Editorial
This article was originally published by Pharus Academiae. Year VIII, Issue 12. Dec. 2015, a local journal published in Spanish.

Concepts of Grammar: Understanding Changes in a More Dynamic ELT Classroom

Jorge Torres Almazán, Mexico

Jorge Torres Almazán is a teacher at the American School of Tampico, Mexico. Jorge has taught EFL for 15 years, holds a BA in Pedagogy, MA in Education Administration, and ICELT. He has been speaking examiner for Cambridge Language Assessment since 2004. He is member of U. S. Alumni Global Community. E-mail: jtorres@ats.edu.mx www.ats.edu.mx

Menu

Introduction
From former to new views
Resistance to change
Adapting new approaches
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Every learner has a special place for grammar in the learning process. For many teachers it is one or the most important part of learning a language. There are different reasons for these conceptions. However there seems to be new ideas about its role in ELT. The more we study the more we realize that language and grammar as well as other features are alive and in constant change.

According to Richards and Rogers, (2003) grammar became the model for learning languages, especially Latin, five hundred years ago. Later during the 17th and 18th centuries in England children would go to school to study Latin grammar. In those years, considered by many the beginning of formal foreign language learning, there was not a clear idea on where to start, so they chose grammar which is related to accuracy. In this way they would ensure correctness. Ever since then, grammar has had a special place in learning languages especially in English language teaching.

Thornbury, (2007) says that “Grammar is partly the study of what forms (or structures) are possible in a language. Traditionally, grammar has been concerned almost exclusively with analysis at the level of the sentence. Thus grammar is a description of the rules that govern how language´s sentences area formed” (p. 01). This may be one of the best known and most up-to-date definitions of what grammar is that is why it could be the most accepted by teachers. The definitions given to grammar have changed over time and now we have a better understanding of what it is.

From former to new views

Before the 1950´s grammar was the most important aspect in second language learning and Grammar Translation Method was widely used (Richards and Rogers, 2003) it was seen like that by the majority of the teachers around the world. Teachers used books and techniques that were designed and adjusted to deal with it. It was extremely important to avoid accuracy errors. Translating was another important aspect of the language, in fact there was no need of more because in those days people did not travel as much as today. It was only wealthy people who had access to language learning and most of the learning was to read or write, there was no face to face communication.

From some years to now depending on the approach or theory, our concepts of grammar have changed or have been modified. Some times in a more successful way than another. One of the most known approaches or theories related to grammar is the one proposed by Noam Chomsky, (1995). His theory of transformational grammar and the difference between competence and performance, after that there have been some other theories which focus on different aspects of the language. However, most of them continue giving a special place to grammar.

Resistance to change

Swan, (2005) states that “Language change may be a natural and universal phenomenon, but people worry about it a great deal” (p. 60) and it has been said that teachers also concerned about. We may feel lost if we do not know about rules, we feel we are not doing a good job if we do not present, explain, practice, and produce grammar in our lesson plans.

This may be one of the reasons grammar has been treated in a different and special way along these years. It seems teachers cannot get rid of the old way. New studies and research have brought more information about this topic and about what other things we can do to modify our opinions and beliefs. We, teachers will have the task of changing students´ views on this issue. It has become our responsibility. We are the ones who see how fast all this happens.

About this Swan, (2005) also says that “People who are not professionally concerned with language may regard all these phenomena as instances of “bad grammar”, feeling perhaps that there is a single correct version of the language defined by rules codified in grammar rules, and that deviation from these norms is a rule-breaking: a sign of carelessness, ignorance, poor education, or even low intelligence” (p. 61). This may be the reason my students want to see grammar in class. Once I heard one of my students saying they did not learn anything, that day we did not study structures. In spite of the fact of new studies and research and new means of communication such as internet are now available, this concept remains strong, not only in students, but also in people in general.

Adapting new approaches

Many theories and approaches are still unknown by teachers. Some others are known and are followed rigorously, which up to certain extent is not a good idea. Many teachers followed ideas like the one suggested by Halliday (2013) which for him is the foundation of the language that describes languages as a series of structures organized around the sentence and the way in which grammar is organised to make meaning. Many teachers adapted this approach and that is why nowadays we can see lessons based on grammar explained through a context and sentences used in that context. After presenting a specific structure teachers ask students to produce new sentences for the same or related context.

Krashen´s Monitor Hypothesis (1982) came to change a bit some ideas about grammar. According to him there is acquisition and learning. Learning is where grammar fits in this approach. We are aware of this, but it would seem that we pay more attention to learning than to acquisition. The problem in here is that we need to figure out how to promote this acquisition Krashen (1982) proposes. According to him there is a need for right input and exposure which is still missing in many classrooms. For some teachers the emerging of communicative methodologies must be the end or decline of grammar approaches, but these grammar approaches are still widely used. In some school even after supposedly adapting a communicative approach for their lessons, there is uncertainty about when to introduce grammar or how much importance it should be given. In addition to that there may not be a teacher training program to refresh or update teachers´ knowledge.

