Grammar translation method Essay

Both the grammar reading regularity and communicative dustup inform ar dogma systems for getting a contrary manner of speaking. Whereas the grammar displacement method foc physical exercises on the translation of certain grammar rules and the translation of vocabulary, the communicative access code aims for acquiring the skill of discourse for the pupil Scrivener (2011). Both methods argon good in their own way, although the communicative attempt focuses on the certain aspiration of linguistic communication, namely communication between homophile beings. In this essay the grammar translation method and the communicative approach will be compared and contrasted, laying additional emphasis on the assertion that the communicative approach is more effective for the scholarship and conceiveing of a foreign linguistic communication than the grammar translation method. offset printing of all, a remarkable difference in quarrel usage is obtrusive when comparing t he two methods.While the grammar translation method exclusively uses the learners mother tongue, the communicative approach uses nonhing else but the actual target language. With the use of the mother tongue, it is easier to understand grammar and meaning of words. (Rhalmi, M. (2009). This is a needful skill to decipher written textbooks. When only using the foreign language, the level of literal communication increases. (Rhalmi, M. (2009). To find out which of two outcomes has a larger value, it needs to be clear what the original goal of language is. communication is a required skill to survive. Oral communication is something that dates from the origin of the human kind. The invention of written language is a lot more recent. (Bright, W. (n.d). This proves that language is originally used for communication. Given this point, there loafer be cerebrate that the outcome of the communicative approach has bigger value to languages actual goal.In contrast, a really attractive feature on the grammar translation method is its easily understandable explanation of grammar, words and phrases. Because of the particular that all the explanation happens in the mother tongue, it is easy for the learner to understand what is being said.Also, learners acquire a better capacity of understanding synonyms in the foreign language, due to the fact that they have already learned the meaning. Secondly, the communication between instructor and learner is flaw slight. Since the teacher and the learner speak the uniform language, the teacher can easily verify whether the pupils have learned what is respectable explained. (Fitriyanti, R. (2011).Within the communicative approach, the communication between student and teacher is a lot more difficult and tedious in the beginning, which has to do with the use of target language only. However, the communication between teacher and learner is from a good deal more value as the learner becomes more familiar with the foreign lan guage (Abradi, C. (n.d). Because of goal aimed teaching in communicative language teaching, the communicative competence improves quickly (this will be explained later).What this says is that the tedious communication at the beginning can better be seen as a learning moment, rather than a disadvantage. Thirdly, in both methods there is a totally different way of acquiring skills. With the grammar translation method the students are supposititious to learn the rules about the target language when sitting down and comprehend to their teacher. Grammar structures are explained and vocabulary is taught through word lists with a translation. The learners practice to apply what theyve learned exists out of exercises where the learner needs to realise sentences or texts from the native to the target language and the other way around. (Rahlmi, M. (2009).Thus, this is a rather passive way of learning. The communicative language teaching lessons are quite different. These lessons contain m eaningful activities in which the learner is required to interact. The activities are based on the interest of the learner to boost learning motivation. (Rhalmi, M. (2009). So, whereas the grammar translation method is rather passive, communicative language teaching is quite active. inactive learning is not really effective for the learner. (Ebbens, S (2013) states that a often better result of learning is caused by (inter)active practice.To go on, the teachers role is quite different in both methods. With the grammar translation method, the teacher is basically the guide for the learning process. The method is teacher centred, which means that the coterie focuses just on the explanation of the teacher. The role of the teacher here is to countenance information to the students (Fitriyanti, R. (2011). Teachers in communicative classrooms will find themselves talking less and listening morebecoming active facilitators of their students learning (Larsen-Freeman, 1986) The communica tive approach is a student centred method. Although the teacher sets up the exercise, it is the learners slaying which fills up most of the lesson (Orellana. (2007). Thelearning process is less effective when the teacher does most work at in the classroom (teacher centred method) instead of the students doing most work in the classroom. (student centred method) (Ebbens, S (2013).A fifth issue, on which the two methods can be compared and contrasted on, is its historical range. The fact that learners of the grammar translation method are not able to produce nationwide output in the form of oral communication, became evident in the years 1939 until 1945 (World War II) when the grammar translation method was not teaching students the foreign language effectively enough to communicate with assort or to understand the communications of the enemy, which was required to survive. When this occurred, a new approach appeared known as the audio lingual method which was based on structural ism and (The Grammar-Translation Method, n.d,).In 1957 the audio lingual method was criticised by the salient linguist Noam Chomsky for its inability to teach learners to creatively apply language (Rhalmi, M. (2009). part because of this criticism, during the 60s of the 20th century, commutative language teaching was introduced in the classroom. (Rhalmi, M. (2009). This states that communicative language teaching was invented as a reaction on an alternative method for the grammar translation method. Thus, the communicative approach is actually already a more modern and adapted method of teaching the core goal language has.To summarise the main points mentioned in this essay The difference of language usage in both methods, the advantage in language usage of both methods, the way of acquiring skills in both methods, the teacher and students role, and the historical background of both methods. These points given, I can conclude that the communicative approach of teaching a language is more effective to teach the learner languages original goal, communication, than the grammar translation method. Although, if one is talking about comprehensive output in the form of letters and/or written text translations, the grammar translation method is superior to the communicative approach.BibliographyRhalmi, M. (2009). Communicative Language didactics (The CommunicativeApproach). Available http//www.myenglishpages.com/blog/communicative-language-teaching-communicative-approach/. Last accessed 05/06/2014. Bright, W. (n.d). Whats the Difference between Speech and Writing?.Available http//www.linguisticsociety.org//resource/whats-difference-between-speech-and-writing. Last accessed 05/06/2014. Rahlmi, M. (2009). Grammar Translation Method. Available http//www.myenglishpages.com/blog/grammar-translation-method/. Last accessed 05/06/2014. Fitriyanti, R. (2011). Grammar Translation Method. Available http//novaekasari09.wordpress.com/2011/06/12/grammar-translation-method/. Last accessed 05/06/2014. Abradi, C. (n.d). Advantages and disadvantages of communicative language teaching. Available https//www.academia.edu/4743392/Communicative_Language_Teaching_theories_lesson_plan_and_application. Last accessed 05/06/2014. Orellana. (2007). The Communicative Approach in English as a Foreign Language Teaching Leer ms http//www.monografias.com/trabajos18/the-communicative-approach/the-communicative-approach.shtmlhowixzz33uLe7fXe.Available http//www.monografias.com/trabajos18/the-communicative-approach/the-communicative-approach.shtmlhow. Last accessed 07/06/2014. The Grammar-Translation Method. (n.d). Available http//hlr.byu.edu/methods/content/text/grammar-text.htm. Last accessed 02/06/2014. Scrivener (2011). nurture Teaching. 3rd ed. Londen Macmillian. 31-32. Ebbens, S (2013). Effectief leren. Houten Noordhoff uitgevers.