Teaching Grammar in Communicative EFL Setting

叶佳敏

【摘要】本文基于“英语语法是可教的”这一理念，讨论了英语语法的本质和各个方面，以及在以学生为中心的沟通式情境下语法如何被教。除此之外，围绕着主题，本文还探讨了关于英语语法教学的相关有趣话题，例如如何将学生个体差异性融入于语法教学，指令性语法和描写性语法，在英语学习中犯语法错误是否应该被纠正等，都会被交织成一个有机的英语语法教学探讨课题。

Abstract： This paper discusses the importance for EFL learners to learn English grammar， and the refined meaning of grammar in contemporary world. Then it talks about given the communicative setting and， how English teachers play their role well and employ teaching methods and theories according to the different needs of the students. At last， the paper offers tentative suggestions on how English teachers engage in grammar instruction more successfully under communicative setting.

Keywords： EFL learning； Grammar； Grammar instruction； Communicative setting

【中图分类号】G42 【文献标识码】A 【文章编号】2095-3089（2013）06-0125-02

1. Introduction

Gone though a winding path （from being downplayed to rightly？鄄played） in linguistic field， grammar instruction？蒺s status in EFL teaching is now conceived by both learners and teachers as necessary and effective， but disturbingly not as something they would enjoy doing after all. This article based on the hypothesis that “grammar can be taught” aims to discuss the questions as follows： nature and aspects of grammar， the necessity of grammar instruction in student？鄄centered communicative teaching background and most crucially， tentative suggestions on how grammar can be taught in the EFL setting. Along with illustrating these main issues， the ideas of “teachers？蒺 role and students？蒺 role”， “descriptive grammar VS prescriptive grammar”， “learners？蒺 individual differences”， “whether mistakes should be corrected in grammar learning”， which have been regarded as most relevant to the main issues will be interwoven into an intact whole as necessary.

2. Grammar instruction in EFL settings

2.1 Grammar can be taught and should be taught

The status of grammar in foreign language teaching has long been a controversial issue. Some people claim that in order to learn a foreign language one doesn？蒺t have to learn grammar. This could possibly be true for people who speak mother tongue as they naturally acquire and command the forms and meanings of grammar with the meaning transaction process， and through recurring trial and error until reaching the obstacle？鄄free communication phase. However， this could be misleading and not the case for EFL learners： It missed the point that the focus here in EFL teaching is not whether teaching and learning grammar is necessary or sufficient for language learning， but whether it helps or not. And the answer is apparently “yes” provided it is taught consistently as a means to improving mastery of language instead of as an end to itself.

2.2 The nature of grammar and the grammar instruction

2.2.1 The definition of grammar

According to Ur， grammar may be roughly defined as “the way a language manipulates and combines words in order to form longer units of meaning”. Here “units” refer to the base unit like words， phrases， and clauses. We may say that a learner who ‘knows grammar？蒺 is the one who mastered and applied these rules to express himself in what would be considered acceptable language forms. Grammar does not only affect how units of language are combined to “look right”， but it also affect their meaning. In many cases， grammar instructions tend to neglect meaning and favor the accuracy of forms. Take the post 1980？蒺s generation as an example， grammar instruction has without any exception initiated with the structure explanation of a grammatical rule， and then followed by the rote memorization. Accurate storage of fixed constitution into one？蒺s mind was highly expected in order to minimize the possibility of making a mistake in exams. It？蒺s not surprising that after a grammar lesson， students end up being perplexed about the actual meaning and application of this grammatical rule while being skilled in mechanically ticking the right option on the answer sheet. With the reformation of the overall design of the English course book， new concept and goals of English learning and imbalance between “form and meaning” has been much improved. However， it is still of great significance to get an idea of what exactly grammar learning consists of to shed a light upon grammar instruction in return.

2.2.2 Three interacting elements in grammar

First and foremost thing in grammar learning is the awareness of three interacting dimension of grammar： form （structure）， meaning （semantics） and function （pragmatics）.

