Grammar Translation Method: Why was it useful?

Linguistic needs and the Grammar-Translation Method

by O. G. P.

Subject: Teaching English as a Foreign Language: Methodology I (with professor Lic. Elizabeth Sosa Piña)

In this essay, I will talk about how the Grammar-translation method (GTM) is, linguistically speaking, inadequate in regard to what modern language teaching concerns, but I will also discuss what I consider to be the real use for which it was developed, and thus, the implications for the contemporary language-learner.

Foremost, the basic characteristics of this method must be mentioned; i.e. the great emphasis on grammatical rules, the exclusive focus on reading and writing, and the central role of word-by-word translation from one language to another (Thuleen, 1996). These two things are what, broadly speaking, constitute the core of GTM.

Many authors have discussed the problems of GTM, and probably one of the most common critiques is that it makes an “overemphasis” on grammar and memorization of words (Byram & Hu, 2013:288) because it was allegedly based in the theory of ‘faculty psychology’, prevalent at that time (Crookall & Saunder, 1989: 64). The then Grammar-translation advocators are today judged as “neglectful” teachers who were virtually ignorant of the language learning process. However, one should not consider it as such. To emphasize the importance of grammar, by itself, is of no harm. Sometimes, it may be actually good if one takes into account that grammatical knowledge and memory are two things that play an extremely important role in language learning, and that it may be appropriate to the purposes of a few students whose linguistic needs are according to the emphasis. To argue that underlining these aspects of language is what constitutes the problem of GTM, is not, in my opinion, a satisfactory answer.

If the exclusive focus on grammar and translation are understood to be the consequence of the cultural context at the time in which GTM was widely used; and of the purposes for which language-learning was primarily taking place, one may realize that the grammar-translation method was not ‘bad’ at all. For centuries, Latin was the main language used in higher studies, and later it was widely used in German schools (Richards & Rodgers, 2001: 5). The GTM was useful for the specific purposes of comprehending written texts (mainly literature) and write for advanced studies. It was actually successful, and we should not overlook the fact that outstanding figures such as Newton, Lebniz and Descartes were almost likely to have learned Latin under this method, even to the grade of acquiring a great level of accuracy (writing). Although the views on language learning were certainly not holistic, developing the skills of speaking (fluency) and of listening in second language learning, was - reasonably – not really important because of several reasons, audiovisual media was literally nonexistent, and international communication was taking place in the form of texts: books, letters, and scholarly papers, etc.

Today, linguistic needs are undoubtedly not the same that they used to be in the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period. Unlike then, we are now in a very globalized world in which the business, touristic and diplomatic area demand skills of oral communication and listening. We live in a place where, since the post-war era, in the twentieth century, communication has been increasingly taking place through audiovisual media; (Interestingly, those were the very years in which the GTM began to decay according to authors like Kuhiwczak & Littau; 200:56; Richards & Rodgers, 2001: 4). Nowadays, the linguistic needs of the majority of second language learners are understood to regard grammar and reading as two parts as important as listening and speaking.

In conclusion, the GTM would be inefficacious and faulty to those students who require a global learning of L2, and for those teachers that are supposed to give an holistic teaching of language; but, nonetheless, it should not be seen as an obsolete method, and it should remembered that it may be useful for those whose linguistic interests are only aimed at the area of reading, and for those whose mood is enough disposed to learn with a self-taught grammar translation method.

References

• Byram, Michael; Hu, Adelheid (2013). “Routledge Enyclopedia of Language Teaching and Learning”. Revised edition. Routledge. ISBN: 113623554X
• Richards, Jack C.; Rodgers, Theodore S. (2001). “Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching” (2nd ed.). Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Thuleen, Nancy (1996). "The Grammar-Translation Method." Website Article. University of Wisconsin-Madison. 24 October. <http://www.nthuleen.com/papers/720report.html>.
• Piotr Kuhiwczak, Karin Littau, (2000) "A Companion to Translation Studies", Multilingual Matters.
• Saunder, Danny; Crookall, David. “Communication and Simulation: From Two Fields to One Theme”. Multilingual Matters. ISBN: 0905028848