Grammar translation method Essay

Both the grammar deracination manner and communicatory manner of speaking commandment argon teaching rules for getting a outside(prenominal) wording. Whereas the grammar definition method acting focuses on the shift of certain grammar rules and the edition of vocabulary, the communicatory attack aims for acquiring the attainment of talk for the apprentice Scrivener (2011). Both methods atomic number 18 impressive in their own sort, although the communicatory mount focuses on the potent finale of linguistic communication, that is to say intercourse amidst human beings. In this essay the grammar supplanting method and the communicative coming will be compared and contrasted, displace special emphasis on the confidence that the communicative uprise is more(prenominal) hard-hitting for the accomplishment and pictureing of a contrary phrase than the grammar translation method. First of all, a remarkable difference in verbiage utilization is notice able when comparing the ii methods.While the grammar translation method completely uses the scholarly persons mother tongue, the communicative approach shot uses nothing else but the actual marking wrangle. With the use of the mother tongue, it is easier to understand grammar and meaning of words. (Rhalmi, M. (2009). This is a required skill to decipher written text editions. When only victimization the contrasted language, the level of oral communication increases. (Rhalmi, M. (2009). To escort out which of both outcomes has a bigger lever, it needfully to be absolve what the original goal of language is. communication is a required skill to survive. literal communication is something that dates from the origin of the human kind. The excogitation of written language is a weed more recent. (Bright, W. (n.d). This proves that language is originally utilise for communication. Given this point, there nominate be concluded that the outcome of the communicative approach has bigger value to languages actual goal.In contrast, a actually attractive feature on the grammar translation method is its easily understandable score of grammar, words and phrases. Because of the item that all the definition happens in the mother tongue, it is easy for the assimilator to understand what is being said.Also, learners acquire a go against capacity of understanding synonyms in the foreign language, due to the fact that they direct already learn the meaning. Secondly, the communication between instructor and learner is flawless. Since the teacher and the learner speak the same language, the teacher can easily verify whether the pupils have learned what is just explained. (Fitriyanti, R. (2011).Within the communicative approach, the communication between student and teacher is a lot more difficult and obtuse in the informant, which has to do with the use of signal language only. However, the communication between teacher and learner is from much more val ue as the learner becomes more beaten(prenominal) with the foreign language (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 education moment, rather than a disadvantage. Thirdly, in both methods there is a completely different way of acquiring skills. With the grammar translation method the students are supposed(p) to learn the rules about the target language when sitting down and listening to their teacher. Grammar structures are explained and vocabulary is taught through word lists with a translation. The learners practice to concur what theyve learned exists out of exercises where the learner needs to translate 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 communicati ve language teaching lessons are preferably different. These lessons contain meaningful 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 a active. inactive learning is not really effective for the learner. (Ebbens, S (2013) states that a much better result of learning is caused by (inter)active practice.To go on, the teachers portion is quite different in both methods. With the grammar translation method, the teacher is basically the guide for the learning surgical operation. The method is teacher centred, which means that the manikin focuses just on the explanation of the teacher. The role of the teacher here is to provide breeding to the students (Fitriyanti, R. (2011). Teachers in communicative classrooms will find themselves talking less and listening morebec oming active facilitators of their students learning (Larsen-Freeman, 1986) The communicative approach is a student centred method. Although the teacher sets up the exercise, it is the learners cognitive process which fills up roughly of the lesson (Orellana. (2007). Thelearning process is less effective when the teacher does most work in the classroom (teacher centred method) alternatively of the students doing most work in the classroom. (student centred method) (Ebbens, S (2013).A fifth issue, on which the devil methods can be compared and contrasted on, is its historical background. The fact that learners of the grammar translation method are not able to produce comprehensive return in the form of oral communication, became unambiguous in the years 1939 until 1945 (World War II) when the grammar translation method was not teaching students the foreign language effectively enough to die with allies or to understand the communication theory of the enemy, which was required to survive. When this occurred, a new approach appeared known as the audio linguistic method which was based on structural linguistics and (The Grammar-Translation Method, n.d,).In 1957 the audio lingual method was criticised by the prominent linguist Noam Chomsky for its unfitness to teach learners to creatively apply language (Rhalmi, M. (2009). Partly 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 response on an alternative method for the grammar translation method. Thus, the communicative approach is actually already a more modern and fit method of teaching the core goal language has.To summarise the main points menti superstard 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 produce in the form of letters and/or written text translations, the grammar translation method is superior to the communicative approach.BibliographyRhalmi, M. (2009). Communicative lecture Teaching (The CommunicativeApproach). Available http//www.myenglishpages.com/blog/communicative-language-teaching-communicative-approach/. hold out 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. utmost(a) accessed 05/06/2014. Rahlmi, M. (2009). Grammar Translation Method. Available http//www.myenglishpages.com/blog/grammar-translation-method/. ending accesse d 05/06/2014. Fitriyanti, R. (2011). Grammar Translation Method. Available http//novaekasari09.wordpress.com/2011/06/12/grammar-translation-method/. stand up 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 slope 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). Learning Teaching. third ed. Londen Macmillian. 31-32. Ebbens, S (2013). Effectief leren. Houten Noor dhoff uitgevers.