Members sign in | Register | Advertise | Contact
Home | About TEFL | Teacher training | TEFL jobs | Resource centre | Advice | Language schools | Forum

Resource centre > Theory and issues > Grammar teaching
Larry Lynch adds his views to the debate about implicit versus explicit grammar teaching, and argues that the chosen approach should depend on the teaching and learning conditions of an individual class.
Based on my 15 years of EFL (English as a Foreign Language) teaching experience,
the statement "grammar teaching should be implicit, not explicit" could be
argued both for and against. Whether to teach grammar as an extracted focus of
ELT (English Language Teaching) or more passively as an inductive, integral
topic has been the theme of countless debates on the part of institutions,
professors, grammarians and language researchers for decades. Grammar is the
branch of linguistics dealing with the form and structure of words or
morphology, and their interrelation in sentences, called syntax. The study of
grammar reveals how language works, an important aspect in both English
acquisition and learning.
In the early 20th century grammarians like the German-American anthropologist
Franz Boas and the Danish linguist Otto Jespersen began to describe languages
and Boas' work formed the basis of various types of American descriptive grammar
study. Jespersen's work was the fore-runner of such current approaches to
linguistic theory such as Noam Chomsky's Transformational Generative Grammar.
Chomsky, who studied structural linguistics, sought to analyze the syntax of
English in a structural grammar. This led him to view grammar as a theory of
language structure rather than a description of actual sentences. His idea of
grammar is that it is a device for producing the structure, not of a particular
language, but of the ability to produce and understand sentences in any and all
languages. Since grammar is the means by which we can understand how a language
"works", a definitive study of language grammar is essential to language study.
Strictly explicit grammar study however, and even grammar-focused lessons are
often not communicatively based. They can therefore be boring, cumbersome and
difficult for students to assimilate. The strict teaching of grammar /
structure, except with students of the Logical - Mathematical or Verbal -
Linguistic multiple intelligences, can be frustrating and highly ineffective.
Grammar teaching should be implicit
In the early 20th century, Jespersen, like Boas, thought grammar should be
studied by examining living speech rather than by analyzing written documents.
By providing grammar in context, in an implicit manner, we can expose students
to substantial doses of grammar study without alienating them to the learning of
English or other foreign language. I also agree with this implicit approach of
teaching grammar. The principal manner in which I accomplish this is by teaching
short grammar-based sessions immediately followed by additional function-based
lessons in which the new grammar / structure is applied in context.
The hypothesis is that adult language students have two distinct ways of
developing skills and knowledge in a second language, acquisition and learning.
Acquiring a language is "picking it up" i.e., developing ability in a language
by using it in natural, communicative situations. Learning language differs in
that it is "knowing the rules" and having a conscious knowledge of grammar /
structure. Adults acquire language, although usually not as easily or as well as
children. Acquisition, however, is the most important means for gaining
linguistic skills. A person's first language (L1) is primarily learned in this
way. This manner of developing language skills typically employs implicit
grammar teaching and learning.
Grammar teaching should be explicit
This does not exclude explicit grammar-teaching entirely, however. Some
basic features of English language grammar structure are illogical or
dissimilar to speakers of other languages and do not readily lend themselves
to being well understood, even in context. In cases where features of
English grammar are diametrically opposed or in some other way radically
different from the manner of expression in the student's L1, explicit
teaching may be required.
Aspects of English language grammar that may offer exceptional challenge to
EFL students include use of word order, determiners (this, that, these,
those, a, an, the), prepositions (in, on, at, by, for, from, of),
auxiliaries (do, be, have), conjunctions (but, so, however, therefore,
though, although), interrogatives, intensifiers (some, any, few, more, too)
and distinctions between modal verbs (can, could, would, should, may, might,
must). Phrasal verbs also present considerable difficulty to Spanish
speakers learning communicative English.
