Aspects of the Use of Learners' Mother Tongue in English Language Teaching
Заказать уникальную дипломную работу- 72 72 страницы
- 86 + 86 источников
- Добавлена 29.03.2017
- Содержание
- Часть работы
- Список литературы
- Вопросы/Ответы
Aspects of the Use of Learners' Mother Tongue in English Language Teaching 3
Introduction 3
1. Chapter one. Literature review 6
1.1. Change in attitude toward the use of learners' mother tongue over time 6
1.1.2. Major language teaching trends of the twentieth century 9
1.1.3. ‘The Age of Methods’ 16
1.2. The Communicative Approach and the Concept of Communicative Competence 21
1.2.1. The Communicative Approach 21
1.2.2. The concept of communicative competence 25
Summary of Chapter One 31
2. Chapter 2. Mixed studies review 32
2.1. Arguments against and in favor of MT use in EFL classroom 32
2.1.1. Arguments against MT use in EFL classroom 32
2.1.2. Arguments in favor of MT use in EFL classroom 32
2.2. Empirical research into MT use in ELT 34
2.2.1. Quantity of MT use in various situations 34
2.2.2. The context and functions of the MT use 35
2.2.3. Aspects determining the MT use 36
2.2.4. Putting theory to practice 38
2.3. Empirical ethnographic research (The Japanese Case) 39
2.3.1. Relevance of the ESL/EFL distinction 39
2.3.2. Setting realistic objectives 41
2.3.3. Toward student-centered approach 43
Summary of Chapter Two 45
Chapter 3. The use of learners’ MT and translation in English language teaching 50
3.1. The revival of interest in the use of mother tongue and translation 50
3.2. The effect of translation in the ELT classroom 51
3.3. Students’ perceptions of the MT in ELT classrooms 52
3.4. The MT place in learning English for Special Purposes 54
3.4.1. Units of analysis and methodology 55
3.4.2. Results 56
3.4.3. Research implications for translation activities in ESP class sessions 57
3.4.4. Concluding remarks 59
Conclusion 60
Bibliography and list of sources 63
In contrast, native teachers of English claim that foreign/second language learning needs as much exposure to the target language as possible during scarce classroom time, and any usage of the MT or, even worse, translation is ineffective.The real practicality of translation in the English language classroom lies in exploiting it for the sake of comparing vocabulary, grammar, word order and other language issues in the English language and the student’s L1. If students become aware of the differences (and similarities) between L1 and L2, language interference (transfer) and intervention from their native language are most likely to be reduced.MT place in learning English for Special Purposes (Analysis of own data)This small-scale study aimed, at rating college students’ perceptions of mental translation they use in learning, and, second, at assessing the students’ experiences of using the MT in the form of translation within the framework of the classroom activities. In addition, the implications of the research on the use of the mother tongue in learning English for Special Purposes were demonstrated with the help of various activities and exercises involving several translation techniques.MT place in learning English for Special Purposes (The results of the analysis)The following conclusions have been drawn from the small-scale study. First, all the learners regularly rely on their mother tongue in learning English. Second, the amount of the MT that students need depends on their levels of proficiency and language learning situations. Third, the statistical processing of the research findings showed that the data are significant in spite of the small sample of recipients.ConclusionDespite the small sample of respondents, the data are statistically significant and can be generalized to other samples of the population of ESP learnersThe following hypothesis can be accepted: “A consistent use of L2 and a careful use of L1 in English language teaching may provide learners with a better knowledge of the target language; the entire exclusion of mother tongue from the ELT process may appear to be unfavorable to learning the target language system”.Limitation of the studyThis study contains one significant limitation requiring deliberation when evaluating its contribution to the literature. Although it allowed us to draw a conclusion that the data are statistically significant and can be generalized to other samples of the population of ESP learners, the size of the sample, as well as resulting overall statistical significance of the data, suggests that the research is not generalizable to wider contexts of learner’ MT use. Therefore, the study aims only at “petite” generalizability (Stake, 1995)
2. Bachman, Lyle F. 1990. Fundamental considerations in language testing. New York: OUP.
3. Benson, C. (2002). Transfer / Cross-Linguistic Influence. ELT Journal 56 (1), 68 -70.
4. Bouvy, C. (2000). Towards the construction of a theory of cross-linguistic transfer. In J. Cenoz & U. Jessner (Eds.), English in Europe: The acquisition of a third language (pp. 143-155). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
5. Brown, Douglas H. 1994. Teaching by Principles. An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-017816-0
6. Brown, Douglas H. 2005. English Language Teaching in the “Post-Method” Era: Toward Better Diagnosis, Treatment and Assessment. In Richards, Jack, Renandya, Willy A. Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge University Press.
