TEMA 1. EVOLUCIÓN DIDÁCTICA DE LAS LENGUAS EXTRANJERAS.

TENDENCIAS ACTUALES EN LA DIDÁCTICA DEL INGLÉS COMO LENGUA

EXTRANJERA. LOS ENFOQUES COMUNICATIVOS

OUTLINE:
1. INTRODUCTION
2. EARLY STAGES IN LANGUAGE TEACHING: CLASSICAL
LANGUAGES
3. THE TEACHING OF MODERN LANGUAGES:
- 1ST APPROACHES: GRAMMAR-TRANSLATION METHOD,
REFORM MOVEMENT, DIRECT METHOD.
- 20TH CENTURY INNOVATIONS: BERLITZ SCHOOL, BASIC
ENGLISH, THE STRUCTURAL APPROACH, TGG.
- PRESENT DAY TRENDS: FUNCTIONAL-NOTIONAL
GRAMMAR, COMMUNICATIVE APPROACH, NLP
4. CONCLUSION
5. BIBLIOGRAPHY
 INTRODUCTION.-(section1)
As foreign language teachers we must be aimed at making the language a tool that
our ss can use to communicate with other people. This perspective is fairly new and it
has led to the emergence of new communicative models of language teaching. However,
they do not constitute a unique way to approach foreign language teaching. As we know
through history, many different methods of language teaching and learning have been
used. So the aim of this topic will be to deeply analyse their basic characteristics with
their pros and cons in relation to our profession. Therefore, a revision of the different
approaches used to teach and learn a foreign language throughout history will be
offered.
To give an organised explanation of all the contents included in this topic I will be
following this outline:
- first of all a brief explanation of the early stages in language teaching,
focusing on classical languages.
- Secondly, I will be dealing with the teaching of modern languages as a
whole, distinguishing among different stages in chronological terms:
First approaches including: grammar translation method, reform
movement, direct method.
20th century innovations, talking about: Berlitz school, basic English, the
structural approach, TGG
Present day trends including: functional-notional grammar,
communicative approach, and NLP.
The last section will be the conclusion followed by the bibliographical sources
used to develop this topic.

EARLY STAGES IN LANGUAGE TEACHING: CLASSICAL

LANGUAGES.-(section 2)
In this section I am going to offer a brief historical review of the situation of
language teaching and learning in old times, i.e., regarding basically classical
languages.
If we think about ancient civilisations such as the Egyptians, Babylonians and
Assyrians, it doesn’t come to our minds the existence of some sort of linguistic
approach or scientific methods to teach or learn languages, since we have got the
impression that this is something fairly new and specially when dealing with
communicative trends. However, this people had bilingual representatives to help
them with diplomatic and political issues, foreign trade and other economic affairs.
Unfortunately, we don’t know much about their training, but we know for sure that
language will be learnt and taught to them by oral means, i.e., using conversation and
real contexts, which are two of the standpoints of the communicative approach.
On the other hand, Romans had Greek teacher-slaves who taught them Greek by
means of grammar exercises, translations, reading comprehension, practising writing
skills and, occasionally conversation as well. We must not forget that Romans were
very interested in learning Greek, since its culture was considered to be superior to
that of Rome.
Also Christianity was developed and spread by means of conversational methods,
or using textual methodology depending on the level of literacy among the people.
But what is clear is that the existence of different didactic methods to learn or
teach languages is not something of the last decades but rather ancient if we consider
the situation in classical times.
Obviously years have gone by and new tendencies are constantly emerging, that is
why I have analysed the different approaches following a chronological organisation
to make it easier for the understanding of the topic.

THE TEACHING OF MODERN LANGUAGES.- (section 3)

1st APPROACHES
grammar-translation method.-
this method began to be used in Prussia at the end of the 18 th century. Its main
feature was the use of sentences which were exemplificatory of grammar rules,
instead of whole texts. Its main goal was to make ss able to read and understand
foreign literature in its original language. This method was fundamentally based on
the classical training methodology used to teach Latin.
The characteristics of the grammar-translation method are basically as follows:
1. the terms and explanations of Latin grammar were applied to modern
European languages.
2. the role played by words in the sentences was carefully analysed.
3. the TL process was based on written skills and conversation was not taught.
4. ss had to learn by heart lots of grammar and vocabulary lists.
5. accuracy was a requisite.
 6. compositions had a great importance and they were used to test ss
proficiency.
This method has received several criticisms, for instance:
1. language is not only rational but also intuitive.
2. spoken language and interaction were neglected.
3. this method is very appropriate for inflective languages, such as Latin, but
unsuitable for most European modern languages.
4. the only register used is literature, which does not really suit for
communication.
However, this method also offers some positive aspects for the sake of teaching
and learning a foreign language, e.g. it gives a great importance to meaning in the
learning process and translation is highly considered which can be pretty useful in
high levels when learning a foreign language.