Some students also are logical or linguistically-biased thinkers who respond
well to structured presentation of new material. Logical-Mathematical and
Verbal-Linguistic intelligence learners are prime examples of those that
would respond well to explicit grammar teaching in many cases.
Based on my English language teaching and on my second and third foreign
language learning (L2, L3) experience, an exclusive approach using either
implicit or explicit methodologies is not as effective as utilizing one or
the other of these approaches as required. Although it is essential to teach
elements of language and develop communicative abilities in our students,
there is no one best way to introduce and provide practice in them. Young
learners have more natural facility in acquisition, while adults may benefit
substantially from more "formal" language learning. Learning styles and
intelligence strengths are also a significant factor.
There are many generally accepted ways of introducing the sounds, structure and
vocabulary of English, including colloquial forms of conversation and the four
basic communication skills. Grammar provides for "communicative economy".
Grammar teaching should be implicit, or explicit, as teaching / learning
conditions may dictate helping to minimize the student response teachers fear
most, "Teacher, I don't understand".
Note: Academic references for this article are available on request.
Prof. Larry M. Lynch has taught EFL, published ELT articles as an expert author, presented at numerous TESOL conferences and trained teachers in the USA, Colombia, Mexico, Ecuador, Panama and Spain. His work has appeared in Transitions Abroad, South American Explorer, Escape from America, Mexico News and Brazil magazines. At present he teaches at the Universidad Santiago de Cali in Cali, Colombia. To get original, exclusive articles and content for your newsletter, blog or website or information on TEFL presentations, specialized teacher training programs or conference speaking engagements contact him at: lynchlarrym@gmail.com
Send to a friend
Comment
Share this
ESL resources
Downloadable activities
Grammar teaching ideas
Grammar Practice Activities: A Practical Guide for
Teachers
For the teacher who wishes to combine grammar teaching with a broadly
communicative methodology, this is an invaluable resource. It contains a
collection of imaginative and interesting grammar practice activities suitable
for a wide range of levels and ages.
Judith said...
"Yes, I agree. My student (after 2 years in this country) has naturally picked
up a core of vocab and some basic grammar skills. However - some grammar, that
differs vastly from his native language, just has to be taught. For example, he
still repeats subjects twice in sentences: "the dog, he ate the bone" . Plus
prepositions he has learnt through teaching and worksheets - you are born "in" a
country "on" a certain date, "at" a certain time, "in" the year of..."
Muge said...
"I believe both implicit and explicit ways of teaching grammar are prevailing.
It depends on the pupils requirements. I have a class of 2 Ss. One tries to
speak and doesn't take notes unless I warn him to but tries hard to speak.
However, he makes many mistakes. The other, wants to write every detail down and
asks for an explanation in L1. She speaks less and rather slow but doesn't make
mistakes like the other one. In my opinion grammar rules should be explained in
detail and there still has to be another material, speaking material to make Ss
carry this rule out."
Micaela said...
"I agree that grammar should be taught in a variety of ways, both implicitly and
explicitly. It really comes down to why the students are learning the language.
If their goal is to know enough English to communicate abroad on short trips,
then communicative lessons may be the best approach. If the student is hoping to
take the First Certificate or any other similar exam, then explicit grammar
lessons must be an integral part of their learning process. As teachers I think
we must remember to take into account that not everyone learns languages because
it is enjoyable and, in this way, help them reach their personal goals in the
best way possible."
Azhar said...
"I think grammar should be taught as implicit whenever possible. Yet, grammar
teaching should be explicit when students still cannot get it. The easiest way
to teach grammar is the direct way. Nevertheless, if I avoid it, it will be just
because it sounds boring for my students, though so effective."
Etienne said...
"Professor Lynch has already addressed the point I was about to make when he
says that neither approach should be used exclusively. We need to keep in mind
that students learn in different ways and that what works for a particular group
of students does not necessarily work for another. We teachers need to be
eclectic in our approach if we want to cater to the different learning styles
represented within our classrooms.
I love to teach grammar the traditional way, that is, as a separate entity.
