Animated Grammar
Introduction
Marmo Soemarmo and Neil Anderson
What is the role of grammar instruction in language teaching in the 1990s?
This is a question which has been asked by several second language researchers and
teachers over the past few years (Brown, 1994; Celce-Murcia, 1991; Fotos,1994;
Larsen-Freeman, 1991; Nunan, 1994; Terrell, 1991). Historically, grammar has played
a central role in language teaching often being the only activity in language classrooms
(Brown, 1994). Rutherford (1987) indicates that "[f]or most of the 2,500-year history
of language teaching, ... grammar teaching and language pedagogy were ...virtually
synonymous" (p. 27). Celce-Murcia (1991) points out that "[p]rior to 1967 and for
several years thereafter, however, no one challenged the centrality of grammar either as
content for language teaching or as the organizing principle for curriculum or materials
development" (p. 460).
The grammar translation approach, the audiolingual approach, the cognitive code
approach, the comprehension approach and the communicative approach all view the
role that grammar should play in language teaching with slight variations. Very early
in the days of the communicative competence movement, Canale & Swain (1980)
proposed that grammatical competence was an integral part of communicative
competence.
Some language teachers moving into the communicative era may have
reacted too quickly in assuming that grammar was not a significant part of language
teaching and thus ignored its role in the classroom. Fotos (1994) states that the recent
discussion of the role that grammar plays in language teaching "present[s] a dilemma
for many teachers who have become committed to the use of communicative
approaches to language learning, wherein learners are given a rich variety of
comprehensible input, and teacher-fronted grammar instruction is generally omitted"
(p. 323).
Rutherford (1987) and Fotos (1994) both address the issue of consciousness-raising (CR) tasks. Rutherford points out the characteristics of C-R. First, it is an aid to learning.
C-R tasks serve to facilitate language learning. Animated Grammar seeks to be one of
the "aids to learning not the object of learning" (Rutherford, 1987, p. 18) that
Rutherford refers to. Second, C-R serves various roles. One such role is to provide
language learners with the linguistic data needed so that the learner can test hypothesis
and form generalizations about the language being learned. It is only when learners
receive adequate input that they can then formulate generaliza- tions. Animated
Grammar provides learners with animated input to facilitate the development of a
learners generalizations. Third, C-R tasks can lead a learner from the known to the
unknown. Rutherford suggests that C-R activities serve as the "illumination of the
learner's path" (1987, p. 21).
Language teaching in the 1990s should place grammar back into the curriculum
through a careful evaluation of the variables which influence learning and through
1
appropriate techniques to make language learning enjoy- able. C-R activities can
facilitate the integration of grammar and communicative language teaching.
Animated Grammar seeks to be one of the tools for facilitating the placement of
grammar back into language teaching curricula through C-R tasks.
Defining grammar teaching: Larsen-Freeman (1991) defines the teaching of grammar
as "enabling language students to use linguistic forms accurately, meaningfully, and
appropriately" (p. 280) (emphasis added). Perhaps the greatest weakness of the
grammar/language teaching relationship in previous years is that far too much
emphasis has been placed on accurate use of linguistic form. Larsen-Freeman now
provides a focus for language teachers to move beyond form to include meaning and
pragmatics of language structures.
Recent research has shown that explicit grammar teaching can fit within a
communicative language teaching curriculum (Doughty, 1991; Fotos, 1994;
Lightbrown & Spada, 1990; Tomasello & Herron, 1988; White, 1991; White, Spada,
Lightbrown, & Ranta, 1991).
Teacher initiated grammar instruction and error correction can have a place in
communicative language teaching in the 1990s. By focusing learner attention to the
aspects of form, meaning, and pragmatics of language structures, language teachers can
improve language instruction.
Variables to consider in determining the role of grammar instruction: No longer is it
acceptable to say that grammar is unimportant in language teaching.
Celce-Murcia (1991) provides a matrix of variables for teachers to use in judging the
degree of importance that grammar instruction can play for a given class. As teachers
use this matrix, they will be able to make an informed decision of the place the
grammar instruction can play in their own classes.
Variables that Determine the Importance of Grammar Lessons
From "Grammar Pedagogy in Second and Foreign Language Teaching" by M. CelceMurcia, 1991, TESOL Quarterly, 25, 459-480. Figure 1.
=============================================================
Less
More
Important <-----------Focus on Form----------->Important
Learner variables:
Age
Children
Adolescents
Adults
Proficiency level
Beginning
Intermediate
Advanced
Educational backPreliterate,
Semiliterate,
Literate,
ground:
no formal
some formal
well education
education
education
Instructional variables:
Skill
Listening,
Speaking
Writing
reading
Register
Informal
Consultative
Formal
Need/Use
Survival
Vocational
Professional
communication
==============================================================
2
Celce-Murcia identifies six common instructional variables used along with a
continuum running from less important to more important. The six variables include:
age, proficiency level, educational background, language skill, register, and need/use.