The reform movement.-

This movement began with the pamphlet Language Teaching must Start Afresh by
Viëtor in 1882. This phonetician together with Sweet The Practical Study of
Language, Jespersen How to teach a FL, or Passy, and supported by the foundation of
the International Phonetic Association, established the principles of the reform:
Primacy of speech and oral methodology; written homework was abolished and
substituted by learning rhymes and songs by heart; the method was based on spoken
language. Viëtor proposed accurate descriptions of speech based on phonetics;
pronunciation should be corrected and grammar should not be explained in class (he
proposed an inductive method).
This was a text-based approach which leaned on Psychology and its notion of
association. According to this, we should provide ss whit texts in which linguistic
elements were correctly assembled to make necessary associations.
In this oral method the teacher spoke in the FL, using the L1 only for glossing new
vocabulary. They were non-native teachers.
The main criticism received by this method was the high emphasis laid on
phonetics, which was considered an extra burden and highly complex for ss.

The direct method.-

 This method is based on the belief that learning how to speak a FL is not a rational
but an intuitive process for which humans have a natural capacity that can be
awakened provided that the proper conditions exist, which are mainly as follows:
someone to talk to, something to talk about and a desire to be understood..
The general principles stated by this method are:
1. language should be learnt through speech.
2. language should be used as much as possible.
3. grammar rules don’t have to be learnt by heart, but picked up by the practise of
the language in itself.
4. L1 has to be totally avoided.
This method , however, had also a dark side, receiving mainly these criticisms: it
takes too much time; it completely excludes translation and explanation of grammar
rules, which have proved useful for teaching adults; vocabulary learning is slow and
inefficient in the long run.

20TH CENTURY INNOVATIONS.-

Berlitz school.-
M. Berlitz founded a school in Rhode Island in 1878. It is not really a new
method, but an application of the direct method, and it has been quite successful. Its
slogan is ‘The Eye is an enemy to the ear’, which is true in the case of English. The
main characteristics that define this school’s profile are:
1. no translation.
2. no use of L1.
3. oral work, based on question/answer technique.
4. native trained teachers.
5. no grammar explanation till late in the course.
6. only everyday vocabulary and structures are taught.

Basic English.-
This method was devised by Richard and Odgen in 1928. they thought that each
language has a basic grammar and vocabulary which have to be taught on the first
place.
Richard and Odgen reduced language to just 850 words which were classified in 3
different groups according to the several grammatical categories: qualities (adj.),
things (N) and operators (V, Prep., conj.). If one wanted to express any meaning
impossible to be covered by these words, paraphrasing was the solution offered by
these authors.
As we might guess this method presents several problems:
1. each word has to carry a lot of meanings.
2. it doesn’t teach real English: paraphrases are needed to express words which
exist in the language (bush = small tree), and many usual terms used on a day-
to-day basis ( good-bye, thank you e.g.) cannot be expressed.
3. teachers also have to learn basic English before they are able to teach it.
However, a practical application of this model can also be found; since basic
grammar and the frequency criterion are still important when designing a language
course.

The Structural approach.-

This approach to language teaching is based on American Structuralism.
Structuralists believe that 2 steps have to be followed when designing a language
course: analysing the target language by means of a descriptive approach and
providing appropriate materials for that particular language.
The structural theory of language learning is based on behaviourism, whose main
representative is Skinner. Following this perspective, learning a language is just a
process of learning correct habits by means of S-R(r). In order for ss to acquire these
habits, they present a hierarchical syllabus, together with a slot and filler explanation.
The most typical exercises are substitution tables and drills, which work through
repetition and aim at the creation of correct linguistic habits. Errors have to be avoided
because they lead to incorrect habits.
The most successful application of the structural approach has been the ASTP
( Army Specialized Training Programme). This project was devised to teach European
languages to American soldiers during WWII. The programme was characterised by
the following features:
- intensive learning.
- Small groups of selected, highly intelligent ss with some previous
linguistic knowledge.
- Native teachers for conversations and drilling, and trained teachers for
grammar.
 - Use of new technologies.