However, I usually begin or end with a story or dialogue that presents the
structure in an actual situation so that students don't look at the structure as
an isolated piece. I also teach mini-lessons with my writing students every time
I return a writing assignment. In this case, I focus on a structure the students
constantly trip on either individually or collectively. In sum, it is important
to feed students grammar in small chunks and in a manner that connects the
structure to an actual situation."
Rachel said...
"Grammar is a necessary tool for all students, not just LEP students. I work
with 3rd graders 20/25 are LEP and I find it necessary to teach grammar at least
for 10 minutes a day in class. I am amazed at how little monolingual student
understand about grammar. I believe providing grammar instruction not only helps
scaffold the LEP students' native language (all languages have grammar rules),
but also provides monolingual student a broader base for if/when they decide to
learn a foreign language.
As for myself, I had no formal grammar instruction in school. It wasn't until I
took a sophomore year French class in college that the light bulb in my head
went off and I said to myself, "Eureka!! I know what a subject is and why the
verb needs to agree!!"--sad, but true. Unfortunately sometimes our schools, in
trying to be natural about their approach to language, set students up for
failure. It may be dull and boring for a group of kids to sit through language
rules, but with a little game or good attitude it can be managed. I think the
biggest problem is that the teachers teaching grammar do not have a strong grasp
on grammar themselves. Let us all put in the extra effort, roll up our sleeves,
take a deep breath, and just do it--at least when these students grow up and go
to college they will know subject verb agreement means!"
Benedito said...
"This long lasting discussion about implicit / explicit grammar teaching is
academically savoury. Like many theories in science and arts they look like two
paths that do not cross. Our preferences make them like that and we take one as
good, or "correct" and the other we take as a challenge, to say the least.
I have been involved with language and teaching for over 35 years now. As the
author poses, he is L2, l3 levels. I am already on L6 level and that includes
Mandarin Chinese as one of them. Any language, including your mother tongue,
requires some logical-mathematical approach, which means, formal grammar lessons
with drills in order to enable one to master it. Boring or not, one will speak
like an illiterate if he or she does not study grammar, both syntax and
analysis.
I don't think the problem is about teaching it explicitly. The problem is the
simplicity with which life and everything is seen nowadays. As teachers, we must
establish good psychological contracts with our students on the very first day
of class. Once we do it, teaching grammar is just a detail in the whole picture.
Grammar structures, whether one agrees or not, comprise the material we use in
building the mastery of a language. They help us become conscious of vocabulary
usage. They help us generate meaningful sentences and convey messages that truly
communicate.
I have seen teachers that mostly play games with their students. They are
popular indeed, no doubt about it. However, life is not only fun and games: the
world is increasingly competitive and mastery is fundamental, in any field.
Unless we are prone to allow the Chinese to rule the world, our future
generations must be masters in all fields and that includes at least a L4
level!"
Michael said...
"Benedito more or less says it all. Both methods are necessary and at least a
cursory glance at, say, the passive, will be useful to students who will then
notice and observe it when they see it and then start to recognise it and use it
for the rest of their lives. Unless things are explicitly pointed out to
students they will take twice as long or even more time to start to use the
correct form.
There is so much emphasis on "fun" these days. The fun really begins when the
correct form is pointed out, then observed and put into practice. Years and
years of fun rather than frustration will follow on from the explicit "noticing"
of what the students are going to see for the rest of their lives.
The debate doesn't have to involve academics. It doesn't have to be an academic
discussion. Ordinary people want to learn and to communicate. Most students want
to know how they can learn quickly. They should have an explanation of the
grammar point and then observe its usage over years and years of reading and
writing."
Jhoana said...
"Both types of presenting grammar are important in EFL environments. I am a
foreigner teacher and I have the chance to work in a language center in my
country, Colombia. I developed Focus on form with my students and that helped
them to understand the language. They gained in confidence when dealing with a
second language.
