Discussion on H. Douglas Bronwn's chapter 2 (A methodical history of language teaching. In: BROWN, H. Douglas. Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to language pedagogy. New Jersey, Prentice Hall Regents, 2001.)
Question for discussion: Richards & Rodgers (1986) said that The Grammar Translation is a method for which there's no theory. Do you agree with this judgement?
See the slides below for further information:
http://www.4shared.com/document/HRJ66DTp/MTODOS_DE_ENSINO_DE_LNGUA_INGL.html
I agree to share. The grammar translation method is mainly aimed at developing the skills to read and translate the target language, without emphasizing the other skills, and this method does not take the student to build a real meaning of the object studied. Hence the criticism to this method. But I think the beginning of anything is subject to errors. Despite harsh criticism to this method It was the first major step in the development of other methods.
ResponderExcluirI don´t agree, because nothing function alone, the grammar translation is a method that can be combined with many theorys of learning to become the acquired knowledge more advantageous like for example the behaviorism in which the students can learn a second language through habit formation,practice,repeation,etc.The grammar translation develops the knowledge about vacabulary, but this isn´t enough. Everything you want to do correctly to be successful you need first the theory that the practice is not a failure.
ResponderExcluirI agree, because the grammar translation method wasn't based on any theory that justifies it, be it linguistic, psychological or educational. Without worrying about theorize it, it just had as essential purpose, the ability of the learner to read and translate the target language.
ResponderExcluirThe results of this method were essential for development of other methods. The dissatisfaction of studious of languages, led them to seek the improvement of teaching practice and learning through methods with theoretical supports.
joaquim I agree because the grammar rules said to follow the cultural morms, however at the time of speech we see that not everything heppens according to the grammar even agree that we must first learn english to learn in practice after only after studying the grammar
ResponderExcluirI agree to share. Because considering the translation activity essentially a producer of meaning. But when we don’t think so and treat or cover the translation as not merely the transfer from one language to another. Because the very meaning of a word or a text, will be determined by a reading. In the Grammar Translation is the same thing.
ResponderExcluirI agree, because when the Grammar Translation Method was developed there was a concern with the use of language teaching. It was a method designed to meet the needs of the time. The students just memorize words, there was no concern with competence in the target language.
ResponderExcluirI agree, because of the Grammar Translation Method is a structural method, not based on theory, but in methods that facilitate the dialogical experience that is essential for communication. The objective was to to supply the needs of the time.
ResponderExcluirI disagree, because every method needs of a theory, as well as all theory has its methods to that itself realize. For that grammar translation method works, it needs a support and this support would be its theory. It is believe that one method isn't born of a chance and wouldn't work if it not had a basis theory,to that through their studies would be realized.
ResponderExcluirEste comentário foi removido pelo autor.
ResponderExcluiragree, because the grammar translation method is based on the deductive process, and for that there is no need for theories, moreover it supports the idea that learning the language means to acquire certain skills and that can be learned through practice and not by rules or theoretical studies.
ResponderExcluirEste comentário foi removido pelo autor.
ResponderExcluirI'm really enjoying the discussions held in here! I'm also happy for the fact that more and more students are posting their opinions untimidly! Tomorrow is the last day for publishing any opinios about this topic (class 1)! Don't miss the chance! On Tuesday, we'll have another topic to work on. See you around.
ResponderExcluirI disagree because just like the other methods this one presents a sequence of characteristics that makes it somehow useful. It may not be so accepted like the others (By the way the others are a kind of compilation of the main methods), but this method can help the ones who really wants to learn a second language, at least the basic knowledge regarding to the structures of the target language. According to the connectionism the learning is reached through the information processing and I think that the Grammar Translation Method is a good way to beginning this process
ResponderExcluirI don´t agree because the grammar translation even as the theories of learning, require of theories that give it a theoretical support.
ResponderExcluirI don't agree. I think that was necessary a theory to auxiliar this method of the Grammar Translation, although this method have as main objectives only memorization of vocabulary and memorization of grammatical rules through the use drills is important an auxliar theory to obtain satisfatory results in the learning of language foreign because is through of the formation theory that make clean which the best methods to use in the learning second language.
