book language teaching metodologies(2)(2)

8/12/2019 Book Language Teaching Metodologies(2)(2)

1/77

Maya Pentcheva,

Todor Shopov

Whole Language, Whole Person

A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology

Edited by ilo!ena "apucho and

Peter Hanenberg

Sofia, #iseu, $%%%

Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 1


2/77


3/77

ore&ord

This 4oo5 is written within the fra+ewor5 of theExchange to ChangeProect. e have 4een tr-ing the find o!t what the +ethodological

i+plications of the awareness res!lting fro+ reflective +o4ilit- are. &s there

an- +ethodological val!e8 added in res!lt of the visiting and welco+ing

e$periences of lang!age teachers and learners in +o4ilit-9 !r ai+ is to

offer so+e orientation into the general ed!cational concerns of the Proect.

The tas5 is for+ida4le. &t is the foc!s of +an- different lines of e$ploration.

&n his poe+ ittle /idding8 in!our "uarters; T. S. #liot p!ts it in this wa-:

e shall not cease fro+ e$ploration

(nd the end of all o!r e$ploring

ill 4e to arrive where we started

(nd 5now the place for the first ti+e.


4/77

literat!re is of co!rse e$tensive; so we shall 4e pointing o!t so+e of the

good 4oo5s on the topics presented.

e have !st +entioned the ter+ foreign lang!age8> thro!gho!t the 4oo5

we shall !se it interchangea4l- with the ter+ second lang!age8. ere; we

shall consider the+ s-non-+o!s al4eit we reali=e that the- can 4e easil-

disting!ished. &n the literat!re; second lang!age8 !s!all- refers to a target

lang!age that is 4eing ta!ght in the co!ntr- where it is the do+inant

lang!age; whereas foreign lang!age8 !s!all- refers to a target lang!age that

is 4eing ta!ght in the co!ntr- where it is not the do+inant lang!age.

owever; we do not find this distinction ?!ite relevant for the foc!s of this

4oo5.

( decade ago; . S. Pra4h!; the fa+o!s &ndian +ethodologist; pointed o!t

that lang!age teaching faced three +aor pro4le+s; @1A the +eas!re+ent oflang!age co+petence involves elicitation @in so+e for+A of specific

lang!age 4ehavio!r 4!t the relationship 4etween s!ch elicited 4ehavio!r and

lang!age co+petence which +anifests itself in nat!ral !se is !nclear; @2A

given the view that the develop+ent of ling!istic co+petence is a holistic

process; there is not eno!gh 5nowledge availa4le either to identif- and

assess different inter+ediate stages of that develop+ent or to relate those

stages to so+e ta4le of nor+s which can 4e said to represent e$pectations;

and @3A there is; !lti+atel-; no wa- of attri4!ting with an- certaint- an-

specific piece of learning to an- specific teaching: lang!age learning can

ta5e place independentl- of teaching intentions and it is i+possi4le to tell

what has 4een learnt 4eca!se of so+e teaching; and what in spite of it8

@Pra4h! 1*B7; BA. %an- things have happened in the field of lang!age

teaching +ethodolog- since then. For e$a+ple; the Co$$on Euro#ean

!ra$e%ork of &eference@Co!ncil of #!rope 1**6 and 1**BA was p!4lished;

Euro#ean Language Council@http:www.f!)4erlin.deelcA was fo!nded;

Euro#ean Language Portfolio@Scharer 1***A was la!nched and so on.

onetheless; Pra4h!Ds clai+s are still valid. e shall foc!s on a range of

?!estions in the light of +odern +ethodological develop+ents tr-ing to state

the scientific facts. !r own opinion e+erges in the disc!ssion now andthen; tho!gh. e hope o!r fort!ito!s acade+ic 4ias will 4e !nderstood.

The 4oo5 is written in #nglish and o!r e$a+ples co+e fro+ #nglish 4!t we

do not intend to pro+ote a lingua Ada$ica restituta. e 4elieve in

pl!riling!alis+ and pl!ric!lt!ralis+ and o!r inade?!ac- is onl- 4eca!se of

o!r teleological pr!dence. The 4oo5 is a colla4orative effort 4!t the

Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology ,


5/77

responsi4ilit- of the a!thors is individ!al. %a-a Pencheva wrote Chapter 1

and Todor Shopov prepared Chapters 2; 3 and ,.

Chapter 1 offers a theoretical orientation into the philosophical fo!ndations

of +ethodolog-. Cognitive and other principles of lang!age teaching and

learning are disc!ssed. &t is clai+ed that the Pict!re of the orld; which we

all 5eep in o!r +inds; deter+ines the wa- we spea5. This relativistic

perspective and other ideas have fo!nd different applications in teaching.

The- are e$plored in Chapter 2. &t is a 4rief historical overview of teaching

+ethods. The three +aor periods of the develop+ent of +ethodolog- in the

twentieth cent!r- are presented. Chapter 3 disc!sses the +ore specific the+e

of the approach level of teaching +ethods. The a!thors arg!e that

ed!cational paradig+ shift has had a prono!nced i+pact on lang!age

+ethodolog-. Partic!lar plans for a lang!age c!rric!l!+; which constit!tes

the relativel- concrete design level of teaching +ethods; are +ade inChapter ,. The ?!estion of +odern c!rric!l!+ design and develop+ent is

e$a+ined in it. The 4oo5 f!nctions as a whole te$t. e reco++end that the

reader speed)read the 4oo5 first. Then; the appropriate readings can 4e

selected easil-. owever; the reader can approach it as a co+pendi!+;

4rowsing onl- thro!gh the relevant sections.

e want to ac5nowledge the enco!rage+ent and s!pport e$tended to !s 4-

+an- people. e have had the good fort!ne to wor5 with Filo+ena Cap!cho

of Eniversidade Catolica Port!g!esa Centro egional das Geiras Polo de

Hise!; PT; Proect /eneral Coordinator; and o!r Partners fro+ ogs5olan

al+ar; S#; Centro de Professores - ec!rsos de Sala+anca; #S; Centro de

Professores - ec!rsos de Hitig!dino; #S; &nstit!t Eniversaire de For+ation

des %aitres dD(!vergne; F; S5ar!p Statsse+inari!+; ' and Eniversitat

Sal=4!rg; (T. e also wish to ac5nowledge o!r deep sense of inde4tedness

to o!r colleag!es at the Fac!lt- of Classical and %odern Philolog-; Sofia

Eniversit- St. li+ent hrids5i; G/. !r wor5 wo!ld have hardl- 4een

possi4le witho!t the order introd!ced in the s-ste+ 4- (le$ Fedotoff. e are

especiall- gratef!l to Peter anen4erg of Eniversidade Catolica Port!g!esa

Centro egional das Geiras Polo de Hise!; PT; who had the idea of this4oo5 first; for his e$a+ple and help.

To all these people; +an- than5s.

Sofia; 'ece+4er 1***

Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology "


6/77

"hapter $' Principles of Teaching

&n hisPrinci#les of Language Learning and Teaching; . 'o!glas Grownnotes that there are I4est of ti+es and worst of ti+es8 in the lang!age

teaching profession @Grown 1**,aA. e can safel- sa- that this is the 4est of

ti+es for the foreign lang!age teacher. Toda-; we 5now +!ch a4o!t foreign

lang!age ac?!isition; a4o!t child ac?!isition of lang!age; a4o!t cognitive

processes; etc. &t is also ver- i+portant that we have co+e to an appreciation

of the e$tre+e co+ple$it- of this field. This gives !s ca!tio!s opti+is+ to

pl!nge even deeper into the pro4le+s.

Foreign lang!age teachers and ed!cators are often confronted with the

?!estion Jhat +ethod or what s-ste+ do -o! !se in teaching a foreign

lang!age9J %ost often the answer does not co+e easil- or if one gives a

straightforward answer; he ris5s to 4e s!4ected to criticis+. Teachers

alwa-s have to $ake choices. These choices are +otivated 4- the fact that

the- rest on certain#rinci#lesof lang!age learning and teaching. ow that

we 5now +!ch +ore a4o!t h!+an lang!age and its vario!s aspects; we can

+a5e the ne$t step and for+!late at least so+e of these principles; which are

4ased on what we 5now a4o!t lang!age itself. ften; swept 4- fashiona4le

theories or a desire to so!nd scholarl-8; we forget a si+ple tr!th %e, as

hu$an beings, teach a hu$an language to hu$an beings. St!dents andteachers of lang!age8; sa-s sgood; will discover the principles of their

science in the !niversalities of h!+anness8 @sgood et al. 1*"7; 301A. (

concise 4!t tr!e definition of +an will pro4a4l- incl!de three +aor

characteristics: @iA one who can reflect and interpret the world aro!nd hi+>

@iiA one who can e$press feelings> and @iiiA one who can !se lang!age. These

characteristics !nderlie three +aor principles of lang!age teaching and

learning. ell 5nown and novice teaching techni?!es can 4e s!4s!+ed

!nder these three headings. %!ltiplicit- of techni?!es can 4e 4ro!ght down

to a n!+4er of +ethods and the +ethods red!ced to a n!+4er of principles.

%astering a great n!+4er of teaching techni?!es will not save -o! in new

sit!ations; not predicted8 4- the theor- 4!t predicta4le. &t will not give -o!

the all)i+portant a4ilit- to rationali=e what -o! are doing and wh- are -o!

doing it. To do that one +!st 4e aware of deeper principles of lang!age

ac?!isition and !se; ste++ing fro+ the fo!ndations of h!+an lang!age as

s!ch.



7/77

$($( "ognitive Principles

e shall call the first set of principles cognitive8 4eca!se the- relate to

+ental; intellect!al and ps-chological fac!lties in operating with lang!age.

&t sho!ld 4e +ade clear; however; that the three t-pes of principles descri4ed

in this chapter; cogniti'e, social and linguistic #rinci#les; do not e$ist as if in

three watertight co+part+ents 4!t rather spill across each other to +a5e !p

the +ost re+ar5a4le a4ilit- of +an the ling!istic a4ilit-.

&t is no wonder that the achieve+ents of +odern cognitive science have

fo!nd s!ch a war+ and fast response in ling!istics. So+e of the post!lates of

cognitive science toda- are cr!cial to o!r !nderstanding of how lang!age

operates and how we ac?!ire this a4ilit-; respectivel-. Geca!se one of the+ost diffic!lt ?!estions in foreign lang!age ac?!isition and child ac?!isition

of lang!age is; ow is it possi4le that children at an earl- age and ad!lts;

late in their life; can +aster a s-ste+ of s!ch i++ense co+ple$it-9 &s it onl-

a +atter of +e+or- capacit- and a!to+atic reprod!ction or is there

so+ething else that helps !s ac?!ire a lang!age9

et !s 4egin with so+e long esta4lished post!lates of foreign lang!age

ac?!isition and see what cognitive theor- has to sa- a4o!t the+.

