Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  0 

Name: Hassan Basarally

ID: 806007430

Course: LING 6103-Principles and Methods of English Language Teaching

Assignment: Write a critical analysis of the link between the evolution of Language

Teaching Methods (Grammar Translation, Direct Method, and Audio-lingual Habit

Formation) and the evolution of Linguistic Theory. Use any one method to outline the

stages you would go through to develop an appropriate syllabus for teaching English to

the group you have identified.

Lecturer: Prof. I. Robertson

Semester: 1

Academic Year: 2009/2010

Faculty: Humanities and Education

Department: Liberal Arts

University: The University of the West Indies, St. Augustine

Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  1 
 

Language learning always existed in human history and can be traced to the Greek and

Roman Eras. With the advent of formal schooling, a pedagogical approach was applied,

although initially with little linguistic knowledge. In the latter half of the twentieth century, this

changed with the field of linguistics becoming an integral academic base for language learning

theories. As with all academic fields, advances in linguistic knowledge resulted in changes in

language teaching methods. These methods had ideological bases as well, that in some cases

complemented the relevant linguistic theory. The result of this is that a teaching course or

syllabus will reflect the relevant linguistic and pedagogical standpoints. In addition, a particular

theory is utilised as the best possible way to teach the language to the particular student

population.

Stern divided language learning history into two periods: 1940-1960 and 1965-1970

(131). The Grammar Translation and Direct Method were of the first period and Audio-lingual

Habit Formation to the latter. In the early stages of language learning theory, the focus was on

language learning as an intellectual exercise, the study of classical literature in the target

language and the study of grammatical rules and translation exercises. This was called the

Grammar Translation method. Early use of this was in 1840 by Ollendorff (Stern, 454). It

involved the teaching of a grammatical rule followed by its application to a translation exercise.

Grammar was considered part of the mental disciple required for language. The focus on

grammar showed that language was viewed as a rule governed system. As such, focus was put on

elaborate grammatical explanations, grammatical terms, rule exceptions and rule memorisation.

Translation formulae and vocabulary lists were used. The focus was on reading and writing as

opposed to listening and speaking. The target was explained in comparison to the native

language of the learners. Though it was an early theory it possessed some advanced linguistic
Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  2 
 

principles. Amongst them was the comparison of the target and native language. Cross lingual

techniques and the use of the native language as a reference resulted in students understanding

the grammatical system of the target (Stern, 455). However, the students were never truly free

from the native language hampering expression.

Linguistic theory came into conflict with the Grammar Translation as language is

primarily speech not writing. The method’s focus on translation resulted on accuracy, but

accuracy did not result in creativity. As language is creative, according to Hockett, students were

not able to create novel sentences and risk taking. One of the twelve principles proposed by

Douglas Brown in language learning is risk –taking (13). Students must attempt to produce

language with the knowledge that errors are inevitable. This belief is undermined when the

fixation is on correct grammatical forms. Another principle is meaningful learning (12). This

requires the content to have some relevance in usage by the learner. This relevance was not

attained with the Grammar Translation method’s use of translation exercises that lacked cultural

awareness of the target and usability in everyday situations. Another divergence with linguistic

theory that the Grammar Translation method, and later the Audio-lingual Habit Formation

method, had was that repetition does not necessitate learning. The focus on translations,

vocabulary lists and drills meant that students could recall isolated aspects of the language

readily and not produce lengthy coherent structures. The students’ “apparently high level of

accuracy, based on the use of memorised chunks, suddenly drops and then rises again as they

come to create novel sentences” (Lightbrown, 444). The focus on isolated aspects of the target

meant that corrections were given without consideration for changing language behaviour.

The primacy of speech in language is a key principle of the Direct method. Translation

was replaced with direction association with the word or object. One of the earliest calls for the
Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  3 
 

need for speech was the 1951 Francais fundamental (Stern, 161). This study of French language

learners called for the use of the spoken language of everyday situations. Grammar explanations

are given in the target, even though a simplified paraphrased form. This was difficult for teachers

to do as some form of translation was needed to explain concepts to students. The focus on

speech is further highlighted by the teaching of pronunciation. This was reiterated by the

International Phonetic Association’s (IPA) six principles of second language teaching. The first

article stated that instruction should be in spoken language not only literature and the second

required the teacher to focus on pronunciation of the target (Stern, 89). At this time in linguistic

theory, phonetics was introduced to language learning. With the direct association there was no

need for the use of the native language. The method moved from speaking about the language to

speaking the language. It diverged from the Grammar Translation method in using the native

language in instruction, as it was viewed as a hinderance to speaking.

This method addressed the need for meaningful learning with the inclusion of common

situations and classroom objects. In addition, lessons depicted life in a geographic area where the

target is spoken. To assist with language creativity, students are exposed from the onset to

complete and meaningful sentences. This helped with genuine communication compared to the

abstract sentences and formulae memorised in the Grammar Translation method. This is also

why there was a shift from literary language to the spoken one. The method promotes another of

Brown’s twelve principles of second language acquisition, automaticity. This is a “timely

movement of the control of a few language forms into the automatic processing of a relatively

unlimited number of language forms” (12). Automaticity was seen in the graded approach in

which the easy and then more difficult lessons were taught. This graded approach to language

teaching is articulated in the Second Language Generalisations by Lightbrown. The principle is

Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  4 
 

that “there are predictable sequences in L2 acquisition such that certain structures have to be

acquired before others can be integrated” (442). This meant that the students’ production of the

target was the only way to assess language acquisition. There was no explicit teaching of

grammar as it was believed that they would be learnt through practice. Knowing a language rule

does not mean that it can be used in a communicative interaction.

However, the Direct method’s focus on learner generated sentences have come into

question. Rivers warns that the result may be “clothing native-language structures in foreign-

language vocabulary” (1981). Despite this, the recognition that errors are inevitable was a result

of advances in linguistic theory. Lightbrown lists another generalisation of second language

learning as “the learner creates a systematic interlanguage which is often characterised by the

same systematic errors as the child learning the same language as the first language, as well as

others which appear to be based on the learners own native language” (441). In addition,

productive skills were not as advanced as listening skills. This method placed heavy emphasis on

teacher training and knowledge. For example, Bowen et. al. state that the Direct method rejected

the Natural Methodologist belief that language learning was not affected by age (25). This meant

that the language teacher would have to modify teaching approaches for young and adult

learners. Stern also poses an important question as “how to apply the direct method beyond the

elementary stages of language learning” (460). As more complex language tasks are required by

the students such as the production of large and coherent amounts of the target speech and

writing, the method would not be suitable.

Another theory that championed language as primarily an oral system was the Audio-

lingual Habit Formation or Audio-lingual Method. The main linguistic knowledge incorporated

in this method was the study of recurring language patterns. The sub fields involved in this were
Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  5 
 

morphology and phonology. Audio-lingual theory had much grounding in structural linguistics.

Bloomfield advocated that language learning was a conscious effort. That was why drills and the

use of graded material formulated by trained linguist were important. In addition, the division of

the aspects of language: listening, speaking, reading and writing; became utilised. The focus on

communication was as a result of Bloomfield’s 1942 criticism that students would have years of

foreign language instruction and ye not be able to use the language being studied. This was

viewed as the natural progression of language. Lado formulated what he called laws to guide this

method. These laws were based in behaviourist psychology and contrastive linguistics. These

laws were characterised by contiguity or the recall of one experience when another occurs,

exercise or practise, intensive language study, assimilation or the same response with similar

conditions and effect or the reinforcement of satisfying responses. The focus on intensive study

was as a result of the realisation that the target requires time. It was through the increasing of

instruction that the Audio-lingual method attempted to address one of the problems identified in

the Coleman Report of 1929. This report assessed the effectiveness of foreign language

instruction in United States’ schools. Many language teachers believed that there was not enough

instruction time for speaking skills to be developed (Mitchell and Vidal, 28).Unlike the native

language of the students , there was less exposure to the target. This gap must be reduced in the

classroom.

Like the Direct method, grammar discussion was brief. The method also went further to

ban the native language from the classroom. Audiolingualism paid attention to sequence.

Sequence was a feature of language teaching promoted by Krashen and Seliger (Stern, 488).

Sequence meant that language content was graded. Audiolingual supporters found the Direct

Method to be too lenient on this and strived for designed progressions. The effect of the
Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  6 
 

behaviourist theory was seen in the focus on drilling and stimulus-response exercises. Linguists

such as Halliday, McIntish and Strevens disagreed with lack of contextual meaning that

structural linguistics had. In addition, the universality of language meant that some structures

would be present in different languages.

The refusal to utilise the native language was debatable. On one hand the native language

could produce interference. However, the concept of interlanguage meant that between the native

and target lay a stage where the native language was used by the learner to understand target

language structures. Linguists such as Di Pietro called for the comparison of the native and target

languages in contrastive analysis (Stern, 168). In addition, psychologist such as Rivers found

flaws in the psychological assumptions in the method (Stern, 326). For example, the insistence

on spoken language was too rigid and the drills sacrificed the sociocultural contexts in which

language must be spoken. The focus on drills was also seen as teachers not offering intellectual

activity to students. Stern describes this as “habituation and conditioning without the

intervention of any intellectual analysis” (464). The lack of emphasis on intellectual activity at

the same time made language learning available to a wide range of students of varying ages and

abilities. Rivers concluded that an eclectic approach to language teaching was needed.