ResponderExcluirJust to make it clear, please read this: "the grammar translation method is a foreign language teaching method derived from the classical (sometimes called traditional) method of teaching Greek and Latin. The method requires students to translate whole texts word for word and memorize numerous grammatical rules and exceptions as well as enormous vocabulary lists. The goal of this method is to be able to read and translate literary masterpieces and classics." (extracted from Wikipedia)
ResponderExcluirWhen Richards & Rodgers mentioned the word 'theory' above, they meant 'learning theory'. So, one must reconsider the use fo the term and think about it again. Please, bear in mind the state of art concerning the learning thories when the grammar translation method first appeared and started to be used. What learning theory was dominating the scenario in the end of 18th century?
ResponderExcluirEste comentário foi removido pelo autor.
ResponderExcluirI agree. The apredizagem is not subject to rules or theories.But the practice equivalent to the level of knowledge and difficulty of the student . In the use of a translation method Focused only on rules of grammar. A text, for example, translated word for word, maybe not following rules be understood. Already one in which not be translated literally, it is quite understandable. The ideal method is that use all the skills without Following the rules.
ResponderExcluirEste comentário foi removido pelo autor.
ResponderExcluirThe learning theory was humanism, because this period According to Michel Montagne (1533-1592), Considered the founder of modern pedagogy, the educational work was a simple form of memory without regard to reason and human consciousness.
ResponderExcluirI still don`t agree, because with this decorative method, in which only develop large vocabulary skills, needs some theories cause the acquired knowledge is insufficient and limited, in this case would require a social context, with daily practices in context, so you can get a better learning a second language.
ResponderExcluirI disagree, because I think the memorization of vocabulary and grammatical learning can be important to help in learning a foreign language, but it takes much more than that to really learn a language.
ResponderExcluirVilma Amorim disse: All methods are created importantes.O grammar translation method, focused as much memorization, while the method of series created by Gouin, went further, not only stopped to translate, but to create phrases that facilitated direct student learning. The first was the basis for the development of others.
ResponderExcluirEste comentário foi removido pelo autor.
ResponderExcluirIsla Rafaela disse: I disagree, because is important that every method has a theory, if not has a theory, is without base and does not work so well. Every method must have first a base, to be best accomplished.
ResponderExcluirI agree to share too. Because Teaching a language, regardless of it be foreign or not, requires a "plan" over the grammatical structures surrounding that language and, starting this "planning" to try to convey the contents, despite this there isn't a "theory of language" or a theoretical construct...
ResponderExcluirI agree. Because in connectionist learning is the result of accumulation of information and grammar helper is this process. So,the practice is more important than any theory and works even without the help of it.
ResponderExcluirI agree to share. The approach Grammar Translation, the focus of language learning is reading, little attention is given to pronunciation and detailed explanations of grammar. Works with fragmented structure of the target language and not the subjective values of the specific communication skills and not part of any learning theory.
ResponderExcluirI do not agree, surely there was some theoretical at the time that argued learning the foreign language only for grammar and translation, the other method only came about because someone began to rethink and criticize the method of grammar and translation.
ResponderExcluirEste comentário foi removido pelo autor.
ResponderExcluirI disagree because grammar translation is a teaching method and all method needs of a theory,grammar translation needs of exhaustive repetition,pratice,reading,memorize,and etc.I think that is tiresome but theory is like this.
ResponderExcluirI agree, because the method of grammar while the former, many people used it in their own learning and succeeded. Whether or not every individual will use this method to communicate, but has to be used with the method of learning in context to be useful.
ResponderExcluirI think that the Grammar Translation doens’t have theory cause it abides by the rules of Latim, that they were based in abstract gramatical rules, translation and vocabulary list. In fact, it doesn’t have theory ‘cause was JUST a imitation of the error gramatical rules of Latim.
ResponderExcluir