@1A(!to+aticit- of (c?!isition

o one can disp!te the fact that children ac?!ire a foreign lang!age ?!ic5l-

and s!ccessf!ll-. This ease is co++onl- attri4!ted to childrenDs a4ilit- to

ac?!ire lang!age str!ct!res auto$aticallyandsubconsciously; that is;

witho!t act!all- anal-=ing the for+s of lang!age the+selves. The- appear to

learn lang!ages witho!t thin5ing8 a4o!t the+. This has 4een called 4- G.

%ca!ghlin a!to+atic processing8 @%ca!ghlin 1**0A. &n order to operate

with the incredi4le co+ple$it- of lang!age 4oth children and ad!lt learners

do not process lang!age !nit 4- !nit8 4!t e+plo- operations in whichlang!age str!ct!res and for+s @words; affi$es; endings; word order;

gra++atical r!les; etc.A are peripheral. The Principle of (!to+aticit-; as

stated a4ove; ai+s at an a!to+atic processing of a relativel- !nli+ited

n!+4er of lang!age for+s8. veranal-=ing lang!age; thin5ing too +!ch

a4o!t its for+s tend to i+pede the ac?!isition process. This leads to the

reco++endation to teachers to foc!s on the useof lang!age and its



8/77

functional as#ects. G!t foc!s on !se and f!nctionalit- pres!pposes

+eaningf!l learning; which is in strong contradiction with a!to+aticit-.

hat is +ore; one +aor characteristic 4oth of child ac?!isition and ad!lt

learning of foreign lang!ages is the pheno+enon called hy#ercorrection.

(gain h-percorrection cannot e$ist witho!t +eaningf!l anal-sis of lang!age

str!ct!res and their classification8 into reg!lar patterns8 and e$ceptions8

with respect to a lang!age f!nction.

@2A%eaningf!l earning

%eaningf!l learning s!4s!+es8 new infor+ation into e$isting str!ct!res

and +e+or- s-ste+s. The res!lting associative lin5s create stronger

retention. Children are good +eaningf!l ac?!irers of lang!age 4eca!se the-

associateIwords; str!ct!res and disco!rse ele+ents with that %hich is

rele'ant and i$#ortant in their daily (uest for kno%ledge and sur'i'al8@Grown 1**,4; 1BA. e +!st pa- special attention to this sentence of . '.

Grown; especiall- the last words; !nderlined here. &t will 4e relevant in o!r

arg!+ent in favor of the cognitive principles of lang!age ac?!isition. ne of

the reco++endations for classroo+ application of %eaningf!l earning is

also of relevance to o!r f!rther arg!+ent in this direction. &t states

henever a new topic or concept is introd!ced; atte+pt to anchor it in

st!dentsD e$isting 5nowledge and 4ac5gro!nd so that it gets associated with

so+ething the- alread- 5now8.

So+e thirt-)five -ears ago; a new science was 4orn. ow called Cognitive

Science8; it co+4ines tools fro+ ps-cholog-; co+p!ter science; ling!istics;

philosoph-; child ps-cholog-; and ne!ro4iolog- to e$plain the wor5ings of

h!+an intelligence. ing!istics; in partic!lar; has seen spectac!lar advances

in the -ears since. There are +an- pheno+ena of lang!age that we are

co+ing to !nderstand.

ang!age is not a c!lt!ral artifact that we learn the wa- we learn to tell the

ti+e. &nstead; it is a distinct characteristic of o!r 4rains. ang!age is a

co+ple$; speciali=ed s5ill; which develops in the child. For that reasoncognitive scientists have descri4ed lang!age as a ps-chological and +ental

faculty. The idea that tho!ght is the sa+e thing as lang!age is an e$a+ple of

what can 4e called a conventional a4s!rdit-. ow that cognitive scientists

5now how to thin5 a4o!t thin5ing; there is less of a te+ptation to e?!ate it

with lang!age and we are in a 4etter position to !nderstand how lang!age

wor5s.

Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology B


9/77

&n essence; to reason is to ded!ce new pieces of 5nowledge fro+ old ones.

G!t 5nowledge8 is so+ething co+ple$; the prod!ct of social and c!lt!ral

e$perience fro+ living in a partic!lar world8. &n hisPhiloso#hy of

Language; ilhel+ von !+4oldt clai+s that spea5ing a lang!age +eans

living in a specific concept!al do+ain. (c?!iring a foreign lang!age +eans

entering a new concept!al do+ain. This state+ent poses a +aor pro4le+ or

perhaps the $aor #roble$of ac?!iring a foreign lang!age are these

concept!al do+ains so different that the- are inco+pati4le9 r there are

certain +echanis+s 4- which we can +a5e transitions fro+ the one into the

other9

e shall present arg!+ents in s!pport of the second decision. The pivotal

?!estion is how we interpret !+4oldtDs concept!al do+ains. e will refer

to the+ 4- the ter+ Picture of the World; initiall- !sed in anal-=ing+-tholog- and toda- e+plo-ed 4- cognitive science. The word pict!re8;

tho!gh !s!all- !sed +etaphoricall-; e$presses tr!l- the essence of the

pheno+enon it is a#icture; not a +irror reflection; or a snapshot of the

world aro!nd !s. i5e another pict!re; it pres!pposes a definite point of

view or the attit!de of its creator. &t involves interpretation; representations

of the world fro+ vario!s angles @the so) called facet viewing8A. This of

co!rse i+plies the possi4ilit- to have a n!+4er of different pict!res of one

o4ect. hat is i+portant here is that o!r concept!ali=ation of the world is

not an o4ective reflection of realit-8; 4!t a s!4ective pict!re; which

reflects o!r views; 4eliefs; and attit!des. S!4ective8 in the sense of the

collective interpretation or point of view of a societ- or c!lt!ral and

ling!istic co++!nit-. This pict!re e$plicates the relativit- of h!+an

cognition. &n se+iotics it goes !nder the na+e of passive8 c!lt!ral

+e+or-. Cognitive science; however; reects the ?!alification passive8 and

clai+s that Pict!res of the orld are activel- and c!rrentl- str!ct!red 4-

co++on cognitive +odels. &n connection with !+4oldtDs state+ent; it is

possi4le to pass fro+ one pict!re of the world into another 4- +eans of a set

of !niversal cognitive +echanis+s. This is cr!cial for e$plaining foreign

lang!age ac?!isition. G!t what are those +echanis+s9 (nd what is thenat!re of the evidence9

!r concept!al s-ste+ or Pict!re of the orld is not so+ething that we are

nor+all- aware of. G!t h!+an lang!age is an i+portant so!rce of evidence

for what a pict!re of the world is li5e. n the 4asis of ling!istic evidence we

can sa- that +ost of o!r ever-da- concept!al s-ste+ is +etaphorical in

Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology *


10/77

nat!re. Cognitive science e$plains the essence of +etaphor as !nderstanding

and e$periencing one thing in ter+s of another. The first thing is called

Target 'o+ain @what we want to e$pressA and the second one is called

So!rce 'o+ain @4- +eans of which we e$press the firstA. e can !se; as an

e$a+ple; the wa- we conceive of ti+e in o!r ever-da- life. et !s have the

following ling!istic e$pressions:

)ou are %asting $y ti$e*

This gadget %ill sa'e you hours*

Ho% do you s#endyour ti$e+

That flat tyre %ill cost $e an hour*

-$ running out of ti$e*

The central post!late of cognitive science is that +etaphorical transfer is not

!st a +atter of lang!age; of +ere words. !+an tho!ght processes arelargel- +etaphorical. %etaphor +eans +etaphorical concepts. (nd these are

specificall- str!ct!red. &f we generali=e the e$a+ples a4ove; we co+e !p

with the +etaphor T)ME )S M*+E. This +etaphor entails the treat+ent

of ti+e as a li$ited resourceand a 'aluable co$$odity. The e$a+ples

de+onstrate one t-pe of +etaphorical transfer structural $eta#hor.

n the +ore ling!istic side of the pro4le+; when +etaphorical concepts

4eco+e le$icali=ed; the- help a variet- of people !nderstand what the

concepts +ean. &n other words; the- have a certain didactic role. %etaphors

in co+p!ter ter+inolog-; for e$a+ple; aid !sers spea5ing different

lang!ages 4!t !sing #nglish to !nderstand and re+e+4er new concepts. (t

the sa+e ti+e the- allow !sers to associate !nfa+iliar concepts with old

ones; there4- helping to palliate technostress. Eser friendliness8 of

co+p!ter +etaphorical ter+s can 4e ill!strated 4- the n!+ero!s e$a+ples

fo!nd in the voca4!lar- of !ser interfaces e.g. des5top; wallpaper; and

+en!; to +ention !st a few. &t appears that concept!al do+ains are shaped

4- several the+es. The do+ain of the &nternet feat!res several concept!al

the+es. %ost of these are 4ased on the f!nctions that the &nternet is

perceived to have: @1A helping people +ove8 across vast distances> @2Afacilitate co++!nication> and @3A send and store data. The following

+etaphorical do+ains can present these the+es:



11/77

.* Trans#ortation

The the+e of transportation do+inates &nternet ter+inolog-; specified

so+eti+es as $arine na'igation; high%ay trans#ortation:

to navigate-cruise-surf the )nternet .or the Web/

internaut

cybersurfer

anchor

infor!ation high&ay, data high&ay

to ride-get on the )nternet

router

ra!p-on0ra!p, access ra!p

infobahn

cyberspace

/* Mail and Postal 0er'icese0!ail

snail!ail

!ailbo1

virtual postcard

envelope

1* Architecture

site

gate&aybridge

fra!e

2* The Printed Mediu$

Web page

book!ark

White pages

to bro&se

e0!aga2ine

carbon copy

So+e +etaphorical ter+s have spawned n!+ero!s concept!all- related ones

4- +etaphorical e$tension. 3o#her; for e$a+ple; has given rise to

3o#hers#ace; 3o#her hole. The fa+o!s des5top +etaphor has given rise to

files;folders; trashcans. The +o!se +etaphor has generated $ouse trails

and so on.



