GRAMMAR TRANSLATION

1. What are the characteristics of this method?

Translation of a Literary passage

Either from native to target or vice versa. The translation is to be written or read aloud. Literal
translation is not necessary as long as the meaning is accurate. The passage is to include some specific
vocabulary and grammatical structures that are to be studied afterwards.

Goal: The passage chosen is literary, which is considered superior to spoken language. The aim is to
develop translation skills. In this case, the students are considered successful learner if they can
translate well.

Comprehension questions:

3 types

1. Questions to test the students’ comprehension of the text.

2. Questions whose answers are not in the text, but which call upon the students’ deduction/inferencing
skills.

3. Questions which link the passage to the learner’s own experiences.

Goal: to develop the students’ comprehension, reading and writing skills.

Antonyms/Synonyms

The instructor asks the students to find antonyms and synonyms in the text. A similar exercise could
consist in asking a definition from the students of certain words.

Goal: helps the students improve their vocabulary and create connections between the words of each
language.

Cognates

If the two languages share some similarities as regards sounds, the students are taught and required to
memorize specific sound patterns. It is the occasion for the teacher to point out the cognates that look
similar in the two languages but whose meaning differs. Goal: Facilitate learning by demonstrating the
similarities between the two languages.

Deductive presentation of rules

Grammar rules are presented with examples and exceptions are pinpointed. The rules are then to be
used in different examples.
Goal: The learners acquire the structure of the target language. Using the rule helps stimulate their
deductive skills and makes them use it automatically.

Fill in the blanks

Sentences with words missing. The sentences are supposed to be completed with a particular
vocabulary item to be used or with specific grammatical structures: in this case, phrasal verbs. Goal:
Helps practice grammar or retain the meaning of particular vocabulary.

Memorization

It can be lists of words with their translations or grammatical rules and verb conjugations.

Goal: A good mental exercise and students retain grammatical rules.

Using words in sentences

The language learners to use the new lexical items in sentences. Goal: To help memorization and make
sure the meaning is well understood.

Composition

Either the teacher gives the learners a topic relating to the passage studied that is to be written in the
target language, or asks them to make a summary.

Goal: Develop writing skills.

In what ways is this method of teaching helpful?

Students are learning a sophisticated variety of the target language by studying its literature. Grammar
is taught to them so they learn the basis of the foreign language and many exercises are practiced which
are a good stimulant to develop their inferencing abilities. The fact that the students are mobilized to
answer when a classmate gives a wrong answer gives more room for their deduction instead of passively
waiting for the teacher to give the correct answer. Lots of exercises consisting in translating or writing
provide the students with a good mental practice in order to improve the ease of switching from one
language to the other.

What are the weak points of the Grammar translation method?

The teacher is the “sage on the stage:” the students learn from him/her but it doesn’t work the other
way around. Little or no interaction occurs between the students during the class either. Since it is a
rather literary language that is taught, culture appears to matter here, yet this has little to do with
learning a language. Reading and writing are emphasized to the point that less attention is given to the
listening and speaking capacities of the learners, although learning a language is also a matter of being
able to interact with native speakers. The teacher also has the tendency to speak in the native language
(less focus on listening practice), and to give a direct translation instead of making the students infer the
meaning of some words.
2. How does this method fit with a cognitive approach to second language teaching?

The method is based on explicit teaching of prescriptive grammar rules: as such, it is not a cognitivist
method. It does not seek to take advantage of the innate cognitive capacities which drive language
acquisition in babies and untutored second language learners. Grammar-translation does not allow for
complex linguistic phenomena to be assimilated through implicit learning, or seek to facilitate such
natural processes through noticing exercises or focus-on-form in meaningful contexts. Some grammar-
translation activities rely on behaviourist or audiolingual methods, involving the contrastive analysis of
source and target languages. However, the method’s insistence on the presentation, practice and
production of grammar rules is unlike audiolingualism, which aims to teach patterns without explaining
rules. Grammar-translation shares its reliance on presentation-practice-production (PPP) techniques
with other second language teaching methods.

The grammar–translation method is a method of teaching foreign languages derived from the

classical (sometimes called traditional) method of teachingGreek and Latin. In grammar–translation
classes, students learn grammatical rules and then apply those rules by translating sentences
between the target language and the native language. Advanced students may be required to
translate whole texts word-for-word. The method has two main goals: to enable students to read
and translate literature written in the source language, and to further students’ general intellectual
development. It originated from the practice of teaching Latin; in the early 1500s, students learned
Latin for communication, but after the language died out it was studied purely as an academic
discipline. When teachers started teaching other foreign languages in the 19th century, they used
the same translation-based approach as had been used for teaching Latin. The method has been
rejected by scholars, and has no theoretical basis.

