Proposing Structured Input Activities for Communicative Grammar Teaching

Authors

  • Sulistyani Sulistyani Nusantara PGRI Kediri University
  • Khoiriyah Khoiriyah Nusantara PGRI Kediri University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25273/etj.v4i1.4358

Keywords:

structured input, grammar, communicative grammar teaching

Abstract

Current views of language teaching suggest that grammar is included in communicative activities. The reason is that discrete grammar teaching fails to produce fluent speakers while pure communicative classroom fails to produce accurate speakers. This article aims to share a way of teaching grammar in meaning-focused instruction namely structured input activities consisting of referential activities and affective activities. The activities not only affect learners’ input processing strategies but also affect their underlying system in such a way to be able to incorporate the target forms in their output. Besides containing input that facilitates form meaning connections they also force learners to focus on the target structure and to process it for meaning. This practice is expected to provide EFL teachers with useful practical insight to enhance their teaching practices.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown university round table on languages and linguistics: Language, communication, and social meaning (pp. 223–237). Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Press.

Celce-Murcia, M., & Olshtain, E. (2000). Discourse and context in language teaching: A guide for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty, & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197–261). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2002). Doing focus-on-form. System, 30, 419–32.

Fotos, S. (2002). Structure-based interactive tasks for the EFL grammar learner. In E. Hinkel, & S. Fotos (Eds.), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp. 135–54). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Gatbonton, E. & Segalowitz, N. (1988). Creative automatization: Principles for promoting fluency within a communicative framework. TESOL Quarterly 22, 3, 473–92.

Lapkin, S., Hart, D., & Swain, M. (1991). Early and middle French immersion programs: French-language outcomes. Canadian Modern Language Review, 48, 11–40.

Larsen-Freeman, Diane. (2001). Teaching grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed., pp. 251–85). MA: Heinle & Heinle.

Larsen-Freeman, Diane (2003). Teaching language: From grammar to grammaring. Boston: Thomson Heinle.

Larsen-Freeman, Diane. (2009). Teaching and testing grammar. In M. Long and C. Doughty (Eds.) The Handbook of Language Teaching (pp. 518-542). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Lightbown, P. (2000). Anniversary article: Classroom SLA research and second language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 21, 431–62.

Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nassaji, H & Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching Grammar in Second Language Classroom: Integrating form-focused instruction in communicative context. New York: Routledge.

Norris, J. & Ortega, N. (2000). Does type of instruction make a difference? Substantive findings from a meta-analytic review. Language Learning 51, Supplement 1, 157–213.

Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Today. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Roediger, I. & Guynn, M. (1996). Retrieval processes. In E. Bork & R. Bork (eds.), Memory (pp. 197–236). New York: Academic Press.

Segalowitz, N. (2003). Automaticity and second languages. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 382–408). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Thomson, G. (1996). Some misconceptions about communicative language teaching. ELT Journal , 50/1 (pp. 9-15)

Tomasello, M. (1998). Introduction: A cognitive-functional perspective on language structure. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure (pp. vii–xxiii). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

VanPatten, B. (2002). Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning, 52, 755–803.

VanPatten, B. (2004). Input processing in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 5–31). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Downloads

Published

24-05-2019

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 1 (2016)

Section

Articles

License

1. License

The non-commercial use of the article will be governed by the Creative Commons Attribution license as currently displayed on Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. 

2. Author(s)' Warranties

The author warrants that the article is original, written by the stated author(s), has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author, and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author(s).

3. User/Public Rights

ETJ's spirit is to disseminate articles published are as free as possible. Under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, ETJ permits users to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work for non-commercial purposes only. Users will also need to attribute authors and ETJ to distributing works in the journal and other media of publications. 

4. Rights of Authors

Authors retain all their rights to the published works, such as (but not limited to) the following rights;

  • Reproduce the work
  • Prepare derivative works based upon the work
  • Distribute copies of the work
  • Perform the work publicly
  • Display the work publicly
  • Copyright and other proprietary rights relating to the article, such as patent rights,
  • The right to self-archive the article (please read our repository policy),
  • The right to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the article's published version (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal (English Teaching Journal : A Journal of English Literature, Language and Education).

5. Co-Authorship

If the article was jointly prepared by more than one author, any author submitting the manuscript warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to be agreed on this copyright and license notice (agreement) on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this policy. English Teaching Journal : A Journal of English Literature, Language and Education will not be held liable for anything that may arise due to the author's internal dispute. English Teaching Journal : A Journal of English Literature, Language and Education will only communicate with the corresponding author.

6. Royalties

Being an open accessed journal and disseminating articles for free under the Creative Commons license term mentioned, author(s) are aware that English Teaching Journal : A Journal of English Literature, Language and Education entitles the author(s) to no royalties or other fees.