Though different language theories competed with each other for use in the classroom

there was a benefit to the field of linguistics. Firstly linguistics became used and an important

base for language teaching pedagogy and classroom instruction began to describe the target

language. Also this focus on linguistics gave rise to the field of educational linguistics.

Before any syllabus or course of study is planned or implemented a needs analysis of the

students must be done. The student group that the syllabus will be prepared for is the

Anglophone Caribbean. A characteristic of this group is that the target language is Standard
Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  7 
 

English while the native language is an English Creole. Creoles though have a lexifier, mainly

European, also have substrate influences, making a definite genetic typology or descent

impossible. As creoles are learnt with the assistance of social factors, for example the need to

expand a pidgin, Creole acquisition cannot be explained in terms of innateness alone. Creoles

also exhibit accelerated linguistic change which is different from natural languages that comprise

the superstrate and substrate. This is a unique case in language, as the native and a target is very

close in lexicon and relatively closes in morphology, syntax and phonology. This native

language effect is another of the twelve features identified by Brown and will produce

interference. In addition, the target and native language exist in the same sphere creating bi

dialecticism. This sphere is described by Craig as a continuum in which “many speakers can shift

their speech from one point to another on the continuum, without necessarily being able to take

in the whole range” (2). In addition, the sociolinguistic factor of the native language of the

students being stigmatised will hamper risk-taking. Also, many Anglophone Caribbean students

can read and listen to the standard but have difficulty in speaking and writing.

Amongst the language needs of the Anglophone Caribbean is to know the distinction

between Standard English and Creole. The student should also know the context in which

context requires the target and native language. Focus on grammar is needed to highlight to

students the difference s between the target and native language. Shields points out that in

Jamaica the native language with more target features is becoming a “substitute for its

competitor” (1988). Nero identifies several language needs of Anglophone Caribbean students

(503). Amongst the needs is a focus on all aspects of the target: speaking writing, listening and

reading. There also needs to be a comparative study of the writing and speech of the native

language and target.

Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  8 
 

Richards listed six dimensions of syllabus development (145), at each stage the Grammar

Translation Method would guide the direction of planning at each stage. The main reason for this

is the Grammar Translation Method’s use of the native language for comparison. This is

particularly relevant for the Anglophone student as the Creole and Standard English are closely

related in vocabulary and to a lesser extent morphology and syntax. The dimensions identified by

Richards are: developing a course rationale, describing entry and exit levels, choosing course

content, sequencing course content, planning the course content and preparing the scope and

sequence plan.

A main question that the rationale seeks to answer is what king of teaching and learning

will take place in the course. In this section the beliefs about language learning are clearly

articulated. A rationale for the Anglophone Caribbean Student can read as:

This course is designed for Anglophone Caribbean students who wish to improve their
writing of Standard English in order to improve English examination scores. It teaches
the writing skills necessary for the range of writing genres that the student will meet. It
also seeks to give students the ability to identify grammatically acceptable sentences in
Standard English and identify the differences between the Standard and Creole. The aims
are:
1. Know the writing conventions of Standard English.
2. Determine which sentence constructions are grammatically correct in Standard
English.
3. Understand the differences between the grammar of Creole and Standard English.
4. Distinguish between Creole and Standard English sentences.
5. Produce sentences in Standard English.
From this proposed rationale it is clear that the focus is on the learning of grammar rules of the

target. In addition, the native language of the learners is utilised as a point of reference in

instruction. Writing is the main product that the students will produce and be assessed on.

The next stage of syllabus design is describing the entry and exit levels of the students.

Richards believes that it is at this point that a description of the learners’ proficiency levels

(146). The entry level of the Anglophone Caribbean students varies as the Creole spoken lies on
Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  9 
 

a continuum. There is the Basilect, exhibiting the most Creole features, the Mesolect, having less

features and the Acrolect which has the least amount of Creole features. The Grammar

Translation method places emphasis on the study of classic texts, extensive analysis and

memorisation of grammar and views language learning as an intellectual exercise. Due to these

positions, the entry level of students should be at the mesolectal level with fewer amounts of

Creole features. Judging from the aims, the exit level of the students will be markedly different.

Students will be expected to write sentences that are more acceptable in Standard English and

distinguish between structures in the native and target.

The course content must take into account the language needs of the students and the

objectives that are to be met. The Grammar Translation method is grammar and writing oriented

so the content will provide tasks to develop these skills. Table 1 shows a list of topics that could

be taught in a syllabus influenced by the Grammar Translation method:

Order Area Concepts, skills, strategies, procedures etc.