Criticism of the term[edit]

The overall concept of grammar-translation has been criticized due to a lack of verifiable sources
that supported the existence of such a method in the nineteenth century, or earlier.[1]

History and philosophy[edit]

The grammar–translation method originated from the practice of teaching Latin. In the early 1500s,
Latin was the most widely studied foreign language due to its prominence in government, academia,
and business. However, during the course of the century the use of Latin dwindled, and it was
gradually replaced by English, French, and Italian. After the decline of Latin, the purpose of learning
it in schools changed. Whereas previously students had learned Latin for the purpose of
communication, it came to be learned as a purely academic subject[citation needed].
Throughout Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries, the education system was formed primarily
around a concept called faculty psychology. This theory dictated that the body and mind were
separate and the mind consisted of three parts: the will, emotion, and intellect. It was believed that
the intellect could be sharpened enough to eventually control the will and emotions. The way to do
this was through learning classical literature of the Greeks and Romans, as well as mathematics.[citation
needed]
 Additionally, an adult with such an education was considered mentally prepared for the world
and its challenges.

At first it was believed[by whom?] that teaching modern languages was not useful for the development of
mental discipline and thus they were left out of the curriculum.[citation needed] When modern languages did
begin to appear in school curricula in the 19th century, teachers taught them with the same
grammar–translation method as was used for classical Latin and Greek.[2] As a result, textbooks
were essentially copied for the modern language classroom. In the United States of America, the
basic foundations of this method were used in most high school and college foreign language
classrooms.

Principles and goals[edit]

There are two main goals to grammar–translation classes. One is to develop students’ reading ability
to a level where they can read literature in the target language. [3] The other is to develop students’
general mental discipline. The users of foreign language wanted simply to note things of their
interest in the literature of foreign languages. Therefore, this method focuses on reading and writing
and has developed techniques which facilitate more or less the learning of reading and writing only.
As a result, speaking and listening are overlooked.[4]

Method[edit]
Grammar–translation classes are usually conducted in the students’ native language. Grammar
rules are learned deductively; students learn grammar rules by rote, and then practice the rules by
doing grammar drills and translating sentences to and from the target language. More attention is
paid to the form of the sentences being translated than to their content. When students reach more
advanced levels of achievement, they may translate entire texts from the target language. Tests
often consist of the translation of classical texts.

There is not usually any listening or speaking practice, and very little attention is placed on
pronunciation or any communicative aspects of the language. The skill exercised is reading, and
then only in the context of translation.

Materials[edit]
The mainstay of classroom materials for the grammar–translation method is the textbook. Textbooks
in the 19th century attempted to codify the grammar of the target language into discrete rules for
students to learn and memorize. A chapter in a typical grammar–translation textbook would begin
with a bilingual vocabulary list, after which there would be grammar rules for students to study and
sentences for them to translate.[2] Some typical sentences from 19th-century textbooks are as
follows:

The philosopher pulled the lower jaw of the hen.

My sons have bought the mirrors of the Duke.

The cat of my aunt is more treacherous than the dog of your uncle.[5]

Reception[edit]
The method by definition has a very limited scope[citation needed]. Because speaking or any kind of
spontaneous creative output was missing from the curriculum, students would often fail at speaking
or even letter writing in the target language[citation needed]. A noteworthy quote describing the effect of this
method comes from Bahlsen, who was a student of Plötz, a major proponent of this method[citation
needed]
 in the 19th century. In commenting about writing letters or speaking he said he would be
overcome with "a veritable forest of paragraphs, and an impenetrable thicket of grammatical rules."[6]

According to Richards and Rodgers, the grammar–translation has been rejected as a legitimate
language teaching method by modern scholars:

[T]hough it may be true to say that the Grammar-Translation Method is still widely practiced, it has
no advocates. It is a method for which there is no theory. There is no literature that offers a rationale
or justification for it or that attempts to relate it to issues in linguistics, psychology, or educational
theory.[7]

Influence[edit]
The grammar–translation method was the standard way languages were taught in schools from the
17th to the 19th century. Despite attempts at reform fromRoger
Ascham, Montaigne, Comenius and John Locke, no other methods gained any significant popularity
during this time.

Later, theorists such as Viëtor, Passy, Berlitz, and Jespersen began to talk about what a new kind of
foreign language instruction needed, shedding light on what the grammar–translation was missing.
They supported teaching the language, not about the language, and teaching in the target language,
emphasizing speech as well as text. Through grammar–translation, students lacked an active role in
the classroom, often correcting their own work and strictly following the textbook.

Despite all of these drawbacks, the grammar–translation method is still the most used method all
over the world in language teaching. This is not surprising as most language proficiency books and
tests are in the format of grammar–translation method; and hence the use of the method continues.