A Theoretical Glimpse at Issues of Grammar Teaching

                A Theoretical Glimpse at Issues of Grammar Teaching

朱海涛

（广西大学行健文理学院 广西 南宁 530005）

Abstract: When it comes to the description of the status of grammar in the field of second language teaching now, recent literature bears witness a good deal of discussion about a ‘grammar revival’. More recently, theoretical perspectives on language teaching and learning have changed. The possibilities and feasibility of integrating form-focus instruction and meaningful communicative activities in the communicative language classroom have been explored.

Key words: grammar, Theory, discussion, application

1. Discussions on the relationship between acquisition and learning

Language learning theories which influenced the methods regarding grammar teaching in the past concerned mainly the teachability of grammar. Two main streams can be found in Krashen and Ellis’s arguments on the relationship between acquisition and learning. As one of the hypothesis included in the broadening scope of Krashen’s well-known and influential Monitor Theory (MT), the Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis includes the two separate knowledge system described in Krashen (1976): the acquired system and the learned system, which the former ‘consists of subconscious knowledge of second language grammar’ (Larsen-freeman and Long 1991:240) being obtained naturally as the child acquired his first language grammar, and the latter is ‘the product of formal instruction (typically classroom language teaching), and comprised conscious knowledge of easy second language rules’ (Larsen-freeman and Long 1991:240). ‘The orders of appearance of certain English grammatical morphemes’ (Larsen-freeman and Long 1991:240) which Krashen (1976) calls a ‘natural order’ is the ‘surface manifestation of the acquired system and the order is disturbed when learners use their learned system’ (Larsen-freeman and Long 1991:240), which Krashen (1976) names as ‘monitoring’. As the co-author of the book ‘The Natural Approach’ with Krashen in 1983, Terell (1991:53) claims that ‘current second language acquisition research supports the notion that an explicit knowledge of how forms and structures function in the target language is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for their acquisition.’

2. Some critical reviews on MT

The teaching applications of the Monitor Theory have received critical reviews as summarized in Larsen-freeman and Long (1991:249): ‘the lack of classroom evaluation studies, the absence of much specificity as to the syllabus content of MT-inspired language teaching programmes, and what is seen by some to be unwarranted rejection of advantages to gained by various kinds of focus on language form in language teaching’. Other researchers have argued that the learner’s role is perhaps less passive than Krashen implies, and the acquisition involves conscious processes, of which the fundamental is attention.

3. Processes in the conversion between explicit and implicit knowledge

Two concepts in Ellis (2006)—Explicit Knowledge and Implicit Knowledge indicate some similarities to Krashen’s ‘acquisition and learning’ yet have been hypothesized differently: explicit knowledge may aid learner in developing implicit knowledge. ‘Explicit knowledge is held consciously, is learnable and verbalisable, and is typically accessed through controlled processing when learners experience some kind of linguistic difficulty in using the second language…implicit knowledge is procedural, is held unconsciously, and can only verbalized if it is made explicit’ (Ellis 2006:95). While considering the role of explicit knowledge in second language acquisition, Ellis (1993, cited in Ellis 2006: 97) claims that ‘explicit knowledge can convert into implicit knowledge if the learner is ready to acquire the targeted feature and that this conversion occurs if priming a number of key acquisitional processes into it.’

Having answered the question that teaching explicit knowledge does facilitate the development of implicit knowledge, Ellis (2002a) particularly describes one of those acquisitional processes in the conversion between explicit and implicit knowledge as consciousness-raising. ‘Consciousness-raising constitutes an approach to grammar teaching which is compatible with current thinking about how learners acquire second language grammar… it does represent a real alternative in that it removes from grammar teaching the need to provide learners with repeated opportunities to produce the target structure’ (Ellis 2002a:169,170). The central of this task-based approach is what researchers call ‘consciousness-raising task’, which in Ellis (2002a) is thought to facilitate the acquisition of the grammatical knowledge needed for communication by emphasizing discovery learning.

REFERENCES

Ellis, R. (1993). Second language acquisition and the structural syllabus. TESOL Quarterly 27: 91-113.

Ellis, R. (2002a). Grammar teaching: Practice or consciousness-raising.

In Richards, J. and Renandya. W. (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge: CUP.

Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly 40: 83-107.

Krashen, S. (1976). Formal and informal linguistic environments in language acquisition and language learning. TESOL Quarterly 10: 157-168.

Krashen, S. and Terrell, T. D. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Hayward, CA: Alemany.

Larsen-Freeman, D. and Long, M. H. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.