1. Mechanics of Writing 1. Commas

2. Full stops

3. Capitalisation

4. Exclamation

5. Quotation marks

6. Direct Speech

7. Indirect Speech

8. Past tense

9. Present tense

2. Tense 1. Present continuous tense

Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  10 
 

2. Future tense

3. Irregular verbs

3. Plurality 1. Singular nouns

2. Process of pluralisation in English

4. Adjectives 1. Adverbs

2. Adjectives for people, places and emotions

5. Spelling 1. Words with consonant cluster reduction

2. Homophones

Table 1: Topics to be covered in a syllabus influenced by the Grammar Translation method.

The topics above are mainly grammar concepts that must be learn with the exceptions. Some

such as irregular verbs must be memorised from word lists. Topics that cover such criteria would

appear in a Grammar Translation syllabus.

The course content is sequenced based on the principles of simplicity, chronology, need

and prerequisite learning. The method chosen did not sequence content from the simple to

complex tasks. Neither did it use chronology as that required skills to be separated while the

Grammar Translation method did not isolate specific competencies and skills such as speaking,

writing, listening reading. It was assumed that the knowledge of grammar combined with the

study of classical literature would aid in writing which would transfer to speaking. The method

instead focused on need and pre requisite learning. For example, a grammatical concept was

taught deductively and then tested by translation exercises; upon successful completion another

grammatical concept was taught. The choice of grammar was up to the teacher’s analysis of need

and the completion of one was the prerequisite for moving to another.
Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  11 
 

Planning the course structure involves designing a syllabus framework and instructional

blocks. A Grammar Translation syllabus can be described as task based because it is organised

and assessed based on the tasks that students complete. The syllabus can also be termed a

grammatical one. It adheres to several characteristics used by Richards to describe such a

syllabus. It is concerned with grammar rules, focuses on the sentence, concerned with form and

highlights one particular communicative skill. In the instructional blocks teachers would see the

teaching methods to utilise; here the greatest influence of Grammar Translation is seen. The

following are some of the strategies that teachers would be expected to employ:

1. Deductive teaching of grammar rules.

2. Use of reading passages.
3. Memorisation of bilingual vocabulary lists.
4. Vocabulary and grammar quizzes.
5. Reading aloud in the target language.
6. Translation from the native to target language and vice versa.
7. Use of grammar examples from literary texts and reading passages.
The scope and sequence plan is done to show the units in the syllabus, the corresponding

content and the time that it should take. The below table shows the scope and sequence for Area

3 (Plurality) in Table 1:

Unit Function Grammar

Singular Nouns Introducing singular objects; identifying The structure of singular nouns.

singular objects;

Plural Nouns Introducing plural objects; identifying The structure of plural nouns: how

plural objects singular nouns are pluralised in

Standard English

Table 2: Sample scope and sequence chart

Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  12 
 

Language teaching methods have changed with the emergence of new research in the

field of linguistics. Linguistics has provided language teaching with important information on the

nature of language and language acquisition. Each language teaching method has its own

strengths and weaknesses. In syllabus design, the method preferred by those responsible for it

will guide several features such as content and teaching methods. However, the main

consideration in the selection of method is which is best for the particular learners.
Hassan Basarally  806007430  LING 6103  13 
 

Works Cited

Bowen, J. Donald, Harold Madsen and Ann Hilferty. TESOL Techniques and Procedures.
Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers Inc. 1985. Print.

Brown Mitchell, Cheryl and Kari Ellingson Vidal. “Weighing the Ways of the Flow: Twentieth
Century Language Instruction.” The Modern Language Journal 85.1 (2001): 26-38. Print.

Craig, R. Dennis. “Language, Society and Education in the West Indies.” Caribbean Journal of
Education (1980): 1-19. Print.

Lado, Robert. Language Teaching: A scientific approach. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1964. Print.

Lightbrown, M. Patsy. “Anniversary Article: Classroom SLA Research and Second Language
Teaching.” Applied Linguistics 21.4 (2000): 431-462. Print.

Nero, J. Shondel. “The Changing Faces of English: A Caribbean Perspective.” TESOL Quarterly
34.3 (2000): 483-510. Print.

Richards, C. Jack and Willy A. Renandya. Eds. Methodology in Language Teaching: An

anthology of current practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Print.

Richards, C. Jack. Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press. 2001. Print.

Shields, Kathryn. Standard English in Jamaica: A case of competing models. Proc. of Society for
Caribbean Linguistics, Aug. 1988, U of the West Indies. Mona. 1988. Print.

Stern, H. H. Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

1983. Print.