12/77

( different t-pe of +etaphorical +odel is the second one; which organi=es a

whole s-ste+ of concepts with respect to one another the so)called

orientation $eta#hor. The- rel- on 4odil- e$perience: !p)down; in)o!t;

front)4ac5; deep)shallow; center)peripher-; etc. S!ch orientation +etaphors

are gro!nded in ph-sical perception and hence !niversal. For e$a+ple:

3p vs. 4o&n

ha##y sad

-$ feeling u#* -$ do%n today*

-$ in high s#irits* My s#irits sank*

Thinking about her gi'es $e a lift* -$ de#ressed*

good health sicknessHe is in to# sha#e* He fell ill*

He is at the #eak of health* He ca$e do%n %ith a

flue*

ha'e control o'er be subect to control

He is in a su#erior #osition* He is $y social inferior*

ha'e control o'er the situation* He is under $y control*

high status lo% status

He-s cli$bing the social ladder fast* He is at the botto$ of the

social hierarchy*

'irtue de#ra'ity

He is an u#standing citi4en* %ouldn-t stoo# to that*

0he is high5$inded* That-s beneath $e*

rational e$otional

His argu$ents rose abo'e e$otions* 6iscussion fell to the

e$otional le'el*

The third t-pe of +etaphor is called ontological. Cognitive science has it

that we !nderstand o!r e$perience in ter+s of o4ects and s!4stances. This

allows !s to pic5 frag+ents of o!r e$perience and treat the+ as discrete

entities or s!4stances. Th!s; we interpret the h!+an +ind as a +aterial

o4ect with specific properties ) the M)+4 )S A MA"H)+E +etaphor:



13/77

My $ind ust isn-t o#erating today*

-$ a little rusty today*

The ex#erience shattered her*

He is easily crushed*

He broke under cross5exa$ination*

The conception of -M)+4 )S A MA"H)+E also ena4les !s to view +ind

as having an off)state; a level of efficienc-; prod!ctive capacit-; internal

+echanis+s; etc. hat is +ore; and it is ver- i+portant; we view 4oth

concept!al do+ains @The Mind and The MachineA as internall- str!ct!red;

so that we can +a5e transfers not onl- 4etween the do+ains as a whole 4!t

also 4etween parts of these do+ains. This process is 5nown as +etaphorical

+apping8. &n this wa-; when we !se a +etaphorical +odel; we can also !se

ele+ents of that +odel with the sa+e effect. etDs ill!strate this with ane$a+ple:

-L)E )S A 5*36+E.

The +apping 4etween the two do+ains is not si+ple. The str!ct!re of

Ko!rne- incl!des; for e$a+ple; point of depart!re; path to destination; +eans

of transportation; co)travelers; o4stacles along the wa- to destination;

crossroads; etc. &t is a+a=ing how o!r concept of life repeats all the details

of o!r concept of o!rne-s. hat is +!ch +ore a+a=ing; however; is not

that we have +an- +etaphors for life; 4!t that we have !st a few. The- are

a+ong the 4asic +etaphors we live 4-.

Gasic +etaphors are li+ited in n!+4er. (+ong the+ are:

-STATES A6EL*"AT)*+S-

-E#E+TS A6E A"T)*+S-

-PE*PLE A6E PLA+TS-

-PE*PLE A6E "*+TA)+E6S-

-L)E )S A 5*36+E-

G- +eans of the+ we can interpret all e$isting +etaphorical +odels:

-L)E )S A 5*36+E-

7 -E#E+TS A6E A"T)*+S-

-L)E )S A PLA-



14/77

-L)E )S A P6E")*3S P*SSESS)*+-

-L)E )S A S38STA+"E-

7 -PE*PLE A6E "*+TA)+E6S-

-L)E )S A L3)4-

-L)E )S L)9HT-

7 -PE*PLE A6E PLA+TS-

-4EATH )S 4A6:+ESS-

-4EATH )S 4EPA6T36E- L L)E )S A 5*36+E-

4EATH )S SLEEP-6EST- L STATES A6E L*"AT)*+S-.

e !nderstand the So!rce 'o+ains of 4asic +etaphors rel-ing on o!r

ever-da- e$perience 4odil- e$perience and social e$perience. This +eans

that the- are not independent of thin5ing and cognition.

hat +otivates o!r a4ilit- to create and !nderstand +etaphorical str!ct!res9

(ccording to cognitive science; these are cognitive and ps-chological

characteristics; which are ele+ents of o!r species specific as h!+an 4eings.

The- are:

@1A !r a4ilit- to create str!ct!res in concepts that do not e$ist

independent of the +etaphor; i.e. o!r a4ilit- for +odeling;

@2A !r a4ilit- to choose and e$plicate optional ele+ents fro+

concept!al str!ct!res;

@3A !r a4ilit- to +a5e concl!sions and inferences;

@,A !r a4ilit- to eval!ate and transfer eval!ations of ele+ents of the

So!rce 'o+ain onto the Target 'o+ain.

!r +ental a4ilit- for +odeling ena4les !s to operate easil- with e$tre+el-

co+ple$ concept!al str!ct!res. ( ver- good e$a+ple is the notion ofM+otherD. &t co+prises si$ s!4)+odels:

@iAGirth

Mother is the one &ho gives birth to a child(

@iiA/enetic

Mother is the one &ho carries the e!bryo(

Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 1,


15/77

@iiiAGreeding

Mother is the one &ho feeds and cares for the baby(

@ivA%arriage

Mother is the one &ho is !arried to the child;s father(

@vA/enealogical

Mother is the closest fe!ale relative(

@viA o!sewife

Mothers stay at ho!e and care for the fa!ily(

S!4)+odels @iA; @iiiA; and @ivA for+ the core of the concept. The- 4!ild the

stereoty#ei+age of a +other. S!4)+odels @iA; @iiA; and @vA descri4e what a

+other is 7obecti'ely8@4iologicall-A. (nd @iA; @iiA; @iiiA; and @ivA descri4e

what a +other nor+all-is; i.e. the#rototy#ical+other. This protot-pe

re+ains sta4le cross)c!lt!rall-. (ll si$ s!4)+odels descri4e the ideal+other.

This ideal changes historicall- and across c!lt!res.

Th!s; we operate with several i+ages. The +ost i+portant are the stereot-pe

and the ideal. Her- often the- have separate ling!istic e$pressions. Th!s in

#nglish we disting!ish 4etween the 4iological and the ideal father. e can

nor+all- as5

Who is the child-s father+

4!t not

NWho is the child-s daddy+

4eca!se the ideal i+plies caring for the fa+il- and 4eing +arried to the

childDs +other. &n the M+otherD concept the 4iological and the social are

insepara4le. (ll deviations fro+ the +odel are interpreted as highl- +ar5ed;

i.e. e$ceptions fro+ the ideal. For that reason the- are consistentl- +ar5ed

ling!isticall-:

ste#$other

surrogate $other

foster $other

ado#ti'e $other

donor $otherbiological $other

e can s!++ari=e all +etaphorical +odels into a s+all n!+4er of Gasic

%odels:

Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 1"


16/77

-9E+E6AL )S SPE"))"-

-A8ST6A"T )S "*+"6ETE-

-T)ME )S SPA"E-

-S*")AL )S +AT36AL-

-ME+TAL )S PHS)"AL-

ow can we appl- these principles; +echanis+s and +odels in teaching a

lang!age and teaching a4o!t lang!age9 e can do that in a n!+4er of wa-s:

&. n the diachronic level

There is a +ar5ed parallelis+ 4etween c!rrent #nglish +etaphors and

+odels of se+antic change. iving +etaphors and se+antic change are

related and +!t!all- reinforcing. This e$plains the co++onalit- of s!ch

+etaphors in the &ndo)#!ropean lang!ages thro!gh ti+e. G- !sing cognitive+odels we can ex#lain4!t also teachthe esta4lished one)wa- directions of

se+antic change. For e$a+ple; &ndo)#!ropean lang!ages follow consistentl-

certain +etaphorical transfers:

1. ME+TAL A"T)#)T )S M*T)*+ )+ PHS)"AL SPA"E-,

e.g. re#ort

L atin Mcarr- 4ac5D

refer

This direction of se+antic change is paralleled 4- the e$istence of

s-nchronic +etaphorical sche+es in which ph-sical +otion is !sed as the

So!rce 'o+ain for +ore a4stract notions li5e Mti+eD or M+ental activit-D.

Shifts in the opposite direction are !n5nown.

2. -ME+TAL STATES A6E PHS)"AL PE6"EPT)*+-,

e.g. kno%L MseeD

re$arkL obser'eL Mloo5 closel- atD

3. -ME+TAL STATES A6E PHS)"AL M*T)*+-,

e.g.su##oseM!nderstandD L atinsubO#onereMp!t !nderD



17/77

,. -ME+TAL STATES A6E MA+)P3LAT)*+ * *85E"TS )+

SPA"E-,

e.g. co$#rehendL atin Msei=eD

gras#2 M!nderstandD Lgras#1 M sei=e in the handD

get2 M!nderstandD Lget1 Mac?!ire a ph-sical entit-D

decideL atin deO caedoMc!t off fro+D

confuseL atin conOfundereMpo!r together; +i$D

#referL atin#raeOferreMcarr- 4eforeD

deduceL atin deO ducereMlead o!t fro+D

inferL atin inOfereMcarr- inD

#resu$eL atin#raeOsu$ereMta5e 4eforeD

This is the +ost prod!ctive +etaphor with M%ental stateD ver4s in #nglish.

The +anip!lation with ideas is seen as holding; to!ching; +oving; !niting;

separating; arranging; and re)ordering the+; li5e ph-sical o4ects.

". -SPEE"H "*MM3+)"AT)*+ )S SPAT)AL 6ELAT)*+-,

e.g. #ro#oseL atin#roO#onereMp!t forwardD

'ata de+onstrate a sta4le direction in +eaning change: aA ver4s of MPh-sical

+otionlocationD ver4s of M%ental stateDDSpeech actsD> 4A ver4s of M%ental

stateD ver4s of MSpeech actsD; 4!t never in the opposite direction. Therefore

se+antic change tends to +ove towards +ore#ersonal+eanings; +eanings

closer to the Self.

6. -SPEE"H A"TS A6E MA+)P3LAT)*+ * *85E"TS )+

SPA"E-,

e.g. ad$itL atin adO $ittereMsend toD

assertL atin adOserereMconnect toD

ad) e$pressing Mdirection fro+ spea5er to hearerD

re#lyL atin reO#licareMfeed 4ac5D

refuseL atin reOfutareM4eat 4ac5D

re) e$pressing Mdirection fro+ hearer to spea5erD

7. -ME+TAL A"T)#)T-SPEE"H A"T )S T6A#EL )+

SPA"E-,

e.g. We ha'en-t got any%here in this con'ersation*

9o% %e $ust go back to the $ain issue*



18/77

otice also the !se of spatial prepositions 4oth with MSpeech actD and

M%ental activit-D ver4s:

e.g. talk think

about o'er

%alk go

This shows that we conceive of a speech act as a distance 4etween the two

co++!nicating parties; a ro!te along which ideasQo4ects can travel or 4e

e$changed. This is a replica of the +odel of MPh-sical actionD ver4s; with

their reg!lar contrast 4etween toand atprepositions:

e.g. thro% to talk to shout to

at at at

to; e$pressing active participation on the part of the receiverQhearer; as!ccessf!l co+pletion of the traector- of the action; and at; e$pressing an

inactive receiverQhearer.

