7« “ √   “ √ «‘ ™ “ ° “ √ » √’ ª ∑ÿ ¡ ™ ≈ ∫ÿ √’

Hope Christina H. Deita*

* Lecturer, Faculty of Liberal Arts, Sripatum University Chonburi Campus

GTM Vis-a-Vis CLT: A Comparison ofLanguage Teaching Methods

ABSTRACTGrammar Translation Method (GTM) and

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) are twomethods commonly implored by language teach-ers in the classroom setting. These methods areguiding principles that equipped the language teach-ers in their challenge to transfer language skills tononnative students. The comparison of these twomethods shows learning a language effectivelythrough theory versus the real world. Communica-tive language teaching makes use of real-lifesituations that necessitate communication. Theteacher sets up a situation that students are likelyto encounter in real life. The real- life simulationschange from day to day. Studentsû motivation tolearn comes from their desire to communicate inmeaningful ways about meaningful topics. GTM isa method of studying a language that approach itfirst through detailed analysis of its grammar rules,followed by application of the knowledge to thetask of translating sentences and texts into and outof the target language. It views language learningas memorizing rules and facts in order to under-

stand and manipulate the morphology and syntaxof the foreign language. Furthermore, grammar istaught deductivelyûthat is by presentation and studyof grammar rules which are practiced through trans-lation exercises.

IntroductionMethod in language teaching is essential. It

links theory to practice. Every language teacherhas his methods of teaching which he uses as aguiding principle. From these methods, one anchorsthe design of teaching plans, learning activities,instructional materials and evaluation techniques.It is quite notable that the method is proportionateto the performance of the students. So, what wentwrong with the teaching methods used in Thaiclassrooms? Why do most Thai students performbetter in written tasks compared to spoken tasks?What happened to almost twelve years of studyingEnglish?

Although English language teaching inThailand has improved over the years, there arestill a minimal number of students with adequate

« “ √   “ √ «‘ ™ “ ° “ √ » √’ ª ∑ÿ ¡ ™ ≈ ∫ÿ √’8

language performance to communicate in real-life situations. Two possible reasons are considered :lack of opportunity to use English in real- lifesituations and classroom activities do not enhanceforeign language development. The latter is acritical issue worthy of in- depth discussion. Thus,this article will go through a comparative analysisof two known methods popularly used by mostlanguage teachers: the traditional Grammar Trans-lation Method and the modern CommunicativeLanguage Teaching Method.

The Grammar TranslationMethod

Classes were conducted in the nativelanguage. A chapter in a distinctive textbook of thismethod would begin with a massive bilingualvocabulary list. Grammar points would comedirectly from the texts and be presented contex-tually in the textbook, to be explained elaboratelyby the instructor. Grammar thus provided the rulesfor assembling words into sentences. Tedioustranslation and grammar drills would be used toexercise and strengthen the knowledge withoutmuch attention to content. Sentences would bedeconstructed and translated. Eventually, entire textswould be translated from the target language intothe native language and tests would often askstudents to replicate classical texts in the targetlanguage. Very little attention was placed onpronunciation or any communicative aspects ofthe language. The skill exercised was reading, andthen only in the context of translation. In GTM,reading and writing are the major focus.Vocabulary selection is based solely on the reading

texts used, dictionary study and memorization.In addition, accuracy is emphasized. Students areexpected to attain high standards in translation.The studentûs native language is the medium ofinstruction. It is used to explain new items and toenable comparison to be made between theforeign language and the native language.

Key Features of GTM

According to Prator and Celce-Murcia (1991),the key features of the Grammar Translation Methodare as follows:

(1) Classes are taught in the mother tongue,with little active use of the targetlanguage.

(2) Much vocabulary is taught in the formof lists of isolated words.

(3) Long elaborate explanations of theintricacies of grammar are given.

(4) Grammar provides the rules for puttingwords together, and instruction often focuses onthe form and inflection of words.

(5) Reading of difficult classical texts isbegun early.

(6) Little attention is paid to the content oftexts, which are treated as exercises in in gram-matical analysis.

(7) Often the only drills are exercises intranslating disconnected sentences from thetarget language into the mother tongue.

(8) Little or no attention is given to pronun-ciation.

9« “ √   “ √ «‘ ™ “ ° “ √ » √’ ª ∑ÿ ¡ ™ ≈ ∫ÿ √’

The Main Principles of GTM: (Richards and Rodgers,2006)

1. Translation interprets the words andphrases of the foreign languages in the bestpossible manner.

2. The phraseology and idioms of the targetlanguage can best be assimilated in the process ofinterpretation.

3. The structures of the foreign languageare best learnt when compared and contrasted withthose of the mother tongue.

Advantages of GTM1. The phraseology of the target language

is quickly explained. Translation is the easiest wayof explaining the meaning of words.

