2.4 Role of Pedagogic Syntax
2.4.1 Methods and Approaches of Teaching
Over many years, many methods and approaches have been developed for teaching syntax and have been built upon, abandoned, or combined, all with the same goal of teaching students how to communicate effectively and understand how to use the English language properly and accurately. In the followings, some of the methods and approaches of teaching used will be explored briefly to find out which method or approach has more influence in acquisition of L2 language.
Grammar-translation method (GTM): GTM mainly focused on the grammatical rules. In a typical lesson the grammar rule was at first explicitly stated and followed by translation exercises (Thornbury, 2000, p. 21). The classes were taught in the students‟ L1 and it is supposed that they will be able to use the language. However, the primary skills, such as reading, writing, listening and speaking, are generally taught at an insufficient level. Nevertheless, this method has been used very often in schools worldwide.
An audio-lingual method (ALM): ALM was intensively focusing on oral drilling. According to Richards and Rodgers (2007, p. 64) in typical lessons students first hear a model dialogue, which they have to repeat and to memorize. After that, key structures of the dialogue are selected and practiced in the form of pattern drills. While the audio-lingual method
provides an opportunity for some acquisition to occur, it cannot measure up to newer methods which provide much more comprehensible input in a low-filter environment.
Cognitive-Code Method (CCM): CCM focuses on developing all four skills of language: speaking, listening, reading, and writing. It assumes, that "once the student has a proper degree of cognitive control over the structures of a language, this will develop automatically with the use of language in meaningful situations" (Carroll, 1966, p. 102 cited in Krashen, 1982, p. 132). Communicative competence is focused upon. Since the cognitive- code approach provides more comprehensible input than grammar-translation method does, it should produce more acquisition.
Direct method (DM): DM helps students learn grammar unconsciously in the same way as children pick up the grammar of their MT, simply by language immersion that is inductively (Thornbury, 2000, p. 21). The teacher uses examples of language in order to inductively teach grammar; students are to try to guess the rules of the language by the examples provided.
Natural Approach (NA): In this method the teacher speaks only the TL and class time is committed to providing input for acquisition as Richards and Rodgers (2007, p. 179) explains the main focus of teaching and learning is the NA input rather than practice. NA rejects explicit grammar instruction and the organization of the syllabus around grammatical categories.
Total Physical Response (TPR): TPR is a method of teaching language using physical movement developed by James Asher (1977 cited in Krashen, 1982, p. 140). Asher (ibid) claims that it is quite possible to embed vast amounts of syntax into the form of a command. Krashen (1982, p. 141) summarizes that the use of TPR helps the teacher know when utterances are understood, and also provides contexts to help students understand the language they hear.
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) method: CLT is an approach that can be interpreted and adapted in many different ways (Richards and Rodgers 2007, p. 157). CLT includes procedures which identify learners‟ needs and classroom exercises which promote communication such as group work, task work, information-gap activities etc. (ibid, p. 173). Compared to GTM, the most significant, distinct feature of CLT is using the TL with rich meaningful input to achieve communicative competence (Brown, 2000).
Approaches that became very popular in the last century are Inductive and Deductive Approaches. Inductive Approach (IA): In IA, the students are given example sentences and are expected to figure out the rules themselves. According to Krashen (1982, p. 113), inductive teaching is very much “like rule-writing in linguistics” where the learner is given a corpus and has to discover the regularities. The inductive approach is a constructive model of teaching that is more student-centred. It encourages students to view syntax as a meaningful component of contextualized language use. In other words, it draws students' attention to both syntactic forms and their meaning in context. However, it can lead to incorrect conclusions, which need to be verified and corrected. If syntax is not taught explicitly, the learner is likely to make false assumptions about the TL on the basis of limited data. Inductive presentation of grammar allows students to form generalizations about grammatical rules after the examples given in class. Brown (2000) refers to the term “generalization” as to derive a rule or conclusion from the observation of particular instances (p. 96). Language acquisition may occur quickly and after a little exposure to this approach; however, some students are too easily confused if the rules are not presented directly before practice is required.
Deductive Approach (DA): DA is defined as a process in which learners are taught rules and given specific information about language. In DA, the teacher provides examples of the concept or the syntactic patterns and then the student is given ample time to become familiar with them. The DA is a more teacher centred. It saves time for the teacher and the class; and it is more comfortable for the teacher. Nevertheless, a major drawback is the technical presentation of syntax that may frustrate the students if they don‟t understand the rules. Krashen (1982, p. 113) argues that the deductive approach seems “much more reasonable” why make students guess the rule?” According to him, teachers should present a clear explanation and have students practice until the rule is internalized. Incorporating a syntax component in any English language teaching curriculum has become a common practice at the school in EFL and ESL classrooms.
Eventually, each of the different methods and approaches has attempted to deal with language learning issues. However, they have different theoretical consideration. Most importantly, understanding, reading, speaking and writing is the knowledge of syntax which makes communication efficient. Although it is possible to teach or learn syntax by the explicit or implicit approaches or any other approaches, it is important that the teachers must know
which aspect of syntax to focus on and how to teach it to their students. The teachers‟ basic role when teaching syntax is to show the students what the aspects of syntax mean and how they are used and what the grammatical form of the new language is and how it is said and written” (Harmer, 1991). Wong (1996 cited in Tahir, 2011) says in her paper, that it is generally believed that the learner acquires grammatical rules faster and more effectively if they know their errors spot. Students become motivated and active if they understand what is involved and if they know what they are doing. Therefore, teachers need effective approaches to help students acquire all the required syntax aspects as well as to help them eliminate some of their common errors. Considering the vital role of syntactic accuracy in acquiring other aspects of linguistic competence, it is important to detect and analyze Emirati students‟ most common syntactic errors and their causes with the help of error analysis.