Application
of methods used in Latin and Greek to teaching of modern languages. Rules of
grammar, not the language itself, are all important. Verb declensions are set
out tables, vocabulary lists to be learned, leading to translation from mother
tongue into target language and vice-versa. Little or no attention to
pronunciation.
Assumption
was that language consists of written words and of words which exist in
isolation, as though they were individual bricks which could be translated one
by one into their foreign equivalents and then assessed according to
grammatical rules into sentences in the foreign language.
Underlying
justification for such a method rested upon belief that what should be taught
was not the language itself but the faculty of logical thought and provided
valuable mental discipline, equal to the classics.
·
the
learner wouldacquire the skill of translating in writing from MT to FL and from
FL to MT
·
spoken
form of FL played very little part in the learning process
·
language
was merely a deductive process: from data or a set of rules presented, learner
had to create sentences in FL through transfer techniques.
DISADVANTAGES
1 Even if
learning a language by Grammar-Translation method trained mind in logical
thought, there is little evidence to suggest that this faculty is transferable
to other walks of life beyond the language classroom.When is written
translation of actual use to the learner? Only perhaps after school in
industry, commerce, foreign correspondence, advertising, export orders -
European marketBut how many pupils of modern languages will actually end up
here?
2 This method
gives pupils the wrong idea of what language is and of the relationship between
languages. Language is seen as a collection or words which are isolated and
independent and there must be a corresponding word in the native tongue for
each foreign word he learns (CF present day candidates rendering of 'Quelle est
!a matiere?''Je suis seize')
3
Deplorable to assume that language is only acquired through translation skills,
and this at the expense of oral skills (imagine disaster in, comprehensive
schools with mixed ability classes)
4
Low translation standard - caused by grammaticaltechniques which force learner
to deduce FL sentences 'by selecting from a multiplicity of rules and
exceptions and individualised words. Inevitable that language learning process
should fall down.
In
5 year 'O' level courses, candidate faced over 1000 rules, together with
exceptions, in preparation for examination based on translation.
After
5 years learning a language, the average '0' level candidate could make up to 160
errors in translation paper and fail this part of the exam.
5 In GB
translation used to constitute the greater part of 'O' and 'A' level exam (
oral getting 20% and 12% respectively ). Was this really useful / - only served
small minority of learners.
6
IQ of average grammar school child not high enough to cope with this method
(imagine response of mixed-ability group in comprehensive school!)
(imagine response of mixed-ability group in comprehensive school!)
7 Prof Carl
Dodson: "Any system which allows only the few to acquire true knowledge,
very often in spite of the system, can no longer claim self-perpetuating
power"
Language
teachers -a dying breed? - lack of language teachers / lack of students beyond
Yr 9!
8 Worst
effect of this method is on pupil's motivation. Because (s)he cannot succeed -
leads to frustration, boredom and indiscipline.
Even
among more able pupils who may be able to achieve a higher level of success,
there is feeling that this is all there is to language learning. Not a
rewarding or satisfying activity.. Language learning should be fun and bring
some joy and pride in achievement with it.
Below
is an example of the rigours of learning via the pure Grammar Method as
illustrated by Professor Carl J Dodson.
Working
through the mechanics of this imaginary language and undertaking the
translation exercises shows how much this approach relies on cognitive ability.
C.J.Dodson.'Language
Learning and the Bilingual Method'
GRAMMAR
|
|||||||||
DEFINITIVE ARTICLE
|
VERB ENDINGS
|
||||||||
Masc
|
Fem
|
Neut
|
PL
|
1 -en
|
|||||
Nominative
|
Me
|
Men
|
Mas
|
Len
|
Sing
|
2 -a
|
|||
Idiotive
|
Det
|
Def
|
Dof
|
Ten
|
3 -o
|
||||
Imaginative
|
Jeb
|
Kin
|
Los
|
Fen
|
|||||
Illogitive
|
Tal
|
Sib
|
Pen
|
Ken
|
1 -ens
|
||||
Plural
|
2 -ato
|
||||||||
3 -unt
|
|||||||||
VOCCABULARY
|
|||||||||
sabla
|
(m)
|
chair
|
abro
|
under
|
list
|
put
|
|||
maldi
|
(f)
|
table
|
lef
|
on
|
cord
|
throw
|
|||
labro
|
(f)
|
book
|
parti
|
against
|
nu
|
to be
|
|||
gardi
|
(m)
|
Boy
|
|||||||
randos
|
(n)
|
floor
|
|||||||
borden
|
(n)
|
ceiling
|
Notes
If an object. is under 2
ft high from ground level, the Idiotive case is used.
If an object is 2 t over from ground level, the Imaginative case is used
A chair is always considered to be less than 2 ft high, no matter what its actual height may be.
If an object is 2 t over from ground level, the Imaginative case is used
A chair is always considered to be less than 2 ft high, no matter what its actual height may be.
Direct = object Illogitive
Example: The chair is under the
table / Det sabla nmabro kin maldi
Translate the sentences:-
1) The book is under the chair.
2) The boy puts the book on the table.
3) The boy puts the book on the floor.
4) The boy throws the book against the ceiling.
5) The boy throws the books against the ceiling
2) The boy puts the book on the table.
3) The boy puts the book on the floor.
4) The boy throws the book against the ceiling.
5) The boy throws the books against the ceiling
Sources:
www.aber.ac.uk/~mflwww/seclangacq/langteach3.htm-02.09.2012
D.N. Aloysius
No comments:
Post a Comment