Evidently, the grammar-translation method was the most widely used one up till the 1920-s. Gouin's Series method was developed in the 1880-s, but did not acquire significant popularity. Speaking about grammar-translation method, I thought it was interesting that people actually managed to acquire speaking skills (there were diplomatic relations and trade negotiations after all), while implementing it. Then I remembered how many upper class families had private tutors for their children, who were usually native speakers. Also, it was considered good-tone for young people from wealthy families to spend a year traveling Europe, thus putting finishing touches to their education. So, maybe, we can talk about the combination of immersion method with the grammar-translation one. Probably, classical schooling provided enough grammar instruction and linguistic analysis for listening comprehension and speaking skills to nest comfortably.
In 1900 Jerome K. Jerome published a sequel to the Three Men In A Boat, which was called Three Men On A Bummel. In it the three friends (without Monmorancy, sadly) went cycling through Switzerland, Austria, and Germany. Beside the actual narrative the book has a lot of digressions on language learning and various linguistic adventures the characters get in. In particular, Jerome compares the language teaching methods used in Europe and in Great Britain, not to the latter's favour. Jerome wrote that an average German school graduate could freely converse in English, he also notes some things about the difference in school system and organization, but nevertheless. I am wondering how they could speak English freely, if the main method at that time was the grammar-translation one? I don't believe that you can learn to speak by reading and translating. This method was very popular in the USSR, and speaking was traditionally a weakness.
I also was also interested in some of the 1970-s methods, which I think have no relation to the word effectiveness. Community Learning method, for instance, is hardly different from a conference or banquet employing a consecutive interpreter. How this method could have possibly been successful remains a great mystery to me.
6 comments:
Arrgh ... My comment disappeared.
In any case, I thought it was an interesting analysis you did re. classical learning and grammar translation. I also thought that perhaps the characters in Three Men in a Boat did not use grammar translation.
I later remembered Mark Twain's essays on German, but there he referred to Grammar-Translation method, as I recall.
Do you know what methods other than GT were used in Europe of late 19th cent.?
So if the tutors were native speakers of the L2, then was it actually grammar-translation? I would have to say no, in spite of what history tells us. Their basic instruction must've been direct translation...but any self-respecting tutor would have had their students speaking (I would think).
I'm interested in reading those books.
I found many of the methods questionable...but I'm sure their proponents would find me questionable.
Thea, that was exactly my question. I think there is some lacking in the books. Maybe it is due to relative unpopularity of these methods. I mean, how many people would actually be able to afford a native-speaking tutor?
Jerome is a wonderful read, especially if you like British humour.
I have to believe that a person's motivation is a huge factor, no matter what method the teacher is using. If a person wants to learn, they will. Perhaps it will just take a little longer if that teacher happens to be using the grammar-translation method.
In my point of view grammar translation method is not something scary. Furthermore it sometimes works better than others especially in adult education. As ESL teachers diagnosing the target group and behaving pragmatically might work sometimes.
Post a Comment