Since MSpeech actD ver4s involve e$change 4etween two parties; i.e. action;

the- can also have a +etaphorical variant li5e SPEE"H A"TS A6E

WA6A6E-,

e.g. concedeL atin conO cedereMgive !pD

insistL atin inOsistereMstand inD

con'inceL atin conO 'incereMcon?!er togetherD.

&&. n the s-nchronic level

S-nchronicall-; we can e+plo- +etaphorical transfer +odels to teach

se+antic fields and e$plain se+antic e$tension. Th!s; M!+an e+otionsD

can 4e e$plained thro!gh MTe+perat!reD; MCoo5ing activitiesD; or MColo!rsD;

e.g. hot te$#er cold #erson%ar$ friendshi# our friendshi# has cooled

boil %ith indignation take it cool

burn %ith e$otion

si$$er %ith anger

be in a ste%*

Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 1B


19/77

ther spheres of lang!age teaching or ling!istic anal-sis where we can appl-

the sa+e +echanis+ of e$planation are s-non-+-; phraseolog-;

develop+ent of gra++atical categories and for+s of their e$pression;

predo+inant word order; etc. e shall de+onstrate the validit- of this

approach in teaching gra++ar; !sing a!$iliar- ver4s as an e$a+ple.

There is a sta4le tendenc- for a li+ited set of notional ver4s; with specific

+eaning; to t!rn; over ti+e; into a!$iliar- ver4s of anal-tical constr!ctions

@the perfect tenses; the progressive tenses; and the f!t!re tenseA. The le$ical

so!rces for a!$iliaries in s!ch constr!ctions !s!all- incl!de notions li5e:

PHS)"AL L*"AT)*+: be on;at;in no$inal for$

M*#EME+T T* A 9*AL:go


20/77

gi'e*

There are a n!+4er of i++ediate ?!estions that arise. &s this r!le of

a!$iliation8 d!e to p!re coincidence> does it res!lt fro+ geographic or

genetic closeness of lang!ages> or co!ld this 4e the reflection of so+e

f!nda+ental cognitive principle that gets act!ali=ed in ling!istic str!ct!re9

e can post!late that this process of a!$iliation is the reflection of a 4asic

principle in h!+an concept!ali=ation; na+el- that a4stract notions are

concept!ali=ed 4- +eans of a li+ited n!+4er of concrete 4asic concepts. e

can +a5e an even stronger clai+ that le$ical so!rces for gra++ati=ation in

general involve notions 4asic to h!+an e$perience @4odil- and socialA that

provide central reference points.

$(


21/77

and its categories; which are a reflection of o!r wa- of life and the

environ+ent; give partic!lar shape to o!r wa- of thin5ing. That is; spea5ing

a partic!lar lang!age; -o! are also a partic!lar linguistic self. (s h!+an

4eings learn a foreign lang!age; the- also develop a new +ode of thin5ing

and acting the- enter a new identit-. G!t this new lang!age ego8;

intertwined with the new lang!age itself; can create a sense of !ncertaint-;

defensiveness; even h!+iliation; and raise inhi4itions. earners can feel this

4eca!se the arsenals of their native)lang!age egos +a- 4e s!ddenl- !seless

in developing a second self8.

The foreign lang!age teacher is the +aor factor in the for+ation of this

second self8. is choice of techni?!es needs to 4e cognitivel- challenging

to achieve the acco++odation of the learner to his new world8. &f the

st!dent is learning the foreign lang!age in the +ilie! of the co!ntr- where it

is spo5en; then he is li5el- to e$perience an identit- crisis8. To avoid thisthe teacher +!st create8 appropriate nat!ral8 sit!ations for the learner so

that he can practice his new identit-.

et !s ta5e one ordinar- e$a+ple learning to write co+positions in

#nglish. St!dents whose teachers !rge the+ to red!ce the n!+4er of ti+es

the- !se the prono!n &8 in their essa-s @or; conversel-; enco!rage the !se of

&8A +a- 4e s!rprised to discover that in so+e c!lt!res this gra++atical

choice has profo!nd c!lt!ral and even political connotations. ( Chinese

st!dent is ta!ght to !se alwa-s we8 instead of &8 lest he give the

i+pression of 4eing selfish and individ!alistic. Starting to st!d- #nglish he

re?!ired to i+agine loo5ing at the world with his head !pside down8 and to

invent a new #nglish self8 that co!ld !se the prono!n &8. earning to write

an essa- in #nglish is not an isolated classroo+ activit-; 4!t a social and

c!lt!ral e$perience. earning the r!les of #nglish essa- writing is; to a

certain e$tent; learning the val!es of (nglo)(+erican societ-. riting

essa-s in #nglish; a Chinese st!dent has to reprogra+8 his +ind; to

redefine so+e of the 4asic concepts and val!es that he had a4o!t hi+self;

a4o!t societ-.

!le n!+4er one in #nglish co+position writing is: Ge -o!rself8. G!t

writing +an- &Ds8 is onl- the 4eginning of the process of redefining oneself.

G- s!ch a redefinition is +eant not onl- the change of how one envisioned

oneself; 4!t also a change in how he perceived the world. The Chinese

st!dent grad!all- creates his new #nglish Self8.



22/77

@2A The ang!age)C!lt!re Connection

#ver-one 5nows what is s!pposed to happen when two #nglish+en who

have never +et 4efore co+e face to face in a railwa- co+part+ent the-

start tal5ing a4o!t the weather. G- tal5ing to the other person a4o!t so+e

ne!tral topic li5e the weather; it is possi4le to stri5e !p a relationship with

hi+ witho!t act!all- having to sa- ver- +!ch. Conversations of this 5ind

are a good e$a+ple of the sort of i+portant social f!nction that is often

f!lfilled 4- lang!age. G- tr-ing to +aster this f!nction of lang!age; the

learner is 4!ilding part of his new lang!age identit-.

&t is well 5nown; and often h!+oro!sl- e$aggerated; that the Gritish alwa-s

tal5 a4o!t the weather. &n his fa+o!s 4oo5;Ho% To >e an Alien,/eorge

%i5es @1*70A disc!sses the weather as the first and +ost i+portant topic for

a person who wants to learn #nglish. ere is his co++ent:

This is the +ost i+portant topic in the land. 'o not 4e +isled 4- +e+ories

of -o!r -o!th when; on the Continent; wanting to descri4e so+eone as

e$ceptionall- d!ll; -o! re+ar5ed: Me is the t-pe who wo!ld disc!ss the

weather with -o!.D &n #ngland; this is an ever)interesting; even thrilling

topic; and -o! +!st 4e good at disc!ssing the weather.

#R(%P#S F CH#S(T&

For /ood eather

Movel- da-; isnDt it9D

M&snDt it 4ea!tif!l9D

MThe s!nID

M&snDt it gorgeo!s9D

Monderf!l; isnDt it9D

M&tDs so nice and hotID

MPersonall-; & thin5 itDs so nice when itDs hot isnDt it9D

M& adore it donDt -o!9D

For Gad eather

Mast- da-; isnDt it9D

M&snDt it dreadf!l9D

MThe rainI& hate rainID



23/77

M& donDt li5e it at all. 'o -o!9D

MFanc- s!ch a da- in K!l-. ain in the +orning; then a 4it of s!nshine; and

then rain; rain; rain; all da- long.D

M& re+e+4er e$actl- the sa+e K!l- in 1*36.D

M


24/77

e cannot 4e certain that all the f!nctions of lang!age descri4ed in

ling!istic literat!re are to 4e fo!nd in all c!lt!res. The relative i+portance of

these different f!nctions +a- var- fro+ c!lt!re to c!lt!re; their distri4!tion

+a- var-. For an-one to participate in the life of a co++!nit- he has to 4e

a4le to co++!nicate and 4e co++!nicated to. That is wh- the learner is

learning a lang!age. This does not +ean that the range of f!nctions ai+ed at

4- a foreign lang!age learner will 4e that at the co++and of the native

spea5er. ( lang!age learner +a- 5now e$actl- what he wants the foreign

lang!age for; or he +a- have no clear idea at all. G!t for +an- teaching

operations we need to specif- the ai+s.

!r a4ilit- to participate as +e+4ers of social and lang!age co++!nities

depends !pon o!r control of ling!istic and other 4ehavio!r considered

appropriate. The learner of a foreign lang!age is preparing to !se thatlang!age for certain p!rposes; in certain roles and in certain sit!ations. %an-

writers spea5 of the ling!istic needs of the learner in ter+s of roles he +a-

ass!+e. The pri+ar- role ascri4ed to hi+ will 4e that of foreigner; in which

his co++!nicative needs are nor+all- going to 4e +ore restricted than those

of the native spea5er. &n preparing a teaching progra++e or choosing a

teaching strateg-; we have to ta5e into acco!nt what the learnerDs needs +a-

4e and we +!st do so in ter+s of the social sit!ations she is going to have to

participate in; perhaps not as a f!ll +e+4er8 4!t as a foreign associate8. &n

this connection; it is appropriate to re+ind again of the wonderf!l 4oo5 of

/eorge %i5es containing val!a4le advice to foreigners not to pretend to 4e

native spea5ers. ere is what %i5es sa-s a4o!t foreigners; tr-ing to ac?!ire

perfect8 #nglish and so!nd li5e native spea5ers.

&n the first wee5 after +- co+ing to #ngland & pic5ed !p a tolera4le

wor5ing 5nowledge of the lang!age and the ne$t seven -ears convinced +e

grad!all- 4!t thoro!ghl- that & wo!ld never 5now it reall- well; let alone

perfectl-. This is sad. %- onl- consolation 4eing that no4od- spea5s #nglish

perfectl-.

&f -o! live here long eno!gh -o! will find o!t to -o!r greatesta+a=e+ent that the adective nice is not the onl- adective the lang!age

possesses; in spite of the fact that in the first three -ears -o! do not need to

learn or !se another adective.

Then -o! have to decide on -o!r accent.


25/77

accent at all is to hold an !nlit pipe in -o!r +o!th; to +!tter 4etween -o!r

teeth and finish -o!r sentences with the ?!estion: Misn;t it=D People will not

!nderstand +!ch; 4!t the- are acc!sto+ed to that and the- will get the +ost

e$cellent i+pression.

The +ost s!ccessf!l atte+pts to p!t on a highl- c!lt!red air have 4een

on the pol-s-lla4ic line. %an- foreigners; who have learned atin and /ree5

in school; discover with a+a=e+ent and satisfaction that the #nglish

lang!age has a4sor4ed a h!ge a+o!nt of ancient /ree5 and atin

e$pressions; and the- reali=e that @aA it is +!ch easier to learn these

e$pressions than the +!ch si+pler #nglish words> @4A that these words are as

a r!le inter+ina4l- long and +a5e a si+pl- s!per4 i+pression when tal5ing

to the greengrocerI8

$(>( Linguistic Principles

The last categor- of principles of lang!age learning and teaching centres on

lang!age itself and on how learners deal with this co+ple$ and ill)for+ed

s-ste+ @see Chapter ,A.