2. Teacherûs labor is saved. Communica-tion between the teacher and the learner does notcause linguistic problems.

Disadvantages of GTM1. It is an unnatural method. The natural

order of learning a language is listening, speaking,reading, and writing. That is how the child learnshis mother tongue in natural surroundings. GTMstarts with reading thus, the learning process isreversed.

2. Speech is neglected. The Grammar Trans-lation Method lays emphasis on reading andwriting. It neglects speech. Thus, the students whoare taught English through this method fail toexpress themselves adequately in spoken English.Even at the undergraduate stage they feel shy ofcommunicating through English. It has beenobserved that in a class, which is taught English

through this method, learners listen to the mothertongue more than that to the second/foreignlanguage. Since language learning involves habitformation such students fail to acquire habit ofspeaking English. Thus, they have to pay a heavyprice for being taught through this method.

3. Exact translation is not possible. Transla-tion is, indeed, a difficult task and exact translationfrom one language to another is not alwayspossible. A language is the result of variouscustoms, traditions, and modes of behavior of aspeech community and these traditions differ fromcommunity to community. There are several lexicalitems in one language, which have no synonyms/equivalents in another language.

4. It does not give pattern practice. Aperson can learn a language only when he inter-nalizes its patterns to the extent that they form hishabit. But the Grammar Translation Method doesnot provide any such practice to the learner of alanguage. It rather attempts to teach languagethrough rules and not by use. Researchers inlinguistics have proved that to speak any language,whether native or foreign entirely by rule is quiteimpossible. Language learning means acquiringcertain skills, which can be learnt through practiceand not by just memorizing rules.

5. Low translation standard are caused bygrammatical techniques which force the learnersto deduce sentences from a multiplicity of rulesand exceptions.

6. Little or no attention to pronunciation.7. This method neither approaches nor

encourage the studentûs communicative compe-tence

« “ √   “ √ «‘ ™ “ ° “ √ » √’ ª ∑ÿ ¡ ™ ≈ ∫ÿ √’10

Typical Techniques in GTM

Diane Larsen-Freeman, in her book Tech-niques and Principles in Language Teaching(1986:13) provides expanded descriptions of somecommon/ typical techniques closely associated withthe Grammar Translation Method. The listing hereis in summary form only.

(1) Translation of a Literary Passage(Translating target language to native lan-guage)

(2) Reading Comprehension Questions(Finding information in a passage, mak-ing inferences and relating to personalexperience)

(3) Antonyms/Synonyms(Finding antonyms and synonyms forwords or sets of words).

(4) Cognates(Learning spelling/sound patterns thatcorrespond between L1 and the targetlanguage)

(5) Deductive Application of Rule (Understanding grammar rules and their

exceptions, then applying them to newexamples)

(6) Fill-in-the-blanks(Filling in gaps in sentences with newwords or items of a particular grammartype).

(7) Memorization (Memorizing vocabulary lists, grammati-

cal rules and grammatical paradigms)(8) Use Words in Sentences (Students create sentences to illustrate

they know the meaning and use of new

words)(9) Composition (Students write about a topic using the

target language)

So, how does a learner react to this method ofteaching? The GTM may make the language learn-ing experience uninspiring and boring. Worst effectof this method is on pupilûs motivation. Becausehe cannot succeed - leads to frustration, boredomand indiscipline. It may leave the students with asense of frustration. Even among more able pupilswho may be able to achieve a higher level ofsuccess, there is a feeling that this is all there is tolanguage learning. It is not a rewarding or satisfy-ing activity.. Language learning should be fun andbring some joy and pride in achievement with it.The method by definition has a very limited scopeof objectives. Because speaking or any kind ofspontaneous creative output was missing from thecurriculum, students would often fail at speakingor even letter writing in the target language. Throughgrammar translation, students lacked an active rolein the classroom, often correcting their own workand strictly following the textbook.

The Communicative LanguageTeaching Method

Communicative language teaching(CLT) is an approach to the teaching of second andforeign languages that emphasizes interaction asboth the means and the ultimate goal of learning alanguage. It is also referred to as çcommunicativeapproach to the teaching of foreign languagesé orsimply the çcommunicative approaché. Communi-cative Language Teaching marks the beginning of

11« “ √   “ √ «‘ ™ “ ° “ √ » √’ ª ∑ÿ ¡ ™ ≈ ∫ÿ √’

a major paradigm shift in language teaching in thetwentieth century. The origin of CLT is to be foundin the change in the British language teaching tradi-tions dating from the late 1960s. This was a re-sponse to the criticisms of American linguist NoamChomsky. British applied linguists saw the need tofocus in language teaching in communicative profi-ciency rather than on mere structures.

