Stephen van Vlack

Sookmyung Women`s University

Graduate School of TESOL

Approaches to Teaching Grammar

Fall 2006

Thoughts on Grammar: a Response

1. Recently the main focus of teaching English in classrooms all over Korea has shifted. Students are no longer required to know only about English; they are required to know English itself. Real English use, as a language, is what all students now strive for and what all teachers are expected to teach. This basic premise has caused an upheaval in the system that no one has been able to settle. No one knows how to go about this exactly, because we still have the spectre of testing which has gone unchanged as yet. Using more English in the classroom is a start, but is certainly not enough if teachers stick with their old lesson plans and materials. In the old system grammar played a pivotal role. All students were forced to know about the grammar rules of English, but they could not even use the simplest rules when producing the language. A new system, therefore, has to be devised by which students do not only learn about grammar, but acquire a natural use of the language, including the grammar.

2. Generally, in language reception, grammar plays a rather small role. If we think of grammar as the glue which holds language together, in the same way glue might hold a model together, then we can get an accurate picture. In a model, like in language it is the parts that are important. They are the things we see. Yes, the glue is important because without the glue everything would fall apart, but we don`t see the glue. That`s the whole point. The glue, grammar, should be invisible. It is the main content words that carry the lion`s share of the meaning. The function words just work to fine-tune that meaning. The bottom line is this: Grammar is often overestimated in its importance in modular views of language. When we start to think about meaning in relation to form it is clear that raw lexical meaning is much more important. Language that is filled with mistakes is often no less comprehensible than language which does not have any grammar mistakes. It is mistakes in vocabulary that kill meaning both dead and fast.

3. When trying to produce language grammar is obviously more important than in trying to decode language or it would seem that way, but again don`t overestimate the importance of grammar in situations of real language use. Extra-linguistic information is arguably as important as the ability to piece together grammatically acceptable utterances. Speakers and writers have to know how to match their language to the situation as well. It might seem like I am side stepping the issue by saying that the language used is less important in basic communication than people think. Often it is not what someone says, but how they say it. The amount of grammar necessary for producing an utterance is directly related to not only what one is trying to say (the complexity of the meaning to be conveyed) but also the particular elements of the situation in which the message is being conveyed. This is how can children`s ;language not only does but also can differ from adult language.

4. The scope of grammar is generally much larger than people think. Grammar has an effect on elements of language from the word level (in morphemes and word-building) all the way up the paragraph level and beyond. While the lower range grammatical phenomena has been well studied and documented (phonology, morphology and syntax), we are just beginning to understand how grammar works above the sentence level (discourse). This new field has been termed Discourse Analysis and it from this point of view that much of the grammar that has been ill described at the sentence is able to be described easily and completely. It is also, not coincidentally, here where learners (even native speaker learners) fail to show a lack of grammatical dexterity and improvement over extensive spans of time. This justifies our concern.

5. There are many different types of grammars. Each of them has their own special outlook on how language works and each of them claims to be the only best way. Experience should have taught you by now that there is never just one best way, not when we are dealings with matters of the mind. All of the different approaches have some degree of merit as well as easily observable problems. The best way to go about these different approaches is to take note of them but not necessarily to believe in them too deeply. So much of the social sciences has been based on a blind, religious-type belief in certain theories or approaches until, of course, such theories go out of fashion. I am suggesting that we take an eclectic approach in how we choose to look at grammar and also make sure our approach follows the scientific work that has been done in parallel fields. You are probably already doing this, which is good, but you still need to develop an awareness of how and when you are doing this. Awareness is the key.

6. If you are like most people, the type of grammar you were taught with will certainly have a large affect on how you think about grammar today. Much of what you encounter in this course will go against your better instincts, or rather your learned instincts. My job here is not to unteach what you have been taught. That requires too much time and energy and is often impossible. What I hope to be able to do is change your viewpoint about grammar by adding new information to the store of information you already have, thus forcing you to reanalyze all the information you have about grammar. A seed once planted has the potential to grow into a vast forest.

7. If we follow the viewpoint that grammar is the glue which holds the major components of language together, the we see that the real role of grammar is to enhance fluency development and breadth of expression in addition to aiding comprehension. Think back to when you were a student. Did the way your teacher taught, and here we want to focus as much as possible on grammar, promote these goals or were any goals set aside for one related to artificial tests? If your study of grammar did not help you much, then what did? In short, how did you achieve fluency; the ability to use the language across various functional domains? Grammar should play a facilitative role here. Exactly how we can do this is yet to be seen.

8. Following what was written above, we do not necessarily want to follow one approach to grammar. At the same time we have to have a coherent, scientific system that will not allow the students to become hopelessly confused. The important thing then is not only the specific system of grammar that you are advocating, but rather the implication of that system. Languages are living, breathing entities which means that they are in a constant state of change. This fact makes our job much harder, because what is acceptable today might very well be unacceptable in a few years time. As teachers of language we have to make a decision very early on about how we will deal with this fact and other related phenomena, such as regional dialects or slang. All these things relate to the approach to grammar you want to take.

9 and 10. Our outlook on grammar is best expressed by what elements of language we use in relation to grammar. Grammar is not just something that relates to or is better taught through the written form of the language. We have to relate grammar to spoken forms as well. An integrated approach has certain advantages.

11. Whether to teach grammar overtly or covertly is a hot topic. The best approach would be to use both. This sounds simple, but we have to know when to teach grammar overtly and when to do it covertly. If we are going to be teaching grammar covertly, then how is this possible?

12. Grammar has to be your friend. Don`t be afraid of it. Fear doesn`t help anything. Just do it. Grammar should be the friend you respect but don`t really trust. You, therefore, must keep a close eye on this friend. It may help to realize that grammar is everywhere. There is no escape. Every instance of language use involves grammar at some level.