#arlier in this cent!r-; #dward Sapir wrote: hen it co+es to ling!istic

for+; Plato wal5s with the %acedonian swineherd; Conf!ci!s with the head)

h!nting savage of (ssa+.8 There is a considera4le 5nowledge availa4le

a4o!t the nat!re of h!+an lang!age. ing!istics provides a growing 4od- of

scientific 5nowledge a4o!t lang!age; which can g!ide the activit- of the

lang!age teacher. ing!ists can +a5e and have +ade great contri4!tions to

the sol!tion of so+e of the pro4le+s.

ang!age is s!ch a co+ple$ pheno+enon that it cannot 4e f!ll- acco!nted

for within one consistent and co+prehensive theor-. For this reason; when

as5ed the ?!estion Jhat is lang!age9J the ling!ist is li5el- to repl- 4-

as5ing another ?!estion Jh- do -o! want to 5now9J &f we teach lang!age;the wa- we approach the tas5 will 4e infl!enced; or even deter+ined; 4-

what we 4elieve lang!age to 4e. There is generall- a close connection

4etween the wa- we tal5 a4o!t so+ething and the wa- we regard it.

ing!ists; especiall-; often tal5 a4o!t how lang!age wor5s8. The ling!istic

approach to lang!age is the +ost o4ectivising8 approach: it is concerned

with lang!age as a s-ste+> it ai+s to el!cidate the str!ct!re of lang!age. To



26/77

do this it has set !p vario!s levels of description8. These levels 4ear s!ch

fa+iliar na+es as s-nta$; +orpholog-; phonolog- and phonetics; le$is and

se+antics; prag+atics; etc.

The st!d- of lang!age is 4eset 4- the diffic!lt- that it deals with so+ething

!tterl- fa+iliar. #ver-4od- 5nows8 a4o!t lang!age; 4eca!se the- !se it all

the ti+e. The pro4le+ of st!d-ing pheno+ena li5e lang!age is to separate it

fro+ o!rselves; to achieve a ps-chic distance8 @Cho+s5- 1*6BA.

Perhaps the +ost cogent criticis+ of traditional lang!age teaching with its

insistence on correctness; the r!les of gra++ar; and its li+ited o4ectives; is

that it lac5ed the socio)c!lt!ral di+ension. ittle tho!ght see+s to have 4een

given to the notion of appropriateness; to the wa- that lang!age 4ehavio!r is

responsive to differing social sit!ations. &t is one of the great val!es of

+odern lang!age teaching that it adopts a +ore social approach to lang!age;and it is concerned with the pro4le+s of its co++!nicative f!nction.

The relevance of the ling!istic approach to lang!age teaching is too o4vio!s

to need +!ch disc!ssion here. ne point +!st 4e +entioned; however.

%odern teachers of lang!age are act!all- teaching their st!dents not onl-

the language4!t also about language. %odern ling!istics re?!ires that a

gra++ar sho!ld accord with a native spea5erDs int!itions a4o!t lang!age.

This for+!lates a new goal for ling!istic theor-. ow ling!ists descri4e

what native spea5ers conceive to 4e the nat!re of their lang!age. The

e+phasis has shifted fro+ the nat!re of lang!age data to the nat!re of the

h!+an capacit-; which +a5es it possi4le to prod!ce the lang!age data. So+e

ling!ists; Cho+s5- a+ong the+; wo!ld clai+ that the o4ectives of the

ling!istic st!d- of lang!age have alwa-s i+plicitl- 4een the characteri=ation

of the internali=ed set of r!les 4- a spea5er)hearer @and learnerA when he

!ses lang!age. S!ch ling!ists do not st!d- what people do when the- spea5

and !nderstand lang!age; 4!t see5 to discover the r!les !nderl-ing this

perfor+ance. This is what Cho+s5- calls co$#etence@1*66a; *A: J(

distinction +!st 4e +ade 4etween what the spea5er of a lang!age 5nows

i+plicitl- @what we +a- call his co+petenceA and what he does @hisperfor+anceA. ( gra++ar; in the traditional view; is an acco!nt of

co+petenceJ.

The spea5erDs co+petence; then; can 4e characteri=ed as a set of r!les for

prod!cing and !nderstanding sentences in a lang!age. The gra++ar of a

lang!age; th!s; in its ling!istic sense; is a characteri=ation of the native



27/77

spea5erDs co+petence. (ll spea5ers of a lang!age var- slightl- in the r!les

the- follow; as well; of co!rse; as in their perfor+ance. hen we are

teaching a foreign lang!age; we are tr-ing to develop in the learner not !st

gra$$atical co$#etence; in the Cho+s5-an sense; 4!t co$$unicati'e

co$#etence. e are teaching hi+ or her not onl- what we call the

for+ation r!les8 of the lang!age; 4!t also in addition; what -+es has

called the spea5ing r!les8. The learner +!st develop the a4ilit- to

disting!ish gra++atical fro+ !ngra++atical se?!ences; 4!t he +!st also

5now when to select a partic!lar gra++atical se?!ence; appropriate to the

conte$t; 4oth ling!istic and sit!ational.

'ifferent f!nctions of lang!age can 4e associated with the factors involved

in a speech act the spea5er; the hearer; contact 4etween the+; the ling!istic

code !sed; the topic and the for+ of the +essage. &f the orientation is

towards the spea5er; then we have the personal f!nction of lang!age. &t isthro!gh this f!nction that the spea5er reveals his attit!de towards what he is

spea5ing a4o!t. &t is not !st that he e$presses his tho!ghts and e+otions

thro!gh lang!age; 4!t his e+otions and attit!des at what he is tal5ing a4o!t.

earer)oriented speech acts involve the directive f!nction of lang!age. &t is

the f!nction of controlling the 4ehavio!r of a participant. This can 4e done

4- co++and; re?!est or warning; or 4- so+e general ad+onitor- state+ent;

4- invo5ing legal; +oral or c!sto+ar- r!les of societ-.

here the foc!s is on the contact 4etween the participants; speech f!nctions

to esta4lish relations; +aintain the+; or pro+ote social solidarit-. These are

t-picall- rit!al; or for+!laic speech acts: leave)ta5ing; greetings; re+ar5s

a4o!t the weather; in?!iries a4o!t health; etc. This f!nction; so+eti+es

called#hatic; is also perfor+ed or s!pported 4- gest!res; facial e$pression.

The topic)oriented f!nction of speech; often called the referential function; is

that which !s!all- stands first in peopleDs +inds. &t is the f!nction that gave

rise to the traditional notion that lang!age was created solel- for the

co++!nication of tho!ght; for +a5ing state+ents a4o!t how the spea5erperceives the wa- things in the world are.

There are two +ore f!nctions; associated with the code !sed and the

+essage. The- are the +ost diffic!lt to for+!late. e !s!all- test the+ 4-

as5ing the ?!estions J'o -o! hear +e9J and J'o -o! follow9J



28/77

@1A The ative ang!age #ffect

S. Pit Corder clai+s that when people learn a second lang!age the- are not

ac?!iring lang!age; the- alread- possess it. The learning of a second

lang!age is rather a ?!estion of increasing a repertoire; or learning a set of

alternatives for so+ething the- alread- 5now. The ass!+ption then is that

so+e of the r!les the- alread- 5now are also !sed in the prod!ction and

!nderstanding of the second lang!age. This is what is +eant 4- transfer8.

earners transfer what the- alread- 5now. %a5ing errors in the second

lang!age can; in part; 4e e$plained 4- the notion of transfer. &t is also called

negative transfer8 or interference. G!t this tendenc- of transfer can 4e also

positive @facilitationA. &t is !st as well that different lang!ages do; in fact;

have rese+4lances to each other. n this acco!nt; it has to 4e esta4lished

what is different 4etween the +other tong!e and the foreign lang!age.

'escri4ing lang!age; or part of lang!age; is part of the process of

developing ling!istic theor- itself. G!t we +!st now o!tline the hierarch- of

applications of ling!istics to lang!age teaching. There are a n!+4er of

stages in the application of ling!istics to lang!age teaching. The first has

alread- 4een identified as that of ling!istic description. The second is

concerned with operations perfor+ed on the descriptions of lang!age. #ach

stage has the f!nction of answering so+e ?!estions or solving so+e

pro4le+s relevant to lang!age teaching. Th!s; the application of first order

answers the ver- general ?!estion: what is the nat!re of the lang!age; which

is to 4e ta!ght9 The ne$t stage answers the ?!estion: what is to 4e ta!ght and

how is it to 4e ta!ght9 The criteria for selecting +aterial for lang!age

teaching are vario!s: utilityto the learner; that is; selecting what he needs to

5now; his proposed re#ertoire those varieties of the lang!age which will 4e

!sef!l to hi+; those speech f!nctions which he will need to co++and. r

we can invo5e the criterion of difference. &n a sense; all parts of the foreign

lang!age are different fro+ the +other tong!e. G!t difference is relative

So+e parts will 4e +ore different than others. For e$a+ple; if the learnerDs

+other tong!e has no gra++atical s-ste+ of aspect; the learning of s!ch a

s-ste+ presents a serio!s learning tas5. here the learnerDs +other tong!e;however; has s!ch a s-ste+; the si=e of the learning pro4le+ will depend on

the nat!re and degree of difference. ( third criterion +ight 4e difficulty.

hat is different in the foreign lang!age does not necessaril- in all cases

represent a diffic!lt-. For e$a+ple; at the phonological level; what is so

totall- different fro+ an-thing enco!ntered in the +other tong!e does not



29/77

see+ to 4e so diffic!lt to learn as so+ething; which is lia4le to conf!sion

with so+e si+ilar feat!re in the +other tong!e.

The proced!res and techni?!es involved in all these cases of application of

ling!istics to foreign lang!age teaching are co+parative. This is called

interlingual co$#arison; or contrastive8 co+parison @Contrasti'e

AnalysisA. The other t-pe of co+parison is often calledError Analysis. The

errors perfor+ed 4- the learners +a- 4e an i+portant part of the data on

which the co+parison is +ade. G!t what is 4eing co+pared in this case is

not two e$isting and alread- 5nown lang!ages; 4!t the lang!age of the

learner at so+e partic!lar point in the process of learning; with the target

lang!age. ( learnerDs so called errors are s-ste+atic; and it is precisel- this

reg!larit- which shows that the learner is following a set of r!les. These

r!les are not those of the target lang!age 4!t a transitional8 fro+ of

lang!age; si+ilar to the target lang!age; 4!t also si+ilar to the learnerDs+other tong!e @what arr- Selin5er calls interlang!age8A.