7. Burden, P. 2000. The use of students’ mother tongue in monolingual English conversation classes at Japanese universities. The Language Teacher, 24/6, 5-11.
8. Butzkamm, W. & Caldwell, J. (2009). The bilingual reform: A paradigm shift in foreign language teaching. Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag.
9. Camilleri, A. (1996). Language values and identities: Code switching in secondary classrooms in Malta. Linguistics and Education, 8, 85-103
10. Carless, D. (2008). Student Use of the Mother Tongue in the Task-Based Classroom. ELT Journal 62 (4), 331-338.
11. Celce-Murcia, Marianne (Editor). 2011. Teaching English as a second or foreign language. New York: Newbury House Publishers.
12. Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory on Syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press.
13. Cook, G. (2007). Unmarked Improvement: Values, Facts, and First Languages. IATEFL Conference, Aberdeen, 18 – 20 April.
14. Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(3), p. 402-423.
15. Cook, V. 1999. Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 33/2, 185-205.
16. Cook, V. J. (Ed.). (2002). Portraits of the L2 user. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
17. Crawford, J. (2004). Language choices in the foreign language classroom: Target language or the learners' first language? RELC Journal (A Journal of Language Teaching and Research), 35(1), 5-20.
18. Critchley, M. 2002. The role of L1 support in communicative ELT: a guide for teachers in Japan. The Language Teacher, 26/4, 10-15.
19. Cromdal, J. (2005). Bilingual order in collaborative word processing: On creating an English text in Sweden. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(3), 329-353.
20. Cummins, J. (2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10, 221–240.
21. De La Campa, J. C. & Nassaji, H. (2009). The amount, purpose, and reasons for using L1 in L2 classrooms. Foreign Language Annals, 42, 742-759.
22. Derrida, J. (1998). Monolingualism of the other: the Prosthesis of origin. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
23. Dornyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in Second Language Research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers. New Jersey. USA.
24. Duff, P. A., & Polio, C. G. (1990). How much foreign language is there in the foreignlanguage classroom? The Modern Language Journal, 74(2), 154-166.
25. Edstrom, E. (2006). L1 use in the L2 classroom: One teacher's self-evaluation. CanadianModern Language Review, 63(2), 275-292.
26. Ellis, E. M. (2007). Discourses of L1 and bilingual teaching in adult ESL. TESOL in Context, 16(2), 5-10.
27. Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28. Ellis, Rod. 1994. Instructed second language acquisition: learning in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
29. Gattegno (1976 as cites in Chamot and McKeon, 1984:2
30. Grim, F. (2010). L1 in the L2 classroom at the secondary and college levels: A comparison of functions and use by teachers. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 7(2), 193- 209.
31. Grim, F. (2010). L1 in the L2 classroom at the secondary and college levels: A comparison of functions and use by teachers. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 7(2), 193- 209.
32. Hall, G., & Cook, V. (2012). Own-language use in language teaching and learning: State of the art. Language Teaching, 45(3), 271-308.
33. Hall, G., & Cook, V. (2012). Own-language use in language teaching and learning: State of the art. Language Teaching, 45(3), 271-308.
34. Harbord, J. 1992. The use of the mother tongue in the classroom. ELT Journal, 46/4, 350-355.
35. Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. England: Pearson Education Limited.
36. Hauptman, S., Mansur, F., & Tal, R. (2008). A trilingual teaching model for developing academic literacy skills in classical Arabic (L1), Hebrew (L2) and English (FL) in southern Israel. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 29(3), 181-197.
37. Herdina, P., & Jessner, U. (2002). A dynamic model of multilingualism: Perspectives of change in psycholinguistics. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
38. Holthouse J., 2002. https://www.kansai-u.ac.jp/fl/publication/pdf_forum/5/027holthouse.pdf
39. Horwitz, E. 1988. The beliefs about language learning of beginning university foreign language students. The Modern Language Journal, 72, 283-94.
40. Howatt, A. (1984). A history of English language teaching. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
41. Howatt, A.P.R., and H.G. Widdowson. 2004. A History of English Language Teaching. Oxford University Press.
https://www.academia.edu/2473394/1_Teachers_Beliefs_and_Practices_about_the_Use_of_the_L1
42. Hymes (1967 cited in Brown, 1994: 227)
43. Janulevičienė, V. and G. Kavaliauskienė. (2004). Legal English: Translation Issues. Jurisprudencija 57 (49), 141-146. Vilnius: Edition of Law University of Lithuania.