But the most important cause of the success of the method seems to have been the
high motivation of the ss.
The same method failed when, after the war, it was used in schools. The reasons
for this failure were that there were only a few hours per week, too many ss in each
classroom and the high motivation had vanished.
The main criticisms received by the structural approach to language teaching are:
1. language is communication and not a mere repetition of structures.
2. it doesn’t care for the creative use of the language.
3. structural exercises, out of context, are boring and demotivating.

TGG (transformational generative grammar)

TGG appeared as a reaction against structural grammar.
It emerged with Chomsky’s Syntactic Structures (1957), where the main concepts
of this grammar were explained: the difference between deep and surface structures,
competence and performance, and the transformational rules used to generate
sentences. The aim of TGG was to create a grammar which could predict the linguistic
features of a language, and then look for linguistic universals.
Chomsky also talked about the LAD (language acquisition device), which allows
us to learn a language by means of making hypotheses. The described this device in
relation to children’s language acquisition, but considered that it could also apply to
foreign language learning.
The application of TGG to language teaching is called ‘cognitive approach’. The
most important changes brought about by this method are:
1. priority must be given to free expression and creativity.
2. mistakes are to be considered normal, and prove that ss are making hypothesis
about the FL.
3. grammatical explanation and ungrammatical examples can also be valuable.
4. ss are not mere recipients of knowledge, but active elements who can and
should express themselves actively and creatively.

In the field of cognitivism we find one of the most influential men in the area of
language learning over the last twenty years: Steve Krashen. He thinks that learning a
FL can be compared to the way babies learn their mother tongue, and has deepened
the studies on the LAD. One of his key concepts is the affective filter. Krashen
believes that many things, such as motivation of ss can act as filters that come
between the learner and the comprehensible input necessary for language acquisition.
He also made an important distinction among acquisition (unconscious mechanism of
internalising language that we pick up in communicative situations) and learning
(which comes from processing rules and grammar information, being thus conscious).
Many criticisms arise against these theories, specially regarding the abstract
terminology and a rather superficial application of the theory.
However, TGG has made great contributions to language teaching such as a
complete and systematic conception of language and the defence of a solid linguistic
basis on L1 in order to progress in L2.

PRESENT DAY TRENDS.-

Functional-notional grammar.-
This kind of grammar is based on two key concepts: functions and notions.
Functions represent the intentions of the speaker (describe, advise, warn…), so that
they are concerned with the social behaviour. Notions are the categories in which we
divide reality: time, frequency, gender, number,…
This kind of grammar appeared in the 1970’s, due to the Council of Europe’s
efforts to establish an equivalence in the syllabuses for learning different languages.
Functions and notions represent universal categories of human thinking and they do
not vary among languages. So that, it was decided that they should be the base of the
new syllabus.
Functional-notional grammar focuses on language in use: ss have to learn how to
use the language in different situations (travel, hospital, restaurant,…) rather than the
general structure of the language. This method was put into practice in the Waystage,
Threshold, and vantage levels.
A very important factor in this approach was Hymes’ new notion of competence. It
was no longer grammatical competence, but communicative competence: knowing
what to talk about, with whom, when, where and in what manner. This concept was
later reviewed by Canale and Swain, and is the basis of the communicative approach.