@2A ang!age Eniversals

&n the conte$t of disc!ssing si+ilarities and differences 4etween lang!ages;

we +!st to!ch !pon the the+e of lang!age !niversals and their place in

foreign lang!age teaching. The ,;000 to 6;000 lang!ages of the world do

loo5 i+pressivel- different fro+ #nglish and fro+ one another. n the other

hand; one can also find stri5ing !nifor+ities. &n 1*63 the ling!ist Koseph

/reen4erg e$a+ined a sa+ple of 30 far)fl!ng lang!ages fro+ five

continents. /reen4erg wanted to see if an- properties of gra++ar co!ld 4e

fo!nd in all these lang!ages. &n the first investigation; which foc!sed on the

order of words and +orphe+es; he fo!nd no fewer than fort-)five !niversal

feat!res.

Since then; +another s!rve-s have 4een cond!cted; involving scores of

lang!ages fro+ ever- part of the world; and literall- h!ndreds of !niversal

patterns have 4een doc!+ented. So+e hold a4sol!tel-. For e$a+ple; no

lang!age for+s ?!estions 4- reversing the order within a sentence; li5eN>uilt ?ack that house the this is+So+e !niversals are statistical: s!4ects

nor+all- precede o4ects in al+ost all lang!ages; and ver4s and their o4ects

tend to 4e adacent. Th!s +ost lang!ages have SH or SH word order>

fewer have HS> HS and HS are rare @less than 1A> and SH +a- 4e

non)e$istent. The largest n!+4er of !niversals involve i+plications: if a

lang!age has R; it will also have


30/77

aspects of lang!age; fro+ phonolog- @if a lang!age has nasal vowels; it will

have non)nasal vowelsA to word +eanings @if a lang!age has a word for

Mp!rpleD; it will also have a word for MredD> if a lang!age has a word for MlegD;

it will also have a word for Mar+DA.

The 5nowledge of the e$istence of lang!age !niversals +a- save so+e

proced!res of co+parison 4etween the +other tong!e and the foreign

lang!age ta!ght. &n the second place; it can 4e part of the teaching +aterial

@+ostl- i+plicitl-A and the +ethods of e$planation.

@3A ing!istics in Str!ct!ring the S-lla4!s

( finished s-lla4!s @cf. Chapter ,A is the overall plan for the learning

process. &t +!st specif- what co+ponents +!st 4e availa4le; or learned 4- a

certain ti+e line> what is the +ost efficient se?!ence in which the- arelearned> what ite+s can 4e learned si+!ltaneo!sl-8> what ite+s are alread-

5nown.

The str!ct!re of lang!age is a s-ste+ of s-ste+s8; or a networ58 of

interrelated categories; no part of which is wholl- independent or wholl-

dependent !pon another. &n lang!age; nothing is learned co+pletel- !ntil

ever-thing is learned. &f this is so; then no si+ple linear se?!ence for a

s-lla4!s is appropriate. ( logical sol!tion to this pro4le+ see+s to 4e a

c-clic; or spiral; str!ct!re; which re?!ires the learner to ret!rn ti+e and

again to so+e aspects of lang!age str!ct!re; lang!age process; or do+ain of

lang!age !se. ang!age learning is not !st c!+!lative; it is an integrative

process. &n Chapter ,; we shall offer a new approach to s-lla4!sc!rric!l!+

design.

The +aor pro4le+ that faces !s in s-lla4!s organisation is whether to ta5e

the for+al criteria as do+inant; leaving alternative wa-s of e$pressing the

sa+e idea to so+e other part of the s-lla4!s; or to 4ase o!r gro!ping on

se+antic criteria. The teaching of +odal ver4s is a perfect e$a+ple of the

dile++a. Sho!ld we 4ring all alternative wa-s of e$pressing necessit-;o4ligation; possi4ilit- and pro4a4ilit-; etc. together into separate single

!nits9 &n other words; are we going to regard M+odal ver4sD; or alternativel-

Mthe e$pression of o4ligationD; as a s-lla4!s ite+9

There is no si+ple answer to this pro4le+. The +ore we ta5e acco!nt of

se+antic considerations; the +ore evident it 4eco+es that the relationship



31/77

4etween +eaning and s!rface for+ is a co+ple$ and indirect one. (t the

ti+e when less attention was paid to the whole pro4le+ of +eaning; and

lang!age learning was tho!ght of as a +atter of ac?!iring the a4ilit- to

prod!ce a!to+aticall- Msentence patternsD; it was logical @or was it9A to

gro!p +aterials in a s-lla4!s on the 4asis of s!perficial for+al criteria. G!t

with the increasing e+phasis on lang!age learning as training the learner in

co++!nication; the relevance of se+antic criteria in organising the

ling!istic +aterial increases. e are now tr-ing to classif- the ling!istic

+aterial in ter+s of +ore a4stract se+antic categories as ti+e; dei$is;

+odalit-; aspect!alit-; f!t!rit-; possession; ?!antification; ca!sation; etc.

e have seen that the s-ste+atic interconnectedness of lang!age +a5es it

!nrealistic to thin5 of an- ite+ as teacha4le or learna4le in isolation. e

sho!ld consider an ite+ in a +ore general wa-; i.e. as a process; or as so+e

gra++atical categor-; s!ch as tenseor nu$ber.

@aA The s-ntactic s-lla4!s

owada-s; descriptions of lang!age give !s a relativel- satisfactor- acco!nt

of the str!ct!re of the s-ste+ to 4e learned; that is; a characterisation of the

Mfor+ation r!lesD of the lang!age. G!t we are concerned with +ore than this

in lang!age teaching we are concerned with perfor+ance a4ilit-. There are

so+e general t-pes of s-ntactic processes; s!ch as no+inalisation;

relativisation or the+atisation; passivisation; interrogativisation; negation;

which co!ld 4e regarded as Mite+sD of perfor+ance a4ilit- in a s-lla4!s.

ing!isticall- spea5ing; all these involve perfor+ing certain operations.

@4A The +orphological s-lla4!s

The +ost fre?!ent clai+ for the appropriate application of se?!encing;

otherwise denied in principle; is +ade at the level of +orpholog-. For

e$a+ple; the ver4 Jto haveJ and Jto 4eJ are !sed as a!$iliaries in the

for+ation of perfect or progressive aspect. %ost logicall-; we +!st present

and teach these ver4s 4efore introd!cing the for+ation of these aspect!alfor+s. This see+s a good arg!+ent !ntil we specif- what we +ean 4-

MteachingD the ver4s to have and to 4e. earning a ver4 involves not onl-

discovering the relations in enters into with no+inals; whether it is transitive

or cop!lative; 4!t also learning the +orphological s-ste+ together with their

associated +eanings: ti+e; d!ration; co+pletion; fre?!enc-; etc. The

learning of so+ething +!st s!rel- involve the a4ilit- to !se it accepta4l-; i.e.



32/77

discover its f!nctions. The f!nction of the a!$iliar- to 4e in the progressive

aspect; or passive voice; is different fro+ that of the ver4 to 4e in cop!lative

str!ct!res. To sa- that in teaching cop!lative sentences one is teaching the

ver4 Jto 4eJ so that it can 4e availa4le for later a!$iliar- !se is a categorial

error.

@cA The le$ical s-lla4!s

&n order to present and e$e+plif- gra++atical categories and s-ntactic

str!ct!res; we have to !se le$ical words. This does not +ean that the

teaching of voca4!lar- is logicall- dependent on the teaching of gra++ar.

The teaching of voca4!lar- provides !s with another concept of s-lla4!s

gro!ping le$ico)se+antic. (n e$a+ple of this co!ld 4e the co)occ!rrence

of adver4s of past ti+e;yesterday, last %eek, three years ago; etc.; with tensever4s> or co)occ!rrence of ver4s of spea5ing and 4elieving;say, tell, cry,

belie'e, ho#e, ex#ect; etc.; with no+inalised sentences of different t-pes.

e +!st o!tline Mthe networ5 of relationsD which 4ind the voca4!lar- of a

lang!age into a str!ct!re. &t is possi4le to isolate Ms!4)fieldsD within the

le$ical str!ct!re of a lang!age. S!ch gro!pings of le$ical ite+s 4earing +ore

or less close se+antic relations to each other are !s!all- called Mse+antic

fieldsD. Se+antic fields provide gro!pings of the voca4!lar-; which co!ld

serve as Mite+s in a s-lla4!sD. The field of coo5ing will 4e !sed as an

e$a+ple. Coo5ing words provide a good so!rce of e$a+ples 4eca!se there

are clear reference relations that one can appeal to> the words do not

nor+all- carr- strong connotations; so we can concentrate on the cognitive

+eaning.

The 4asic words in the c!linar- field in #nglish are cook; bake; boil; roast;

fry; and broil@orgrillfor Gritish #nglishA. The set also incl!desstea$;

si$$er;ste%;#oach; braise;saut@;!rench5fry; dee#5fry; barbecue;grilland

charcoal. There are; in addition; a n!+4er of peripheral words:#arboil;

#lank;shirr;scallo#;fla$bere; rissolerand several co+po!nds:stea$5bake;#ot5roast; o'en5#oach;#an5broil;#an5fry; o'en5fry.

&t is +ore than o4vio!s that not all of the words are widel- !sed and need to

4e incl!ded in the s-lla4!s. So+e are even !n5nown to ordinar- native

spea5ers of #nglish. Cookcan 4e !sed in two wa-s once as the

s!perordinate ter+ of the field; na+ing the activit- e$pressed @Mpreparing



33/77

foodDA; and second; as a +ore specific word opposed to bake. Cookand bake

are the +ost general ter+s; the- appear freel- intransitivel- with h!+an

s!4ects.>oiland its s!4ordinate ter+s @si$$er;#oach;ste%; braiseA differ

fro+ the others in the field in that water or li?!id +!st 4e !sed; whereas the

a4sence of li?!id is necessar- forfry; broil; roastand bake.

&t is eas- to de+onstrate the set of words of this 5ind as the- pattern in

se+antic fields. G!t we +!st also add; and it is ver- i+portant for lang!age

teaching; that this approach has a strong e$planator- val!e it ena4les !s to

predict and e$plain so+e se+antic and cognitive processes in lang!age.

First; it ena4les !s to e$plain how is it that words co+e to have new

+eanings in certain conte$ts. Secondl-; we can predict what se+antic and

s-ntactic feat!res a totall- new word will have when added to a le$ical field.

(nd thirdl-; we can offer an e$planation as to how we are a4le to !nderstand

and even offer e$planations of o!r !nderstanding of the +eanings of totall-!n5nown words and e$pressions.

