patterns.
- Grammar instruction fosters language acquisition through its delayed effect as it
raises the learner’s awareness.
· The discrete item argument
- Grammar allows the dividing up of the complex language system into smaller units
and thereby reduces the enormity of language to a systematic, digestible step by
step learning.
- Grammar enables a clear organisation of language teaching.
· The syllabus argument
- The guidelines of the syllabus do not allow neglecting the teaching of grammar in
school.
1
· The point of reference argument
- Grammar serves the essential function of giving the learner who does not possess a
natural feeling for language a point of reference for using language properly.
- Guidelines provide a sense of security and confidence for the learner.
· The rule-of-law argument
- Grammar enables the transmission of knowledge from the teacher to the learner as
this structured system can be taught, learned and tested.
- Grammar satisfies the need for rules, order and discipline in institutional contexts
such as school.
· The learner expectations argument
- Students expect to learn the foreign language through grammar instruction as they
assume that teaching grammar is a more systematic and efficient approach.
- The learner expectation presents an intrinsic motivation for learning.
Arguments against teaching grammar
· The fundamental role of Lexis argument
Lexis is the basis of language, as Lexis is the carrier of meaning. The focus of
language teaching should therefore be on Lexis, not on grammar.
· The knowledge-how argument
Language is learned by experimental learning – learning by doing – like riding a
bike. It is not learned by simply studying the language, because learners have
difficulties in transferring their knowledge into skills.
Rather than studying grammar, the learner needs classroom experience that
simulates the kind of condition in which s/he is going to use the language.
· The communicative argument
Communication is learned by communicating: the language should be used in
order to be learned. In this way, through activities that simulate life-like
communication, the learner will unconsciously pick up the grammar. “Studying
the rules of grammar is [therefore] simply a waste of time”.
· The acquisition argument
Krashen distinguishes between language learning and language acquisition. He
argues that language acquisition is more successful than language learning, as, in
comparison to language acquisition, which is a natural process, language learning
results from formal institutions and is not as useful for real communication.
· The natural order argument
Learners are born with a Universal Grammar (Chomsky). This (innate Universal
Grammar) helps to explain similarities in the developmental order of the first and
the second language acquisition, which is different to the order in which
grammatical items are presented in most textbooks.
This argument could also be called “the obsolete approach to teaching grammar”
as the order in which grammar is taught needs to be revised
· The lexical chunks argument
Learning lexical chunks is an element of item learning like learning vocabulary or
idioms and plays an important part in the language development and the acquiring
of language. Having learned language chunks makes it easier for the learner to
react in real-time situations. The learning of language chunks like frequently used
and fairly formulaic expressions can substitute the study of abstract grammatical
categories such as the present perfect or conditionals.
-
2
· The prescriptive use of grammar argument
Grammar is not prescriptive and there is not a fixed canon of English grammar.
Students frequently do not understand the meta-language that is used concerning
grammar rules, which produces unnecessary failure.
Often, the emphasis of grammar exercises in textbooks is on the production of
“correct” sentences. However, being preoccupied with the correctness, one might
fail to notice the different varieties of the English language.
· The learner expectations argument
There are learners who want to focus on communication and not on grammar, for
instance, because they want to put their knowledge of the language into use or
because they do not like the learning of grammar very much.
-
Conclusion
The best solution for the school context seems to be a mixture of implicit and explicit
grammar teaching depending on such factors as the respective level of language proficiency
or the language item which is desired to be taught to the learner.
References:
Batsone, Rob. Grammar. Eds. CN Candlin and HG Widdowson. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1994. 3-4
Lewis, M. The lexical Approach. Grammar Content in the Lexical Approach. Hove: Language
Teaching Publications, pp. 133-137
Thornbury, S. (²2002). How to Teach Grammar. Harlow: Pearson Education. Chap. 2: Why teach
Grammar?, 14-28
3