（Larsen？鄄Freeman， 1990）

Learning grammar does not only include learning structure， but also the meaning. One of the jobs as EFL teachers is to help students make a leap from form？鄄focused work to fluent， but acceptable production， by providing a “bridge”： a variety of practice activities that familiarize them with the structures in context and giving practice both in form and communicative meaning.

Under the communicative approach， the consciousness to link grammar with certain context is much valued. As is suggested in the pie， there is a departure from traditional grammar teaching which “dissociates grammar from context and deals in separate sentences”（Widdowson， 1988：154） and a beginning to address the importance of pragmatics. It happens when we sometimes choose to use passive voice instead of active voice， and this is definitely not the challenge on the sentence level or meaning level， but on the improved awareness of sensitiveness to the context.

2.3 Teachers？蒺 role in grammar instruction

It should be noted here that as EFL teachers what we should hope for is to bring about in learners a skill in applying the rules， not merely knowledge of the rules. In other words， to raise the consciousness of the learners to notice grammar and to nurture their ability to produce English accurately. A problem that often confronts teachers is that the natural development of students？蒺 emerging grammar systems doesn？蒺t always follow the plan laid out in the textbook， and for their command of grammar to continue developing， they need to get into the habit of noticing new grammar structures when they read or listen to English. The idea is that “once a student becomes aware of a particular grammar point/language feature or repeatedly exposed to communicative use of the structure， he will continue to notice the structure subsequently”. However， input doesn？蒺t promise intake： the actual absorption and digestion， let alone output—the production of it. Hence L2 teachers might need to resort to some effective methods to help students transfer input to intake and then use it naturally.

2.4 Tentative suggestions for grammar instruction

Ur has generalized three basic steps in the way of grammar instruction： Presentation of a structure， explanation， and practice. a） Presentation： To get the learners to perceive the structure and to take it into short？鄄term memory. b） Isolation and explanation： This refers to move away the context， and focus on the grammatical items themselves. The objective is that the learners should understand these various aspects of the structure. c） Practice： A series of exercises aim to get the learners absorb the structure thoroughly to transfer the short？鄄term memory into long？鄄term memory.Yet any generalization about the “best” way to teach grammar like what kind of teaching procedures should be used and in what order will have to take into account both the wide range of knowledge and skills that need to be taught and the different kinds of structures subsumed under the heading “grammar”. Besides， the learners？蒺 individual differences should also be considered. Even in the same class， students have different levels of grammar knowledge， and different students prefer different teaching approaches. For example， take “inductive and deductive” teaching method as an example， some students and teachers are more comfortable with inductive approach， for it allows students a chance to figure out the structure before you explain it to them， which makes them more active participants in the learning process； however， for reasons of culture or learning styles， some students are more inclined to a deductive approach. So the teachers would have to experiment with learners and find out the fittest way. The following are several tips for L2 teachers to instruct grammar in a more effective way and hopefully would kill some boring air in the classroom. （1）Kill two birds with one stone. Teachers are suggested to choose an approach that does more than merely teaching grammar. Grammar instruction should work as a catalyst for language acquisition， not purely as a way to learn the complicacy of the language and improve accuracy. It is well？鄄advised that time spent on grammar instruction should be shared in helping learners develop vocabulary， listening comprehension， oral and written competence， etc. As is mentioned， students learn best when they actively engage in the process of learning. It is also well？鄄understood that the chief obstacle for teachers who like to employ learner？鄄centered teaching is that most students are ill？鄄prepared to adopt it： Students are so conditioned by their previous experiences that are characterized by teacher？鄄centered models. Here comes a feasible solution： the organic combination of grammar with other language skills would be a good and feasible option to highlight the learners？蒺 position in language learning. Grammar is considered by most students tedious and dogmatic， so if teachers do not arouse their enthusiasm at this moment， the situation could only get worse and result in a “monologue drama”. Instead， if learners are positioned in this central place of making up dialogues and keeping diaries using the grammar they have just learned， they are bound to feel much obliged and motivated to take the initiative. Needless to say， the result would make a big difference. （2）Correct grammar mistakes only when it？蒺s necessary. Applied linguistics theory commonly distinguishes between errors （which are consistent and based on a mis？鄄learned generalization） and mistakes （occasional， inconsistent slips）. However， it is both unnecessary and tricky to cut a clear boundary between the two， for it is often hard to tell the difference with any degree of certainty. Making mistakes is an integral part of learning. It might be seen as a sign of the learners？蒺 progress towards a closer approximation to the target language. Some would say that it？蒺s not necessary to correct at all. As the learners advance， mistakes will disappear on their own. Yet the suggestion is not the policy of “Laissez？鄄faire”， but rather explores the right way of correction. It is important not to relate to mistakes as a sign of inadequacy. Instead， teachers should treat them as a means to advance teaching and learning， to use them in order to make progress. If teachers already know that certain grammar is particularly difficult， they would want to invest more time and energy in clarifying this grammar rule， and it？蒺s even better if they could inform the students in advance：“This is the mistake a lot of people make， look out for it！” It？蒺s impossible to correct every single mistake of learners， so it would be better to concentrate on important ones and direct learners？蒺 attention to them only. （3）Grammar rules are not laws. It is suggested that language teachers treat grammar from a descrip？tivist point of view rather than from a prescriptivist point of view. Language is constantly changing； it is a unique organic system that never goes static. As language changes， the grammar rules change along. That is why we would not prefer to describe grammar as a kind of “law”， but rather the rules （which often have exceptions） we apply when we want to successfully express ourselves. It？蒺s hard to say which is better， for it depends on each learner？蒺s individual need for language， occasion and audience， but we still need to keep an eye on the descriptive grammar which stays updating and synchronizes with the utterances people actually say every day. Some descriptive grammar may not be considered as Standard English， but it is better for students to know that such kind of grammar exists rather than treating it as “wrong” in the first place. As a matter of fact， some authoritative descriptive grammar dictionaries have been compiled to assist learners and teachers， for example， A Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English （LGSWE） is a comprehensive reference describing language patterns in actual use.