Language learning does not take place in avacuum, and therefore needs to be taught in real-life contexts to be effective. CLT adds the dimen-sion of language functions such as apologizing, per-suading, negotiating, and conveying information thatare vital for interaction with others. It enables learn-ers to use language for communicative purposesin situations with others, and to be aware of theappropriate language to use according to levels offormality, tone, context, topic, and non-verbal be-havior.

Features of CLTOne of the most recognized features of CLT isDavid Nunanûs (1991) five features of CLT:

1. An emphasis on learning to communicatethrough interaction in the target language.There is also an awareness of variation inlanguage use rather than simply attentionto the language.

2. The introduction of authentic texts into thelearning situation.

3. The provision of opportunities for learnersto focus, not only on language but also onthe Learning Management process. Com-municative tasks are achieved through thelanguage rather than simple exercises onthe language.

4. An enhancement of the learnerûs own per-sonal experiences as important contribut-ing elements to classroom learning. Thereis an emphasis placed on students’ initia-tives, rather than simply on teacher- cen-tered directions.

5. An attempt to link classroom language learn-ing with language activities outside theclassroom.

These five features are claimed by practitio-ners of CLT to show that they are very interestedin the needs and desires of their learners as wellas the connection between the language as it istaught in their class and as it used outside theclassroom. Under this broad umbrella definition, anyteaching practice that helps students develop theircommunicative competence in an authentic con-text is deemed an acceptable and beneficial formof instruction. Thus, in the classroom CLT oftentakes the form of pair and group work requiringnegotiation and cooperation between learners, flu-ency-based activities that encourage learners todevelop their confidence, role-plays in which stu-dents practice and develop language functions, aswell as judicious use of grammar and pronuncia-tion focused activities.

CLT Features at Length

Finnochiaro and Brumfit (1983:91-93) com-piled this list of CLT features way back in 1983.

(1) Meaning is paramount.(2) Dialogs, if used, center around commu-

« “ √   “ √ «‘ ™ “ ° “ √ » √’ ª ∑ÿ ¡ ™ ≈ ∫ÿ √’12

nicative functions and are not normallymemorized.

(3) Contextualization is a basic premise.(4 Language learning is learning to com-

municate.(5) Effective communication is sought.(6) Drilling may occur, but peripheral.(7) Comprehensible pronunciation is sought.(8) Any device which helps the learners is

accepted - varying according to their age,interest, etc.

(9) Attempts to communicate may be en-couraged from the very beginning.

(10) Judicious use of native language is ac-cepted where feasible.

(11) Translation may be used where studentsneed or benefit from it.

(12) Reading and writing can start from thefirst day, if desired.

(13) The target linguistic system will belearned best through the process ofstruggling to communicate.

(14) Communicative competence is the de-sired goal.

(15) Linguistic variation is a central conceptin materials and methods.

(16) Sequencing is determined by any con-sideration of content function, or mean-ing which maintains interest.

(17) Teachers help learners in any way thatmotivates them to work with the lan-guage.

(18) Language is created by the individualoften through trial and error.

(19) Fluency and acceptable language is theprimary goal: accuracy is judged not in

the abstract but in context.(20) Students are expected to interact with

other people, either in the flesh, throughpair and group work, or in their writings.

(21) The teacher cannot know exactly whatlanguage the students will use.

(22) Intrinsic motivation will spring from aninterest in what is being communicatedby the language.

Classroom activities used inCLT

ë Role playë Interviewsë Information gapë Gamesë Language exchangeë Surveysë Pair workë Learning by teaching

However, not all courses that utilize the com-municative language approach will restrict their ac-tivities solely to these. Some courses will have thestudents take occasional grammar quizzes, or pre-pare at home using non-communicative drills, forinstance.

Communicative Approach to language teach-ing includes several distinct aspects. Two of themare mentioned here. Applying these aspects meansthat language teaching and learning become farmore than a series of grammar lessons and vo-cabulary lists. For language teaching and learningto be truly communicative, it must not only be incontext, but used to convey ideas, preferences,

13« “ √   “ √ «‘ ™ “ ° “ √ » √’ ª ∑ÿ ¡ ™ ≈ ∫ÿ √’

thoughts, feelings and information in a way that isaddressed to reach others. CLT can be addressedin two ways:

ë Content-Based Instruction (CBI)ë Task-Based language teaching (TBLT)

Definitions of CBI vs. TBL in ELTIn CBI, Widdowson, as cited by Brumfit,

the focus of classes is not on the language andstructure itself, but rather on learners acquiring skillsor knowledge using English as the language ofinstruction. If you teach a learner how to repaircomputers, for example, and use English as thelanguage of instruction, the learners improve theirlanguage communicative skills while learningforemost the skill of computer repair.