The first ?!estion the se+antic e$tension of words can 4e ill!strated 4-

loo5ing at the ite+s hot5%ar$5cool5cold. These e$hi4it +ore or less the

sa+e relationships to one another:Hotand coldare grada4le anton-+s at

end points of a scale; and %ar$and coolare anton-+s which are closer to

so+e centre point that separates hotand cold. (ll fo!r words are !sed and

have standard +eanings when tal5ing a4o!t the weather; ps-cho)ph-sical

feat!res @ feel cold This %ater feels cold to $eA; e+otions @?ohn has a hot

te$#er My brother is a cold #erson Bur for$er %ar$ friendshi# has

cooledA; g!essing ga+es li5e M& sp-D; colo!rs @)ou should #aint this roo$ a

%ar$ colour, like orangeA; etc. ther fields of disco!rse !se onl- one or two

words fro+ the field: e spea5 of hot ne%s ite$s4!t not of a Ncoldor a

Ncool ne%s ite$; a cold %aror a hot %ar; 4!t not a Ncool %aror a N%ar$

%ar. There is hot a44and cool a444!t not N%ar$ a44. ne can get a hot

ti#on a horse; 4!t not a Ncool ti#.

Since hot; %ar$; cool; and cold4ear a certain relationship to one another;

even when a word does not possess a certain +eaning; it can ac?!ire a newone in a conte$t 4- virt!e of that relationship. ence; these new coinages are

so easil- !nderstood.

S!ch e$tensions of +eaning related to se+antic fields are !s!all- perfor+ed

4- +eans of +etaphorical transfer. Cognitive ps-chologists clai+ that

+etaphors are strongl- +e+ora4le. This is d!e to the fact that the- f!rnish



34/77

concept!all- rich; i+age)evo5ing concept!alisations. %etaphorical vehicles

facilitate +e+or- to the e$tent that the- evo5e vivid +ental i+ages. ne

?!estion that is central to lang!age learning is whether the occ!rrence of

i+ager- with +etaphor is si+pl- epipheno+enal to its co+prehension or a

5e- ele+ent in !nderstanding and +e+orising the +eaning. Hario!s

e+pirical st!dies on the co++!nicative f!nction of +etaphor s!ggest a

n!+4er of possi4ilities a4o!t the positive infl!ence of +etaphor on learning.

&n the ne$t chapter; we shall loo5 at the develop+ent of lang!age teaching

+ethods in the twentieth cent!r-.

Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 3,


35/77

"hapter

The first half of the cent!r- was do+inated 4- the teaching +ethod; which is

5nown as 'irect ang!age Teaching or6irect Method@'%A. &t e+erged as

a res!lt of the lang!age ed!cation refor+ +ove+ent at the end of the

nineteenth cent!r- and was pro+inent !ntil the +iddle of the twentieth

cent!r-.



36/77

(t the 4eginning of the cent!r-; the '% 4eca+e the onl- officiall- approved

+ethod for the teaching of +odern foreign lang!ages in France thro!gh a

decree of the French %inister of P!4lic &nstr!ction @1*02A. The ter+; which

was !sed in the decree; was J+ethode directeJ. The +ethod was soon

esta4lished in +an- #!ropean co!ntries and was !sed with enth!sias+ 4- its

proponents. So+e of the co++ercial vent!res in the area were ver-

s!ccessf!l and 4eca+e ?!ite pop!lar. For e$a+ple; in 1B7B; the /er+an

4orn %a$i+ilian 'elphin!s Gerlit= opened his first lang!age school in

Providence; hode &sland; E.S.(. Toda-;>erlit4 Languages nc*

@www.4erlit=.co+free A is still thriving.

'irect %ethod is of co!rse onl- a general ter+; which covers a range of

different teaching +ethods. e shall +ention two of the+; which have 4een

infl!encing lang!age +ethodolog- to present. &n 1*23; arold Pal+erdeveloped his Bral Methodto 4e adapted so+e fift- -ears later in the

innovative approaches of the 1*70s as the Total Physical &es#onse Method

@(sher 1*77; 1*B2A. The second one; %ichael estDs&eading Method; was

designed in 1*26. (nd onl- two -ears ago; Stephen rashen revived it in the

+ethod; which he na+ed theEasy Way@1**7A.

The 4asic pre+ise of the '% is that a second lang!age sho!ld 4e ta!ght 4-

+a5ing a direct connectionin the +ind of the learner 4etween what he

thin5s and what he sa-s. &n other words; no !se is +ade of the learners own

lang!age. Th!s; the target lang!age 4eco+es 4oth the ai+ and the +eans of

the teaching and learning process. The following list s!+s !p eight salient

feat!res of direct lang!age teaching:

Teaching is e$ec!ted orall- thro!gh the +edi!+ of the target lang!age.

Teachers sho!ld 4e either native spea5ers or e$tre+el- fl!ent in the target

lang!age.

/ra++ar is ta!ght ind!ctivel- 4- sit!ation.

Concrete voca4!lar- is ta!ght in conte$t thro!gh ostensive definition and

pict!res.

(4stract voca4!lar- is ta!ght thro!gh association of ideas.

ang!age s5ills are ordered in a nat!ral wa-8: listening; spea5ing;

reading and writing.

Pron!nciation is e+phasi=ed> the first few wee5s are devoted to

pron!nciation.

http://www.berlitz.com/freehttp://www.berlitz.com/free


37/77

(ll reading +atter is first presented orall-.

owever; in the second ?!arter of the cent!r-; the +ethod 4egan to decline.

&ts principles were ?!estioned. ( gro!p of pro+inent (+erican e$perts

stated that Jthe a4ilit- to converse sho!ld not 4e regarded as a thing ofpri+ar- i+portance for its own sa5e 4!t as an a!$iliar- to the higher ends of

ling!istic scholarship and literar- c!lt!reJ @&e#ort of the Co$$ittee of

T%el'e, Modern Language Association of A$erica1B*2A. %oreover; the '%

de+anded highl- co+petent teachers who have alwa-s 4een diffic!lt to

recr!it. So 4- the +iddle of the twentieth cent!r- +odern lang!ages were

4eing ta!ght 4- the +ethods; +ost of which had 4een developed 4efore the

t!rn of the cent!r-. The era of the 'irect %ethod had ended.


38/77

te$t4oo5 in (+erican #nglish;English D; and&ealistic English@(44s;

Coo5 U Enderwood 1*6BA 4eca+e widel- accepted in #!rope in the 1*60s.

&n 1*61; the (+erican ling!ist illia+ %o!lton proclai+ed the ling!istic

principles of (%: lang!age is speech; not writingI a lang!age is a set of

ha4itsI teach the lang!age; not a4o!t the lang!ageI a lang!age is what

native spea5ers sa-; not what so+eone thin5s the- o!ght to sa-I lang!ages

are different8 @?!oted in ichards U ogers 1*B6A. The following list s!+s

!p eight salient feat!res of a!dio)ling!al teaching:

ang!age inp!t is provided in dialog for+.

earning activities are 4ased on +i+icr- and +e+ori=ation and pattern

practice.

S!ccessf!l responses are i++ediatel- rewarded.

%ista5es are not tolerated.

ang!age str!ct!re is ta!ght !sing pattern drills.

Hoca4!lar- is strictl- controlled and learnt in conte$t.

Pron!nciation is e+phasi=ed.

(!dio)vis!al technolog- is !sed e$tensivel-; e.g. slide proectors; tape

recorders; lang!age la4oratories.

o4ert &an Scott invented a sentence generator8 @1*6*; ?!oted in o4erts

1*73; **A as an aid to 4e !sed in the teaching of reading. The +achine co!ld4e progra++ed to generate ,)word sentences of the si+ple; active

declarative t-pe. ords of each s-ntactic f!nction co!ld 4e entered on a

separate wheel; the +achine consisting of , wheels +o!nted side 4- side on

a cran5ing device. The wheels co!ld 4e t!rned independentl- of each other

to +a5e a new sentence at each spin. ith 60 words on each wheel; it wo!ld

4e possi4le to generate 12*60000 sentences; which; ass!+ing that it were

possi4le to spea5 one sentence per second; wo!ld ta5e a4o!t half a -ear of

tal5ing to get thro!gh. The +achine did not gain pop!larit- tho!gh.

The co+parative +erits of the (% and the traditional gra++ar)translationinstr!ction were eval!ated in a two)-ear st!d- of 4eginning st!dents of

/er+an in (+erica @Scherer U erthei+er 1*6,; ?!oted in eich 1*B6A. (t

the end of the two -ears; the res!lts were that (% and traditional

instr!ction were e?!al on listening; reading and #nglish)to)/er+an

translation> (% was far s!perior to traditional instr!ction in spea5ing 4!t

traditional instr!ction was s!perior to (% in writing and far s!perior to



39/77

(% in /er+an)to)#nglish translation. Th!s neither +ethod is clearl-

s!perior. hich -o! prefer depends on what -o! dee+ +ost i+portant.

&n the late si$ties; the (% was s!4ected to criticis+ and its pop!larit-

waned. Controlled st!dies of the effectiveness of the lang!age la4oratories

as act!all- !sed in schools in the 1*60s fo!nd that the- were either a not

partic!larl- effective teaching aid or the- were act!all- detri+ental to

lang!age learning @eating 1*63; ?!oted in eich 1*B6A. oa+ Cho+s5-

openl- critici=ed a!dio)ling!al theor- and practice in his address to lang!age

teachers at the ortheast Conference; E.S.(.; in 1*66; & a+; fran5l-; rather

s5eptical a4o!t the significance; for the teaching of lang!ages; of s!ch

insights and !nderstanding as have 4een attained in ling!istics and

ps-cholog-8. The pattern practice proced!re was reected together with the

disill!sion+ent over neo)4ehavioris+ as a ps-chological theor-. Str!ct!ral

ling!istics was also deno!nced and with it the (% gave wa- to fresherteaching +ethods.

The inno'ati'e a##roaches of the se'entieswere an atte+pt to 4ring

+ethodolog- in line with +odern scientific develop+ents in the related

areas and to discover the new orientations in the teaching of +odern foreign

lang!ages.

The theoretical 4asis of Cale4 /attegnoDs +ethod @1*72A; The 0ilent Way; is

the idea that teaching +!st 4e s!4ordinated to learning and th!s st!dents

+!st develop their own inner criteria for correctness. earning is facilitated

if the learner discovers and creates in a pro4le+)solving process involving

the +aterial to 4e learnt. (ll fo!r s5ills are ta!ght fro+ the 4eginning.

St!dentsD errors are e$pected as a nor+al part of learning. The teacherDs

silence helps foster st!dentsD self)reliance and initiative. The teacher is

active in setting !p sit!ations !sing special teaching aids; Fidel charts and

C!isenaire rods; while the st!dents do +ost of the tal5ing and interacting.

/eorgi o=anovDs 0uggesto#edia@1*72A see5s to help learners eli+inate

ps-chological 4arriers to learning. The learning environ+ent is co+forta4leand s!4d!ed; with low lighting and soft slow +!sic in the 4ac5gro!nd.

St!dents choose a na+e and character in the target lang!age and c!lt!re and

i+agine 4eing that person. 'ialog!es are presented to the acco+pani+ent of

Garo?!e concertos. St!dents are in a rela$ed 4!t foc!sed state of pse!do)

passiveness8. The- listen to the dialog!es 4eing read alo!d with var-ing

intonations and a coordination of so!nd and printed word or ill!stration. The

Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 3*


40/77

st!dents are e$pected to read the te$ts at ho+e c!rsoril- once 4efore going

to 4ed and again 4efore getting !p in the +orning8 @o=anov 1*72A.