As these six variables are taken into consideration, the teacher should be able to
determine the degree of importance that grammar should play in a given class.
As the authors of Animated Grammar we strongly encourage teachers to use this
matrix in determining whether this software package is appropriate for your ESL/EFL
class. Techniques for focusing attention to the role of grammar instruction. Once a
teacher has determined that explicit grammar instruction has a role in the classroom,
determining the appropriate techniques to use in focusing attention on the grammar is
the next step.
Brown (1994) outlines five techniques which teachers should consider in focusing
attention on grammar. _
First, the structures should be embedded in meaningful, communicative contexts. When
learners see that the context for communication is meaningful, they will be more
interested in learning how to grammatically present their ideas and information.
Second, the structures should contribute positively to the learners' communicative
goals. This places importance on the significance of continual analysis of our learners'
needs to determine that what we are teaching is in line with what they need in their
language contexts.
Next, the structures should promote accuracy with fluent, communicative language.
Accuracy and fluency must be seen as a continuum and not as an either/or proposition.
Second language learners need to be both accurate and fluent in their use of language.
Fourth, teachers should not overwhelm the learners with linguistic terminology. The
use of simple terms is appropriate but grammar instruction should not be focused so
much on statements of rules as it should be on how that grammar structure can be used
accurately and appropriately in accomplishing communication goals. _
Finally, the presentation of the grammar structures should be a lively and intrinsically
motivating as possible.
Dulin (1978) proposes a model for motivation in which the expected reward is greater
than the expected effort.
MOTIVATION =
EXPECTED REWARD
----------------------------EXPECTED EFFORT
Language teachers can significantly influence the motiv- ation for learning and
improving grammar by helping learners see that the rewards are greater than the
expected effort that is required in learning the structure.
Animated Grammar has taken these focusing techniques into consideration in
order to provide a tool to language teachers and language learners which will facilitate
grammar practice opportunities. Issues influencing grammar instruction._
_Brown (1994) points out four significant issues which language teachers should
consider in determining how to teach grammar. These issues include:
(a) determining whether the form should be presented inductively or deductively, (b)
choosing to use technical or non-technical language and grammatical explanations, (c)
3
deciding to teach grammar in "grammar only" classes or integrating it into other
language skills courses, and (d) providing explicit correction of errors or ignoring
errors.
Each of these issues is built into Animated Grammar. Through the use of this
software language structures can be practiced with either an explicit or an implicit
focus on the grammar rule. The animated illustration of the principle being introduced
provides a non-technical explanation.
We use non-technical language to explain the basic principles of English grammar
which are part of the program.
This software could be used for "grammar only" classes or as a supplement to a
content-based language course. _
Finally, the program provides immediate feedback to the learner of the correct use of
the structures practiced.
We hope that both teachers and students find Animated Grammar of value in
their ESL/EFL classes.
Grammar plays an increasingly important role in language teaching today and this
tool uses the knowledge that we have gained over several years of language teaching to
improve the grammatical competence of ESL/EFL language learners.
***
REFERENCES
1. Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching Grammar and Vocabulary. In H. D. Brown,
Teaching By Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy (pp.
347-372). Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall Regents.
2. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative
approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
3. Celce-Murcia, M. (1991). Grammar Pedagogy in Second and Foreign Language
Teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 459-480.
4. Doughty, C. (1991). Second language instruction does make a difference:
Evidence from an empirical study of SL relativization. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 13, 431-496.Fotos, S. S. (1994). Integrating Grammar
Instruction and Communicative Language Use Through Grammar
Consciousness-Raising Tasks. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 323-351.
5. Larsen-Freeman, D. (1991). Teaching Grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia (ed.),
Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, 2nd edition (pp. 279-295).
Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
6. Lightbrown, P., & Spada, N. (1990). Focus on form and corrective feedback in
communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies
in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 429-446.
7. Nunan, D. (1994). Linguistic Theory and Pedagogic Practice. In T. Odlin (ed.),
Perspectives on Pedagogical Grammar (pp. 253-270). New York: Cambridge
University Press._
8. Odlin, T. (1994). Perspectives on Pedagogical Grammar (ed.). New York:
Cambridge University Press. Rutherford, W. E. (1987). Second Language
Grammar: Learning and Teaching. New York: Longman.
4
9. Terrell, T. D. (1991). The Role of Grammar Instruction in a Communicative
Approach. The Modern Language Journal, 75, 52-63.
10. Tomasello, M., & Herron, C. (1988). Sown the garden path: Inducing and
correcting overgeneralizationed errors in the foreign language classroom.
Applied Psycholinguis- tics, 9, 237-246.
11. White, L. (1991). Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some
effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second Language
Research, 7, 133-161.
12. White, L., Spada, N., Lightbrown, P., & Ranta, P. (1991). Input enhancement
and L2 question formation. Applied Linguistics, 12, 416-432.
<<< THE END >>> _
5