Todayûs global community expects ourstudents to be not only skilled in their particularfield of interest but at the same time capable oftransferring their knowledge and skills to another.Here lies the demand of developing communica-tively efficient workers who can be performing verywell in both knowledge of work and language skills.Task-Based Learning in ELT

In the TBLT approach, Willis, as cited byBrumfit, the focus is on providing communicativeactivities needed for English language learning,performing tasks using the target language(English) and using the English language in otherways for learning tasks. Examples would be havinglearners buy postage to mail a letter by firstteaching them the structures and language neededto perform the task, then actually having them doit. Another example would be teaching learners theneeded English to order a meal in a restaurant, ormake a shopping purchase, then allowing them tocomplete such tasks on their own using unguided

or free speech.Here lies the various communicative drills

designed by language teachers in the classroom.By providing the students with a variety of speak-ing and listening exercises copied from real- lifescenarios, English language teachers were able tolet the students experience the use of the targetlanguage.

CaveatsA major criticism of CLT is that of a clash of

theory and practice. Theoretically all learners shouldlearn to say and do what they personally want todo, but practically the syllabus mostly prescribesthe lexical and grammatical items which they haveto learn at a given stage of the course. Correspond-ingly the learners are constantly called upon toimagine and pretend that they are in a situation inwhich they want to say what the textbookprescribes they have to say. Critics also point tothe danger that learners may be tempted to simplymemorize certain phrases which prove to beuseful in recurring communicative situations with-out, however, learning to creatively construct newgrammatical forms that might serve their speechintentions better.

Brown (1994:78-80) warns that there arecertain caveats in the field of language teachingwhen it comes to discussing CLT and oneûs sup-port of the approach, saying that that support orbelief needs to be çqualifiedé. He warns against:

(1) Giving çlip serviceé to the principles ofCLT (because çno one these days would admit toa disbelief in principles of CLT; they would be marked

« “ √   “ √ «‘ ™ “ ° “ √ » √’ ª ∑ÿ ¡ ™ ≈ ∫ÿ √’14

as a hereticé) without actually grounding oneûs teach-ing techniques in those principles, or making sureone indeed understands and practices according tothe characteristics that make CLT what it is.

(2) Overdoing certain CLT features, forexample engaging in real-life authentic language tothe exclusion of helpful devices such as controlledpractice, or vice versa. Moderation is needed incombination with common sense and a balancedapproach.

(2) The numerous interpretations of whatCLT actually çisé. CLT is often a catchcall term, and does not reflect the factthat not everyone agrees on its inter-pretation or application. Teachers needto be aware that there are many pos-sible versions, and it is intended as ançumbrellaé term covering a variety ofmethods.

Conclusion

The goal of language teaching is to developwhat Hymes ( as cited by Rao, 1996) referred to asçcommunicative competence.é This could be donewith activities which involve authentic communica-tion to promote learning. Giving the learners prac-tice activities designed to stimulate ç real lifeécommunication problems was the obvious way tobridge that gap. In the process of learning a foreign

language, çlearning by doingé benefits our studentsthrough opportunities to interact with one anotherand perceiving meanings on their own. Anotherargument focuses on the assumption that theopportunity for learners to negotiate meaningduring meaningful interaction is of crucial impor-tance for language learning in the classroom.

In the process of language acquisition, it isinsufficient for students to simply have knowledgeof target language forms, structures, and functions.Students must be able to apply this knowledge innegotiating meaning. During the negotiation ofmeaning, the learners can learn directly from eachother, sharing information and knowledge they haveeither missed or misunderstood.

Language teachers should see teachingmethodology as their own personal domain,certainly open to outside influences and examples,but theirs to experiment with and develop. Decidewhat your language learning principles are andselect techniques from various çmethodsé thatappear to match them. Try adapting/experiment-ing with those techniques before you prematurelydiscard them after one attempt. Try using varioustechniques in a variety of combinations. Observeyour learners closely, and invite them into theprocess by eliciting their feedback on the rangeof techniques you use. Try not to misinterpretwhat the role of a language teacher is - you are notsome çauthorityé given a mandate to tell learnershow they should think. You are a facilitator and aguide, and an ongoing çlearneré yourself.

15« “ √   “ √ «‘ ™ “ ° “ √ » √’ ª ∑ÿ ¡ ™ ≈ ∫ÿ √’

REFERENCE

Brown, H.D.(1994). Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Printice-Hall.

Brumfit,C.J., & Johnson, K. (Eds.). (1979). The Communicative approach to languae teach-ing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Celce-Murcia, M. (Ed.) (1991). Teaching English as sacond or foreign language. Boston:Newbury House.

Larsen-Freman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. (2nd ed.).Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rao, Z. (2008). Reconciling Comunicative approach to the teaching of English withtraditional Chinese method (Online). Available: www.elechina.super-red.esl/rao. [2008,August 31].

Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approach and methods in language teaching. New York:Cambridge University Press.

English Language teaching methodology (Online). (1993). Available: www.englishraven.com/method. [1993, June 4].