&n Charles C!rranDs +ethod @1*76A; Co$$unity Language Learning;

learners 4eco+e +e+4ers of a co++!nit- ) their fellow learners and the

teacher ) and learn thro!gh interacting with the +e+4ers of that co++!nit-.

The teacher considers learners as whole persons8 with intellect; feelings;

instincts and a desire to learn. The teacher also recogni=es that learning can

4e threatening. G- !nderstanding and accepting st!dentsD fears; the teacher

helps st!dents feel sec!re and overco+e their fears. The s-lla4!s !sed is

learner)generated; in that st!dents choose what the- want to learn to sa- in

the target lang!age. earning is lin5ed to a set of practices granting

consens!al validation8 in which +!t!al war+th and a positive eval!ation

of the other personDs worth develops 4etween the teacher and the learner

@C!rran 1*76A.

Ka+es (sherDs Total Physical &es#onse @1*77A places pri+ar- i+portance on

listening co+prehension; e+!lating the earl- stages of native lang!age

ac?!isition; and then +oving to spea5ing; reading and writing. (sher @1*77A

clai+s that the 4rain and nervo!s s-ste+ are 4iologicall- progra++ed to

ac?!ire lang!ageI in a partic!lar se?!ence and in a partic!lar +ode. The

se?!ence is listening 4efore spea5ing and the +ode is to s-nchroni=e

lang!age with the individ!alDs 4od-8. St!dents practice their co+prehension

4- acting o!t co++ands iss!ed 4- the teacher. (ctivities; incl!ding ga+es

and s5its; are designed to 4e f!n and to allow st!dents to ass!+e active

learning roles.

( Period )))' "o!!unicative Language Teaching

The -ear 1*7" constit!tes a watershed8 4etween the second and the third

period of develop+ent of lang!age teaching in this cent!r-. That -ear sawthe p!4lication of The Threshold Le'eldoc!+ent of the Co!ncil for C!lt!ral

Cooperation of the Co!ncil of #!rope @Han #5 1*7"A. The doc!+ent is Ja

specification of an ele+entar- level in a !nitcredit s-ste+ for individ!als

who; fro+ ti+e to ti+e; have @personal or professionalA contacts in the target

co!ntriesJ @Tri+ 1*B0; "A. &t +ar5s the appearance of a new approach; the

so)called Co++!nicative ang!age Teaching or the Co$$unicati'e

Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology ,0


41/77

A##roach@C(A. Kohn Tri+ @1*B0; "A; 'irector of the %odern ang!ages

Proect; writes; Jthe Threshold evel is re+ar5a4le for the s-ste+atic wa- in

which the lang!age 4ehavior appropriate to the defined target a!dience is

specified in its vario!s interrelated para+etersJ.

Since then; the Threshold evel doc!+ents for +an- #!ropean lang!ages

have 4een p!4lished; e.g.; in alpha4etical order; the threshold levels for

French; n 9i'eau 0euil@1*76A; for /er+an;Fontaktsch%elle* 6eutsch als

!re$ds#rache@1*B1A; for Spanish; n ni'el u$bral@1*B1A; for Port!g!ese;

9i'el Li$iar@1*BBA; etc. &nfor+ation on those doc!+ents is availa4le on the

we4)site: @http:4oo5.coe.frlangA. n the #!ropean level; the +ost recent wor5

in this area is the doc!+ent of the Co!ncil of #!rope entitledA Co$$on

Euro#ean !ra$e%ork of &eference for Language Learning and Teaching

@p!4licl- accessi4le on the we4)site: http:c!lt!re.coe.frlangA. e shall ret!rn

to it in Section ,.,.

%an- scholars have contri4!ted to the develop+ent of the C(. For e$a+ple;

'ell -+es introd!ced the constr!ct of co++!nicative co+petence8 in his

fa+o!s paper; Bn Co$$unicati'e Co$#etence@1*71A. e e$plores the

infl!ence of the social conte$t in which a lang!age is learnt on the ling!istic

co+petence; which the individ!al attains. -+es clai+s that a nor+al child

ac?!ires 5nowledge of sentences; not onl- as gra++atical; 4!t also as

appropriate. e or she ac?!ires co+petence as to when to spea5; when not;

and as to what to tal5 a4o!t with who+; when; where; in what +anner. &n

short; a child 4eco+es a4le to acco+plish a repertoire of speech acts; to ta5e

part in speech events; and to eval!ate their acco+plish+ent 4- others8

@1*71; 26*A. &n the cited paper; he as5s his fa+o!s fo!r ?!estions of

co++!nication c!lt!re8:

1. hether @and to what degreeA so+ething is for+all-#ossible>

2. hether @and to what degree so+ething isfeasiblein virt!e of the +eans

of i+ple+entation availa4le>

3.hether @and to what degreeA so+ething is appropriate @ade?!ate; happ-;

s!ccessf!lA in relation to a conte$t in which it is !sed and eval!ated>,. hether @and to what degreeA so+ething is in fact done; act!all-

#erfor$ed; and what itDs doing entails.8 @-+es 1*71; 2B1A

The fo!r ?!estions8 pro+pt a new wa- of !dging !tterances in conte$t. &n

that sense; -+esD paper was progra++atic; s!ggesting a new line of

research.

http://book.coe.fr/lang)http://culture.coe.fr/lang)http://book.coe.fr/lang)http://culture.coe.fr/lang)


42/77

&n the 1*60s; oger Grown st!died earl- develop+ent of the +other tong!e

of (+erican children. The ac?!isition of #nglish gra++atical +orphe+es

was tac5led thro!gh the speech sa+ples of three children; the now fa+o!s

(da+; #ve and Sarah Grown. e fo!nd that the- developed their lang!age

at different chronological ages and at different rates. owever; he also fo!nd

that the- each went thro!gh ro!ghl- the sa$e se(uence of stages. Grown

tried to find the principles !nderl-ing the order he discovered and concl!ded

that a co+4ination of ling!istic and se+antic co+ple$it- +!st ca!se it.

esearch e$tended to other lang!age str!ct!res. Co!rtne- Ca=den and oger

Grown descri4e three +aor progressions in first lang!age ac?!isition:

evol!tion of the 4asic operations of reference and se+antic relations in two)

word !tterances of ver- -o!ng children> the ac?!isition of 1, gra++atical

+orphe+es and the +od!lations of +eaning the- e$press> and; still later; the

ac?!isition of #nglish tag ?!estions li5e doesn-t itor can-t it8 @Ca=den UGrown 1*7"; 2**A. The order of ac?!isition of 1, #nglish gra++atical

+orphe+es and the +eanings the- e$press is the following @Ca=den U

Grown 1*7"; 301A:

@1A Present Progressive: riding @te+porar- d!ration> process; stateA;

@2)3A in, on @contain+ent; s!pportA;

@,A Pl!ral: t%o dogs @n!+4erA;

@"A Past; irreg!lar:sa% %ent @earliernessA;

@6A Possessive:Mo$$y-s hat @possessionA

@7A Encontracti4le cop!la:Here a$in response to Where are you+

@n!+4er> earliernessA;

@BA (rticles: a, the @specific)non)specificA;

@*A Past; reg!lar: %alked, %anted @earliernessA;

@10A Third person; reg!lar:goes @n!+4er; earliernessA;

@11A Third person irreg!lar: has, does @n!+4er; earliernessA;

@12A Encontracti4le a!$iliar-: a$in response to Who-s co$ing+

@te+porar- d!ration; n!+4er; earliernessA;

@13A Contracti4le cop!la:He-s sick* @n!+4er; earliernessA;

@1,A Contracti4le a!$iliar-:He-s running* @te+porar- d!ration; n!+4er;earliernessA.

&n the seventies; several investigators of instr!ctional acc!rac- orders

replicated and e$tended GrownDs e$peri+ents for #nglish as a second

lang!age. &n their +orphe+e st!dies8; eidi '!la- and %arina G!rt @1*7,A

e$a+ined the nat!ral se?!ences in second lang!age ac?!isition appl-ing the



43/77

>ilingual 0yntax Measure. The- !sed 1"1 Spanish)spea5ing children

learning #nglish. The ac?!isition se?!ences o4tained fro+ their s!4ects

were stri5ingl- si+ilar. ther lang!age str!ct!res were also investigated. For

e$a+ple; Fred #c5+an; awrence Gell and 'iane elson @1*B6; 12A tested

the generali=ation of relative cla!se instr!ction in the develop+ent of

#nglish as a second lang!age. The- fo!nd that +a$i+al generali=ation of

learning will res!lt fro+ ac?!isition of relativel- +ore +ar5ed str!ct!res.

S!ch generali=ation will 4e !nidirectional and will 4e in the direction of

those str!ct!res; which are relativel- less +ar5ed8 @#c5+an; Gell U elson

1*B6; 12A. (nd the- concl!ded that if onl- a single str!ct!re of a set of

i+plicationall- related str!ct!res is to 4e ta!ght; +a$i+al generali=ation will

res!lt fro+ teaching that which is +ost +ar5ed8 @op. cit.; 12A. The first

p!4lished ad!lt st!d- of ac?!isition order @Gaile-; %adden U rashen 1*7,A

investigated 73 ad!lt st!dents of #nglish at V!eens College; ew ilingual 0yntax Measurewas applied. The st!d- showed that the conto!rsfor the ac?!isition se?!ences of children and ad!lts are ver- si+ilar. Several

other investigators have loo5ed at ac?!isition se?!ences for ad!lts fro+

different lang!age 4ac5gro!nds @rashen et al. 1*76; Per5ins and arsen)

Free+an 1*7"; %a5ino 1*7*; ee 1*B1; Pica 1*B3; etc.A.

The general res!lt of the ac?!isition order research was that a nat!ral

order8 of ac?!isition of the str!ct!re of #nglish as a second lang!age

characteristic of 4oth children and ad!lts and si+ilar for 4oth spea5ing and

writing was discovered. So+e scholars consider this concl!sion one of the

+ost significant o!tco+es of second lang!age research @'!la- U G!rt 1*B0;

Coo5 1*B*A.

&n sociolog- and ed!cation; the F!t!res %ove+ent evolved. F!t!res research

concerns itself with concept!ali=ing and inventing the f!t!re 4- e$a+ining

the conse?!ences of vario!s plans of action 4efore the- 4eco+e to+orrowDs

realit-8 @P!llia+ 1*B7; 261A. #d!cators and politicians agree on the fact that

the changes c!rrentl- in progress have i+proved ever-oneDs access to

infor+ation and 5nowledge; 4!t have at the sa+e ti+e +ade considera4le

book language teaching metodologies(2)(2)

Documents