Learners？蒺 frustration has too often comes from the fact that rules in textbooks or reference grammars are presented as norms that must not be violated. They would soon find out that these rules get transgressed often in the native context. They are then presented with the many “exceptions” that puzzle and frustrate them. Suppose teachers were to show students that a rule is nothing more than a representation or a description of a form so that learners can make sense of them， then they may more easily accept grammar rules as helping tools rather than frustrating and boring objectives of study. It would be even better if the learners are involved in being critical of these descriptions and coming up with their own variations.

3. Conclusion

This article discussed grammar instruction in EFL setting， including issues like teachability of grammar for EFL learners， what aspects of grammar should be taught， teachers？蒺 role and learners？蒺 role， and last but not least， the tips that teachers should bear in mind when planning a grammar lesson or activity. The bottom line is that the subject matter—grammar， should never be treated as “dead”； it must be used in communicative context to yield its function； teachers need to fully consider the variability of the learners and employ the corresponding methods； students will have to take the initiative to make progress in grammar by equipping with the consciousness of noticing to take in， to adapt themselves to learner？鄄centered approach， and to benefit from making mistakes. References：

[1]Snow， D. From language learner to language teacher. Michigan： McNaughton &Gunn， Inc. 2007.

[2]Jean， G. & Simard， D. Grammar Teaching and Learning in L2： Necessary， but Boring？ Foreign Language Annals. Vol. 44， No. 3.2011.

[3]Larsen？鄄Freeman， D. Pedagogical descriptions of language： Grammar. Annual review of applied linguistics. （pp.187-195）. Cambridge： Cambridge University Press. 1990.

[4]Nassaji， H. & Fotos， S. Current development in research on the teaching of grammar. Annual reviews of applied linguistics. （pp.126-145）. Cambridge： Cambridge University Press. 2004.

[5]Ur， P.， Grammar practice activities： a practical guide for teachers. Cambridge； Cambridge University Press. 1995.