4.1. Methods of language teaching

4.1.1. Traditional learning theories and approaches

In this description we will take a brief look at methods of language teaching which were used at various times in the 20^th century. Although we shall present these in a sequence that corresponds roughly to their historical development, it should not be assumed that each method in turn was totally abandoned in favour of its successor. The situation is more complex than that. To begin with, it is certainly true that all approaches to foreign language teaching, known as traditional, or modern, methods at their time, have survived intact. It is also true that some teachers somewhere in the world are still using all methods. Moreover, the methods themselves have been modified by teachers and textbook writers, while still remaining recognisably the same basic method. Then there have been considerable borrowings from one method by another so that some amalgamated versions have resulted. As we shall see, ultimately, the idea of adopting a method and sticking to it or abandoning it is unsatisfactory. The very idea of a ‘method’ is becoming unfashionable in modern western methodology. However, the following methods are archetypes (classic examples) and offer a clear picture of the way language teaching developed in the 20^th century.

4.1.1.1. Grammar-translation method

This was only called a ‘method’ by later methodologists who were pointing out its weaknesses. For a long time it had been uncritically assumed that this was the only way languages should be taught.

The method consisted of giving the students grammatical rules and paradigms. (Paradigms are lists of forms arranged to a grammatical pattern. Patterns are structural items introduced in the form of examples or model sentences. Structural items are grammatical points about the language. An item of the language is a ‘bit’ of language we can teach our students.) For example: The Simple Present Indicative Active Tense of the verb ‘to go’:

Person	Singular	Plural
1	I go	We go
2	You go	You go
3	He She goes It	They go

Students were also given lists of vocabulary in the form of lexical items together with their translation equivalents in their mother tongue.

And they were given grammatical rules such as the rule for the usage of the verb system or personal pronoun system and so on, together with any exceptions to these rules.

First students had to memorise all these so-called facts about the language. They were often tested on their knowledge by being asked to recite the paradigms or give the translation of words. Or they were asked to ‘purse’ words. E.g.: He goes is the 3^rd person singular of the simple present indicative tense of the verb ‘to go’.

Next the students were made to put their knowledge to use by translating sentences or texts from mother tongue to foreign language or visa-versa.

In retrospect, there were many serious disadvantages to the grammar-translation method. Here are some obvious ones:

• the grammatical analysis was very neat and satisfactory for the grammarians who had devised it, but it often made facts about the language very confusing to the students;

• the method put a tremendous strain on students’ memory;

• word-to-word translations were often unsatisfactory;

• the students had to learn grammatical terms, such as ‘nouns, verbs, indicative, tense’, etc. In fact, they had to learn a new language for talking about the language.