Communicative approach.-
 By such milestones as the appearance of the Threshold level (1975) and Wilkin’s
Notional Syllabus (1976), communicative language teaching (CLT) has been with us
for nearly three decades. A strong theoretical impetus for the development of CLT
came from the social sciences and humanities outside language pedagogy. Different
notions of communicative competence, proposed by Hymes from the perspective of
linguistic anthropology and by Habermas from the vantage point of social philosophy,
served as guiding constructs for the design of communicative competence as the
overall goal of language teaching and assessment. An influential and comprehensive
review of communicative competence and related notions was offered by Canale and
Swain (1980), who also proposed a widely cited framework of communicative
competence for language instruction and testing.
But what exactly is the communicative ability that has gained such attention in
second language pedagogy? Pragmatics is a key term in this field. It has been defined
in various ways, reflecting authors’ theoretical orientation and audience. A definition
that appeals to me, not least for its usefulness for second language pedagogy, has been
offered by Crystal, who proposes that pragmatics is ‘the study of language from the
point of view of users, especially of the choices they make, the constraints they
encounter in using language in social interaction and the effects their use of language
has on other participants in the act of communication’. In other words, pragmatics is
defined as the study of communicative action in its sociocultural context.
Communicative action includes not only using speech acts but also engaging in
different types of discourse and participating in speech events of varying length and
complexity.
In many second and foreign language teaching contexts, curricula and materials
developed in recent years include strong pragmatic components or even adopts a
pragmatic approach as their organising principle. A number of proposals for
instruction in different aspects of pragmatic competence are now based on empirical
studies of native speaker (NS) discourse, on both NS and interlanguage material, or on
the classical set of comparable interlanguage, L1 and L2 data. Examples of target-
based teaching proposals for L2 are Holmes and Brown (1987), Myers-Scotton and
Bernsten (1988), Bardovi-Harlig, Hartford and Reynolds (1991).
Regarding the theoretical basis of the communicative approach, Widowson stated
the following main features:
 1. the heart of the language lesson is the communicative activity in itself, not
the grammar explanation.
2. the syllabus has to be built around a carefully grades selection of
communicative acts which the ss will need to perform their purposes.
3. language must be used for communicative purposes. Interaction is not only
advised but also fundamental.
4. all skills should receive the same attention.
5. if possible, authentic materials should be used. They put ss in contact with
the real use of the language and are highly motivating.
6. the more L2 is used, the better.

Neuro-Linguistic programme (NLP)

The newest trend in teaching is called the Neuro-linguistic programme and it is
based on the theories by Bandler and Grinder (The Structure of Magic). They
explained that by understanding the inner language of the brain anyone can learn to
achieve the excellent result of the most expert communicators, teachers and therapists;
NLP offers three important benefits:
1. a new model of how people learn (brain as a computers’ user manual)
2. it delivers teachers new ways to get the ss to the relaxed state required to get
knowledge.
3. it provides a model of what teaching is, how effective teachers create a sense
of ‘rapport’ with ss.

According to NLP when ss learn they are using the 5 senses. These sensory
systems are called representational system in NLP, and each student has his favourite
one and learns through it. Effective teachers learn how to speak in each of the
representational systems. E.g., we can reach visual learners through words written on
the boards, diagrams… auditory learners through discussions, etc…
NLP proves that ss memorise information better if they are in a relaxed state. The
key ways to do this are:
1. anchoring (as if you were listening to a song which reminds you of your
youth. You can, e.g., play the same tune at the beginning of the lessons.
2. rapport ( a kind of understanding among friends). The teacher has to achieve
it, so that ss will feel at ease in class and will, therefore, learn better.
 3. leading: inviting ss to follow suggestions, rather than ordering them to do
things.

CONCLUSION
Throughout this topic, we have analysed the evolution of the different methods
used to teach and learn a foreign language, using as a starting point the classical times
and the didactic methodology used for Latin and Greek, following with the first
approaches aimed at the teaching of modern languages ( such as the grammar
translation method), some of the most important 20th century innovations (such as
structuralism and transformational generative grammar), and finally the most
influential present day trends: the functional-notional grammar, the communicative
approach and the NLP.
Nowadays the most common methods used for the teaching of a FL and the ones
that can be found in the majority of textbooks are those based on communicative
theories, since the attention is focused on everything related to communication and
language, about real speakers or listeners and the concept of context. Ss, thus, are
considered as active elements who must know the different communicative functions
and dominate the four skills. So that, key terms for this present day trend are
motivation and interaction.
However, we should try to be as eclectic as possible and be able to select among
the wide range of options we’ve got regarding the methods used to teach a FL. Even
though the communicative approach seems to be the most appropriate one we must
not neglect other methods which might also be valid depending on the needs and
specific characteristics of our ss.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES
- Canale and Swain. 1980. communicative approaches to second language
teaching and testing. Ontario ministry of education.
- David Crystal, The Encyclopaedia of the English Languagee.
- Keneth Rose & Gabriele Kasper. 2001. Pragmatics in Language Teaching.
CUP.