Larsen-Freeman, (2003) says grammar is the fifth skill, “When we view grammar as a skill, we are much more inclined to create learning situations that overcome the inert knowledge problem. We will not ask our students to merely memorize rules and then wonder why they do not apply then in communication” (p. 13). This is something very common in second language lessons, when we achieve to convey the necessary knowledge to students and they become competent in the language, we face the situation of having students aware of structures and rules, but unable to use them in unfamiliar or more communicatively contexts. Their knowledge is limited to sentence level. This attempt to classify grammar as a skill is a way to change teachers´ ideas and beliefs about when and how to introduce it. However, teachers are reluctant to see grammar that way, for them there are only four skills.

Harper in Larsen-Freeman, (2003) tries to present grammar in a more dynamic way and suggests a contrasting chart of grammars, one he calls “A Priori Grammar” based on Chomsky´s ideas and another one he calls “Emergent Grammar”

Contrasting Grammars

Table 1 Harper in Larsen-Freeman, (2003, p. 29)

Talmy and Givón in Larsen-Freeman (1991) believe that these reviews represent extremes and agree that they should be flexible. Here is where teacher fall in the middle of nowhere, because they either take grammar as a prerequisite for generating discourse or think that it emerges in discourse and will see it as an effect. Many teachers and people would say that there is only one form to convey a particular meaning, which is part of what prescriptive grammar promotes, Brown & Attardo, (2005) very similar to the “A Priori” idea. As a consequence there is no change and neither of the approaches by itself helps that much. Richards, (2009) makes a comparison of the situations of grammar in language teaching 30 year ago and now. This can give us an idea on how a specialist sees these rapid changes in recent years. According to him:

Then

Richards´ (2009) comparison seems to summarize what has been happening to grammar in recent years. However, not much of this has happened in our context. Many classrooms are far from the “now” list that he suggests. Many lessons are being taught using the “then” list characteristics. For teachers it is easier to assess accuracy than fluency, it is easier to have controlled activities based on grammar where there is no room for mistakes (on behalf of the teacher) than freer activities which may endanger teacher´s performance. It is easier to use the presentation, practice, and produce approach than the task based learning, for example. The “then” model is a comfortable one for teachers, especially novice or untrained ones, but it obstructs further development and learning for students. Many teachers insist on the idea that grammar is absolute and inflexible, they do not want to get rid of old ideas or to at least use the best of them.

Conclusion

Now it is easier to understand Thornbury´s (2007) quote above, he uses the words “partly” because grammar is just a part of what a language is, “traditionally” because that is what has been happening, teachers insist on keeping the tradition, and “almost exclusively” because fortunately more and more teachers are turning their eyes to new, and different approaches. These key words in Thornbury´s quote are a bell that is calling us for a change in our concepts and beliefs about grammar.

Batstone (2003) suggests a list of aspects related to grammar aspects which were and have been neglected in the past, but many more teachers are aware of their existence now. According to him grammar has to do with distance and attitude, social distance, psychological distance, hypothetical distance, meaning, choice, and point of view all of them related to context. As we can see Batstone goes further in explaining what grammar is. Some or all of these aspects were and are rarely taken into account when we think about grammar. This invites teachers to research and innovate more than ever. When Batstone, (2003) describes grammar he says that “What grammar is depends on how you choose to look at it, so we can regard it as a formal mechanism, as a functional system for signaling meanings, or as a dynamic resource which both users and learners call on in different ways at different times” (p. 81). It may not be each of these concepts in isolation, but a combination or all of them together. Of course our students call on grammar in the security of the classroom most of the times, but they have to be ready to call on it in situations beyond that.

To have students ready to cope with new situations, not only in the classroom, but also outside it, Larsen-Freeman, (2003) expresses this “If we aspire to build the bridge between forms and use that our students need in order to overcome the inert knowledge problem, to enhance their attitudes, and to sustain their motivation, we will need to change the way we think” (p. 09). This is indeed what we have to do. These thoughts and new trends have not completely succeeded in replacing the old ones. However, they seem to be in the process.

References

Batstone, R. (2003) Grammar, Oxford University Press

Brown, S. & Attardo, S. (2005) Understanding Language, Interaction, and Variation, University of Michigan Press

Chomsky, N. (1995) The Minimalist Program, MIT Press.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003) Teaching Language: From Grammar to Grammaring, Thomson-Heinle

Krashen, S. (1982) Principles and Practice In Second Language Acquisition, University of Southern California www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/principles_and_practice.pdf
(consulted 20/11/2014)

Halliday, M - Robert de BEAUGRANDE
www.beaugrande.com/LINGTHERHalliday.htm (consulted 14/2/2013)

Richards, J. 30 years of TEFL/TESL: A Personal Reflection. SEAMEO Regional Language Centre Singapore www.professorjackrichards.com/wp-content/uploads/30-years-of-TEFL.pdf
(consulted 15/10/2010)

Richards, J. and Rodgers, T. (2003) Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching, Cambridge University Press

Swan, M. (2005) Grammar, Oxford University Press.

Thornbury, S. (2007) How to Teach Grammar, Pearson Education Limited

Please check the English Language Improvement for Teachers course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the English Language Improvement for Adults course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the British Life, Language and Culture course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the Methodology for Teaching English Spoken Grammar course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the Methodology & Language for Secondary Teachers course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the Teaching Advanced Students course at Pilgrims website.