教育硕士毕业论文 - 初中英语显性与隐性语法教学的整合

山东师范大学硕士学位论文

implicit instruction on grammar in the context of China are still under dispute, and only a few studies explored the effects of the combination of implicit and explicit instruction on second language rules in China. Therefore, the current study may give an insight into those questions. However, this study is not trying to present a conclusive case but to start an inquiry. As language teaching is a theoretical and practical job, a more efficient way within the Chinese educational environment needs to be explored further. 0.4 Organization of this thesis

This thesis consists of 5 chapters.

Chapter one is the literature review which contains three sections. The first section mainly reviews the previous grammar teaching at home and abroad. In the second section, explicit and implicit grammar instruction is introduced including the development of explicit and implicit instruction and different views on explicit and implicit instruction. In the third section, researches on explicit and implicit instruction of second/foreign language grammar are introduced and the problems of the previous researches are pointed out.

Chapter two introduces the theories involved in this study, which include the related definitions, the techniques of explicit/implicit instruction, and the acquisition-learning hypothesis and noticing hypothesis.

Chapter three illustrates the whole procedure of the research. It covers the research purpose and hypothesis, subjects, instruments, experimental procedures and data collection.

Chapter four is about the results of the experiment, which conclude the data analyses from the two tests: pretest and post-test, and the data analyses from the post-treatment questionnaire. It also gives a brief discussion on the results.

Chapter five focuses on the major findings of the research and the implications of the integrative instruction in English grammar teaching. The author also points out the limitations of the research as well as the suggestions for further research.

3

山东师范大学硕士学位论文

Chapter One Literature Review

1.1 Historical review on grammar teaching

1.1.1 Grammar teaching in different language teaching methods

For the past 2500 years，grammar teaching has been the central part of foreign language teaching and learning (Rutherford 1987). And grammar teaching has undergone some changes throughout history. Teaching methods in different periods have had their own background of development and teaching objectives that differentiate them from each other. Changes in teaching methods result from changing views on grammar teaching.

Before the 1970s, the mainstreams of L2 teaching are Grammar-Translation Method (GTM), Direct Method and Audio-lingual Method.

Grammar-Translate Method

Grammar-Translate Method had become the standard way of studying foreign languages in schools by the nineteenth century. The aim of this method is to help learners to access and appreciate great literature and to translate literary works through extensive analysis of the grammar of the target language. Its advocates hold that foreign language study can train the mind and promote mental discipline and that learners will be able to read the language if they can manipulate the rules of grammar. In regard to grammar teaching, the Grammar-Translation Method has the following characteristics:

a. Instruction is given in the native language of the students. b. There is little use of the target language.

c. Focus is on grammatical parsing, i.e, the form and inflection of words. d. There is early reading of difficult classical texts.

e. A typical exercise is to translate sentences from the target language into the mother tongue.

f. The result of this method is usually an inability on the part of the students to use the language for communication.

4

山东师范大学硕士学位论文

g. The teacher does not have to be able to speak the target language.

(Howatt, 1984)

In this method, grammar is viewed as an end and is taught for its own sake. It overemphasizes the structure of the language, but ignores association of language form with meaning and use. It attaches importance to the accuracy of the language, but overlooks the fluency. It pays too much attention to grammatical rules, but neglects the development of communicative competence. It stresses the practice of grammatical rules, but no attention is given to the practice of using language meaningfully and communicatively in a real context. In this regard, we are not surprised to see that many students with years of formal English grammar training cannot communicate properly.

Grammar-Translation Method lays too much emphasis on grammar and grammar is regarded as the most important part. Grammar is taught in the deductive way.

Direct Method

Direct Method is a reaction to the Grammar-Translation Method and its failure to produce learners who could use foreign language they had been studying. It maintains that L2 learners can learn a second language exactly like L1 learners. Thus this method stresses spoken language rather than written language. Therefore, in the classroom teachers present new language by using mime, pictures, objects. Much of the class time was devoted to question-and-answer exchanges between teachers and students. Grammatical rules are not explicitly taught, but teachers encourage students to induce the rules of grammar. Some characteristics of this method are as follows:

a. No use of the mother tongue is permitted (i.e, teacher does not need to know the students’ native language).

b. Lessons begin with dialogues and anecdotes in modern conversational style. c. Actions and pictures are used to make meanings clear. d. Grammar is learned inductively.

e. Literary texts are read for pleasure and aren’t analyzed grammatically. f. The target cultures also taught inductively.

g. The teacher must be a native speaker or have native like proficiency in the

5

山东师范大学硕士学位论文

target language.

(Howatt, 1984)

From the above we can see that in this method, grammar teaching focuses on grammatical rules and is sentence-oriented. Grammar cannot be used in real communication. And it neglects to foster learners‘ writing and reading skills. It does not spread widely because of constraints involving budget, classroom size, time, and teacher background. And it is criticized for its lack of theoretical foundations.

Audio-lingual Method

Neither the Grammar-Translation Method nor the Direct Method has its roots in any linguistic or psychological theory; the Audio-lingual Method is based on both the structural linguistics and the behavioral psychology of the 1950s. This method became dominant in the United States during the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s; it takes much from the direct method but adds features from structural linguistics and behavioral psychology. The characteristics of the Audiolingualism:

a. Lessons begin with dialogues.

b. Mimicry and memorization are used, based on the assumption that language is habit formation.

c. Grammatical structures are sequenced and rules are taught inductively. d. Skills are sequenced: listening, speaking-reading, writing postponed. e. Pronunciation is stressed from the beginning. f. Vocabulary is severely limited in initial stages. g. A great effort is made to prevent learner errors.

h. Language is often manipulated without regard to meaning or context. i. The teacher must be proficient only in the structures, vocabulary, etc.

(Howatt, 1984)

The drawbacks of this method may be obvious: as a consequence of the neglect of language context or purpose, the ignorance of language function. Students tend to lack flexibility and be unable to use learned material when they faced with a context which they have not learned in class. Another defect, though less obvious, is that it makes second language learning dull and painful, due to the pains-taking efforts it

6