44. Januleviciene, V., Kavaliauskiene, G. (2002). Promoting the fifth skill in teaching esp. Retrieved April 2, 2014, from:http://www.espworld.info/Articles_2/Promoting%20the%20Fifth%20Skill%20in%20Teaching%20ESP% 20
45. Janulevicine & Kavlaliauskiene, 2002 cited in Beressa, 2003:29
46. Johnson, Kate. 2001. An Introduction to Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. Pearson Education. ISBN 0-582-29086-4
47. Kellerman, E. (1995). Cross-linguistic influence: Transfer to nowhere? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 125–150.
48. Kim, S. H. O., & Elder, C. (2008). Target language use in foreign language classrooms:Practices and perceptions of two native speaker teachers in New Zealand. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 21(2), 167-185.
49. Krashen and T. Terrell 2001:178
50. Krashen, S., 1981. Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
51. Krashen, S., and T. Terrell. 1983. The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom. Prentice Hall.
52. Larsen-Freeman, D. & Anderson, M. (2011). Techniques and principles in language teaching (3rded). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
53. Levine, G. S. (2003). Student and instructor beliefs and attitudes about target language use, first language use, and anxiety: Report of a questionnaire study. The Modern Language Journal, 87(3), 344-364.
54. Littlewood, W. & Yu, B. (2011). First language and target language in the foreign language classroom. Language Teaching, 44(1), 64-77.
55. Littlewood, William. 1991. Communicative Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press
56. Macaro, E. (2001). Analysing student teachers' code switching in foreign languageclassrooms. Modern Language Journal, 85, 531-548.
57. Macaro, E. (2005). Codeswitching in the L2 classroom: A communication and learning strategy. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Nonnative Language Teachers: Perceptions, Challenges, and Contributions to the Profession (pp. 195-215). New York: Springer.
58. Mahmoud, A. (2006). Translation and Foreign Language Reading Comprehension: A Neglected Didactic Procedure. English Teaching Forum, 44 (4), 28-33.
59. Matsuura, H., Fujieda, M., and Mahoney, S. 2000. The officialization of English and EFL in Japan: 2000. World Englishes, 23/3, 471-487.
60. Mattioli, G. (2004). On Native Language Intrusions and Making Do with Words: Linguistically Homogeneous Classrooms and Native Language Use. English Teaching Forum 42 (4), 20-25.
61. McDonald, C. (1993). Using the target language. Cheltenham, UK: Mary Glasgow
62. McKay, S. 2002. Teaching English as an International Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
63. Medgyes, Péter. 1994. The non-native teacher. London: Macmillan
64. Nunan, David. 1989. Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge University Press.
65. Nunan, David. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology: A Textbook for Teachers.Prentice Hall.
66. Nzwanga, M. (2000). A study of French-English code-switching in a foreign language college teaching environment. Dissertation Abstracts International, A: The Humanities and Social Sciences, 61(5), 1718A.
67. Odlin, T. (1996). Language Transfer. USA: Cambridge University Press.
68. Prator, Clifford H., and Marianne Celce-Murcia. 1979. “An outline of language teaching approaches.” In Celce-Marcia, Marianne, and Lois McIntosh (Editor). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Newburry House.
69. Qian, X., Tian, G., & Wang, Q. (2009). Codeswitching in the primary EFL classroom in China - Two case studies. System, 37, 719-730
70. Richards, Jack C., and Theodore S. Rodgers. 2005. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-00843-3
71. Richards, Jack, and Willy A. Renandya. 2002. Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge University Press.
72. Rolin-Ianziti, J., & Brownlie, S. (2002). Teacher use of learners' native language in theforeign language classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 58(3), 402-426.
73. Ross, N. J. (2000). Interference and Intervention: Using Translation in the EFL Classroom. Modern English Teacher, 9 (3), 61-66.
74. Sabbari, S. (2008). Teachers' beliefs and practices about the use of the L1. Retrieved May, 2014 from
75. Sabbari, S. (2008). Teachers' beliefs and practices about the use of the L1. Retrieved May, 2014 from
76. Savignon, J. Sandra. 1983. Communicative Competence: Theory and Classroom Practice. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc. ISBN 0-201-06503-7
77. Savignon, Sandra J. and Berns, Margie S. 1984. Initiatives in communicative language teaching: a book of readings. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
78. Schweers, C.W., Jr. (1999). Using L1 in the L2 Classroom. English Teaching Forum 37 (2), 6-9. Survey “The Use of Mother Tongue” (not dated). http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/talk/vote/vote15_mothertongue.shtml
79. Shimizu, K. 1995. Japanese college students’ attitudes towards English teachers: A survey. The Language Teacher, 19/10, 5-8.
80. Sinclair, J. and Coulthard, M. 1975. Towards an Analysis of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
81. Stake, 1995
82. Swain, Kirkpatrick, & Cummins, 2011
83. Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: the uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4 (3), 251-274.