Personally I think that the implicit way encourages students to develop their
own abilities when they need to respond to the different activities and
materials in classroom settings. Of course we can assume one is better than the
other but as teachers we can emphasize on one of those, providing students with
the tools they need to master the language."
Caroline said...
"After reading everyone's comments, there really isn't much more to say, except
that I agree with all! My students are really struggling with some of the
structures and verbal phrases - necessitating the need for explicit
mini-lessons. However, the use of real literature and immediate practice puts
lessons into context well. Isn't it fascinating to look at English through the
eyes of an ELL?"
Marilyn said...
"I think that explicit teaching of grammar is essential. Without basic building
blocks one can achieve only a very shaky structure. Implicit teaching has its
place but as a secondary method. I am horrified at how little progress is being
achieved by the implicit teaching of grammar at the school in which I work.
Students are unable to translate effectively without detailed grammatical
knowledge. Could it be that the real problem lies with teachers who are unable
to teach the rules of grammar?"
Sibel said...
"I have been teaching English as a foreign language for two years. I generally
try hard to teach grammar in dialogues or texts. However, many of my students
have difficulty in understanding English grammar well. To my experiences in two
years I realized that my students need the structure of the language in order to
understand it in a speech or make a conversation by using it. So in my lessons I
start with a dialogue or a text. After reading them I ask my students what is
new in it. We talk about the new structure and I get my students attention to
the new structure of the grammar. That is to say both of these methods are
useful in my lessons."
Diana said...
"After some years teaching English as a Foreign Language I can say that everyone
is a different world. But there is something I've learned: At starter levels
Students just want to be able to understand and manipulate the language as much
as possible. They want to communicate ideas, feelings, etc. So rules and
structures must be taught according to their needs.
Then at intermediate and advanced levels they start analyzing structures,
comparing them with L1 and it is a very interesting process to consolidate what
they learned before and they feel more confident with their own level. Doesn't
matter if they got it deductively or inductively. There's a time when all
Students are concerned about how English works."
Vasumathi said...
"As far as I am concerned I think that grammar should be taught implicitly in
the initial stage and explicitly later, then we should make the students acquire
grammar by themselves. In my experience I feel that the student often gets
confused with passive form and participle form"
Bruce said...
"Some people eat their food using a knife and fork. Other use chopsticks, whilst
elsewhere, fingers and spoons help to keep the digestive juices working! Each,
according to their abilities - as long as they are fed! Student-centred learning
is the pivot."
Irina said...
"I strongly believe that grammar should be taught both implicitly and
explicitly. With younger learners the latter method works much better, whether
adult learners prefer the former one. It's up to the teacher to decide which is
better for particular students and groups."
Mariana said...
"I think both approaches to grammar teaching are important and each of them adds
up to master the language. What I think is that it's absolutely necessary to
give grammar a meaning by contextualizing it appropriately, according to
student's needs. There are students who need to analyze in detail, others who
learn in a more holistic way and, as in most cases different learning styles
converge, all student's should find opportunities for approaching the language
in the way that best suits their needs."
Bernadine said...
"Hi everyone here! I am from Myanmar. We Myanmar people enjoy learning English
Grammar, Writing and Speaking. For Non-native speakers, I think learning grammar
is the first step of learning English. Grammar can help students speak, write
and understand English. I usually teach my students how to use helping verbs in
English because everybody knows how important it is in English. This can help
students speak and write English very quickly. But the students should be taught
the difference between spoken English and written English. Grammar can give us
confidence in using Language. In short, beginners of English should be taught
grammar."
Rhoda said...
"I accept that grammar should be taught both explicitly and implicitly
especially in ESL classrooms. specifically in the Nigerian context where
learners require English for functional purposes."
eslbase © 2005-2008
Terms of use |
Disclaimer |
Privacy |
Contact |
Advertise |
Links |
Site map |
Testimonials |
Language exchange |
TEFL blog
TEFL jobs and TEFL courses, information, advice and
ESL resources for teachers - Grammar Teaching