Scribd
Upload
244 views2 pages

Mod - 2 - 2.1 The Structural View of Language

The structural view of language was dominant in language teaching until the 1970s. This view analyzed language as a system of interconnected grammatical elements that could be broken down and taught to enable students to master the language system. Syllabuses were organized around grammar units, and correct language use was achieved through drilling, controlled exercises, and a focus on preventing mistakes. While communicative language teaching later emerged, grammar still underlies many modern syllabuses and aspects of controlled practice remain common.

Uploaded by

enoedes10
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
244 views2 pages

Mod - 2 - 2.1 The Structural View of Language

The structural view of language was dominant in language teaching until the 1970s. This view analyzed language as a system of interconnected grammatical elements that could be broken down and taught to enable students to master the language system. Syllabuses were organized around grammar units, and correct language use was achieved through drilling, controlled exercises, and a focus on preventing mistakes. While communicative language teaching later emerged, grammar still underlies many modern syllabuses and aspects of controlled practice remain common.

Uploaded by

enoedes10
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

2.

1 The structural view of language


Up until the 1970s grammar had been a controlling focus for language teaching,
and coursebook design reflected this structural view of language. This theory of
language drew on research from linguistic analysis and textual discourse analysis.
It saw language as a system of structural elements which was used for transmitting
meaning. Language could be broken down into these related components parts
which were:

 Phonological units (phonemes)


 Grammatical units (phrases, clauses, sentences)
 Grammatical operations (adding, shifting, joining or transforming elements)
 Lexical items (function words and structure words)

These “parts” could therefore be taught, and the goal of language learning was to
master the elements of this system. Sentence and sentence grammar formed the
building blocks of language, language learning and language use (McCarthy 2001).
Teaching language from this perspective, therefore, involved getting students to
understand how sentences were used to create different kinds of meaning, and to
teach the rules for forming sentences from lower level grammatical units, such as
phrases and clauses.

Syllabuses were arranged around units of grammar and correct language use was
achieved through drilling and practice, and through controlled speaking and writing
exercises. The aim was to prevent or minimise the potential for making mistakes.
Thus, the following features of methodology were frequently used (Ellis, 2002:168):

1. A specific grammatical feature is isolated for focused attention.


2. The learners are required to produce sentences containing the targeted
feature.
3. The learners will be provided with opportunities for repetition of the targeted
feature.
4. There is expectancy that the learners will perform the grammatical feature
correctly, therefore practice activities are success-oriented.
5. The learners receive feedback on whether their performance of the
grammatical structures is correct or not. This feedback may be immediate or
delayed.

Some of the methods that were based on this view of language were the audio-
lingual method, total physical response (TPR) and the Silent Way. However, it
should be noted that while officially rejecting a focus on grammar, many language
syllabuses and coursebooks which claim to be communicative to this day use
grammar as an organising principle and aspects of controlled practice are not
thought to be in opposition to the principles of communicative language teaching.

You might also like