84. Swan, M. 1985. A critical look at the communicative approach (2). ELT Journal, 39/2, 76-87.
85. Takada, T. 1999. The challenge EFL teachers face in Japan. TESOL Matters (online), 4/5, 1-3.
86. Weschler, R. (1997). Uses of Japanese (L1) in the English Classroom: Introducing the Functional Translation Method. The Internet TESL Journal, 3(11), 1-12.
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/iatefl2007/jasmina_day2.shtml
Other sources
Internet 1, Second-Language Teaching Methods. [viewedhttp://coe.sdsu.edu/people/jmora/ALMMethods.htm
Internet 2, Communicative Language Teaching. [viewed 29.12.2006] http://communicative-language-teaching.area51.ipupdater.com
Internet 4, Krashen and Terrell´s Natural Approach. [viewed 10.12.2006] http://www.stanford.edu/~kenro/LAU/ICLangLit/NaturalApproach.html
Internet 5, Mother Tongue in the Classroom. [viewed 5.10.2006] http://www.teachenglishworldwide.com/Articles/Ferrer_mother%20tongue%20i %20the%20classroom.pdf
Вопрос-ответ:
Какие изменения произошли в отношении использования родного языка учащихся в преподавании английского языка?
Со временем отношение к использованию родного языка учащихся в преподавании английского языка изменилось. Раньше считалось, что использование родного языка отвлекает от изучения и замедляет прогресс. Однако сейчас стало понятно, что родной язык может быть полезным ресурсом для изучения иностранного языка. Он может помочь учащимся понимать новые концепты и структуры языка, сравнивать их с родным языком и лучше усваивать материал.
Какие основные тренды преподавания языков в XX веке оказали влияние на использование родного языка учащихся?
В XX веке было несколько основных трендов в преподавании языков, которые оказали влияние на использование родного языка учащихся. Например, в период классического метода перевода считалось, что родной язык не должен использоваться во время уроков. Однако с развитием коммуникативного подхода понимание родного языка начали воспринимать как полезный ресурс для улучшения коммуникативных навыков учащихся.
Какие идеи входят в концепцию коммуникативной компетентности и как они связаны с использованием родного языка учащихся?
Концепция коммуникативной компетентности включает в себя не только знание языковых структур, но и умение использовать их в коммуникации. Родной язык учащегося может быть полезным инструментом для развития коммуникативных навыков, так как позволяет сравнивать и анализировать языковые структуры на родном и иностранном языках и лучше понимать их смысл.
Какие методы преподавания английского языка были широко применены в XX веке и как они относятся к использованию родного языка?
В XX веке было разработано множество методов преподавания английского языка, таких как метод аудирования, метод интенсивного чтения и т.д. Некоторые из них подразумевали полный отказ от использования родного языка, в то время как другие позволяли его использование в определенных контекстах. В целом, использование родного языка в преподавании английского языка зависит от конкретного метода и подхода преподавателя.
Какие аспекты использования родного языка учеников рассматриваются в статье?
В статье рассматриваются различные аспекты использования родного языка учеников в преподавании английского языка.
Какие изменения произошли в отношении использования родного языка учеников со временем?
Статья описывает изменения отношения к использованию родного языка учеников в течение времени и предлагает обзор существенных тенденций преподавания языков в XX веке.
Какие основные методы преподавания языка рассматриваются в статье?
В статье представлен обзор главных методов преподавания языка XX века и их влияния на использование родного языка учеников.
Что такое коммуникативный подход и как он связан с использованием родного языка учеников?
Статья описывает коммуникативный подход и концепцию коммуникативной компетенции, а также объясняет связь между коммуникативным подходом и использованием родного языка учеников.
Какие преимущества и недостатки использования родного языка учеников в преподавании английского языка?
Статья освещает преимущества и недостатки использования родного языка учеников и предлагает рекомендации по оптимальному использованию родного языка для эффективного изучения английского языка.
Какие изменения произошли в отношении использования родного языка учащихся при обучении английскому языку?
В статье говорится о том, что отношение к использованию родного языка учащихся изменилось со временем. В прошлом использование родного языка считалось нежелательным, но теперь его использование в процессе обучения стало признаваться важным и полезным.
Какие основные тренды языкового обучения в двадцатом веке рассматриваются в статье?
В статье упоминаются несколько основных трендов языкового обучения, которые наблюдались в двадцатом веке. Это методика грамматики-перевода, методика прямого метода, методика аудиовизуального обучения, коммуникативный подход и т.д.
Что такое коммуникативный подход и как он связан с использованием родного языка учащихся?
Коммуникативный подход - это метод обучения языку, основанный на развитии коммуникативной компетенции учащихся. В рамках этого подхода, использование родного языка учащихся становится важным средством для повышения коммуникативной компетенции на английском языке.