THE GRAMMAR TRANSLATION METHOD: IMPORTANCE OF THIS METHOD IN DEVELOPING EFL STUDENTS SPEAKING SKILLS
Abstract
Abstract: The major aim of this paper is to show that certain recent developments in Cognitive Linguistics (CL) and Translation Studies (TS) could be used as arguments for reviving the long discredited Grammar Translation Method (GTM). It is argued that CL provides significant insight into the target language structure and helps FL learners to discover motivation underlying conceptualisations and their linguistic expression while translation, by bringing into light interlingual contrasts, exposes culturally motivated differences between the native and the foreign tongues at the same time making learners more aware of crucial universal aspects of verbal expression. 1. Introductory remarks It is of course a platitude to say that Foreign Language Teaching (FLT) methodology must be based upon a theory of language; the label “Applied Linguistics,” which is generally (although not quite correctly) used as its synonym, reflects the principle linguisticancilla discipline. The historical development of FLT methodology, marked by a long chain of subsequent theoretical proposals and their practical implementations, shows how closely main assumptions underlying consecutive theoretical frameworks for FLT reflect fundamental developments in linguistics at a given time. Moreover, while in earlier FLT models translation figured merely as one of the teaching or testing techniques, with recent emergence of Translation Studies (TS) as a scholarly discipline successfully striving for autonomy, the contribution from TS has been gaining importance. It is not the aim of the present essay to off er even a cursory survey of either the status ante or the status quo in FLT. Instead, I would like to demonstrate how recent developments in Cognitive Linguistics (CL) and TS could be used as arguments for reviving the long discredited Grammar Translation Method (GTM), without at the some time provoking potential criticism of FLT methodology “running in circles.” We shall claim that it is the spiral which is a better source for the metaphor.
References
Bartmiński J. 2009. Aspects of cognitive ethnolinguistics (ed. J. Zinken). London, Oakville.
Boers F., Lindstromberg, S. 2006. Cognitive Linguistic approaches to second or foreign language instruction: Rationale, proposals and evaluation. In Kristiansen G. et al. (eds.) Cognitive Linguistics: Current applications and future perspectives. Berlin: 305–355.
Geeraerts D. (ed.) 2006. Cognitive Linguistics: Basic readings. Berlin, New York.
Kristiansen G., Achard M., Dirven R., Ruiz de Mendoza Ibanez F. J. (eds.). 2006. Cognitive Linguistics: Current applications and future perspectives. Berlin.
Lakoff G., Johnson M. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago, London.
Langacker R. W. 2009. Cognitive grammar. A basic introduction. Oxford.
Littlemore J. 2011. Applying Cognitive Linguistics to Second Language Learning and Teaching. Basingstoke.
Król-Markefk a A. 2011. Metalinguistic knowledge and the accurate use of English articles: The eff ects of applying Cognitive Grammar in second language teaching. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation.
Nida E. 1964. Toward a science of translating: With special reference to principles and procedures involved in Bible translating. Leiden.
Rudzka-Ostyn B. 1996. The Polish Dative. In Van Belle W. and Van Langendonck W. (eds.) The Dative: Descriptive studies [vol. I]. Amsterdam: 341–394.
Rudzka-Ostyn B. 2003. Word power: Phrasal verbs and compounds. A cognitive approach. Berlin, New York.
