The Notional-Functional Approach: Shaping the perception of Language Teaching
by Omar G. P.
Subject: Teaching English as a Foreign Language: Methodology I
In this essay, I will talk about what I consider the strongest features of the Notional-functional Approach, which will be referred in this essay as NFA. In my view, this approach, first proposed by British linguist D.A. Wilkins, has very interesting and indispensable principles for language teaching, and wide more advantages than all the other methods we have checked before.
First, I must say that what I love most about the NFA is that it redefines the traditional structuralist and behavourist conceptions of language. It poses language, not just as a mere system of structures or symbols, but as a living expression of meaningful and communicative acts. Secondly, the great emphasis on the communicative value of language is wonderful because it accomplishes the extremely important task of making students know the use of language and the way in which it really works in every day conversations. Learning takes place as a very practical analysis of the communicative meanings that need to be understood and used effectively in the target language. The learners’ need of expressing themselves is taken into account and the learner is able to notice clearly the diverse formulations of language. Third, the idea of functional grammar, which is more related to the syllabus design (Sánchez, 2011:2), is a more complete manner to address grammar in a realistic way provided that it deals with the purpose and practical understanding of grammatical structures in certain situations.
Another point in its favor, for me, is the idea of code-switching. With this, it deviates radically from behaviorist perceptions which insisted that L1 was a bad “interference” or “problem” for the L2 learner and should be completely avoided, regardless of the level of the students. As I see it, code-switching as proposed in the NFA should not be confused with the idea of giving most of the class in L1, let alone with the idea of returning the Grammar Translation Method, but as a way to recognize the mental, semantic, and emotional value that the L2-learner holds for his L1.
With respect to the criticism of NFA, one the one hand, it might be argued that, at some point, this approach may neglect writing skills, but no one forbids us to adjust it and apply an eclectic approach that include the four basic skills of language under the same approach of notions and functions. On the other hand, it is true what some people have pointed out about the apparent random order in which notions are functions are taught. Nonetheless, that is not really a big deal because, to my mind, it would be a matter of doing more research and methodic studies so as to determine the frequency with which certain notions or functions happen in spoken or written language, and know accurately which are the most and less common. A study as such would provide NFA advocators with clearer understanding of which are the notions or functions that are more appropriate for students in basic, intermediate or advanced levels of language; according to an order of frequency. If that is taken into account, courses, syllabuses and textbooks for language teaching would be designed and addresses far better.
In conclusion, the Notional Functional method has many good sides which can enrich the process of language learning. If one looks at the way in which language teaching courses have been planned in the last decades, it must be admitted that, in fact, this approach has definitely shaped the practice of language teaching. Therefore, its importance cannot be overlooked, and any serious teacher, course designer or language scholar should eagerly consider its implications and proposals.
References:
First, I must say that what I love most about the NFA is that it redefines the traditional structuralist and behavourist conceptions of language. It poses language, not just as a mere system of structures or symbols, but as a living expression of meaningful and communicative acts. Secondly, the great emphasis on the communicative value of language is wonderful because it accomplishes the extremely important task of making students know the use of language and the way in which it really works in every day conversations. Learning takes place as a very practical analysis of the communicative meanings that need to be understood and used effectively in the target language. The learners’ need of expressing themselves is taken into account and the learner is able to notice clearly the diverse formulations of language. Third, the idea of functional grammar, which is more related to the syllabus design (Sánchez, 2011:2), is a more complete manner to address grammar in a realistic way provided that it deals with the purpose and practical understanding of grammatical structures in certain situations.
Another point in its favor, for me, is the idea of code-switching. With this, it deviates radically from behaviorist perceptions which insisted that L1 was a bad “interference” or “problem” for the L2 learner and should be completely avoided, regardless of the level of the students. As I see it, code-switching as proposed in the NFA should not be confused with the idea of giving most of the class in L1, let alone with the idea of returning the Grammar Translation Method, but as a way to recognize the mental, semantic, and emotional value that the L2-learner holds for his L1.
With respect to the criticism of NFA, one the one hand, it might be argued that, at some point, this approach may neglect writing skills, but no one forbids us to adjust it and apply an eclectic approach that include the four basic skills of language under the same approach of notions and functions. On the other hand, it is true what some people have pointed out about the apparent random order in which notions are functions are taught. Nonetheless, that is not really a big deal because, to my mind, it would be a matter of doing more research and methodic studies so as to determine the frequency with which certain notions or functions happen in spoken or written language, and know accurately which are the most and less common. A study as such would provide NFA advocators with clearer understanding of which are the notions or functions that are more appropriate for students in basic, intermediate or advanced levels of language; according to an order of frequency. If that is taken into account, courses, syllabuses and textbooks for language teaching would be designed and addresses far better.
In conclusion, the Notional Functional method has many good sides which can enrich the process of language learning. If one looks at the way in which language teaching courses have been planned in the last decades, it must be admitted that, in fact, this approach has definitely shaped the practice of language teaching. Therefore, its importance cannot be overlooked, and any serious teacher, course designer or language scholar should eagerly consider its implications and proposals.
References:
- Sánchez Hernández, Purificación (2011). The Potential of Literary Texts in the Language Classroom: The Study of Linguistic Functions: Universidad de Murcia. Odisea, nº 12, ISSN 1578-3820, 2011, 233-243
- Retrieved on march 2013 http://www.ual.es/odisea/Odisea12_Sanchez.pdf
- Mora Modules (2012). Second and Foreign Language Teaching Methods. Enhancing Academic Achievement of Bilingual Learners.
- Retrieved on march 2013. http://moramodules.com/ALMMethods.htm#Functional
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario