Marks for classroom contributions such as reading out?

[mesomorph]

mesomorph said: Having a real grasp of the grammar I think is the most important thing, as just from speaking a language badly new knowledge doesn't just miraculously appear out of the ether

My 3 year old would seem to be the living proof that what you say doesn't really hold much water.

Perhaps it would seem that way to you.

To me however your three year old is not actually an adult learner.

The fact is, an adult who tries to speak a language he doesn't actually have any knowledge of will struggle somewhat.

[Macavity]

I think too many people assume that children don't have to struggle and grapple with language learning simply because no-one remembers learning their mother tongue. To infer that adult learners are at a huge disadvantage is a little misguided in my opinion. True enough, they will struggle with a language they have no knowledge of but they have one major advantage when taking this task on: they know what language is.

[fluffyhamster]

Way too many brackets there fluffy, but I think I follow what you're saying. I don't disagree with the idea that a sound knowledge of grammar can be beneficial to students, but would maintain that it isn't the study of rules that really equips a person to make the breakthrough into speaking a language. Sure things are different for adults learning a second language than they are for children picking up their mother tongue, but all the same they do indeed absorb knowledge from the "ether", and this does equip them with new skills. It's just that we, perhaps consciously or less so, filter this new knowledge into the ether for them or else guide them to that part of the great blue yonder where they will encounter it. We can argue that 6 is 9 if we want as to how to teach and what to teach; and I do teach grammar as I find appropriate according to what I feel (guess?) are the needs of the given students, but at the end of the day, for some unknown reason, and despite my best efforts they just pick it up anyway!

OMG! An 'ad bracketinem' attack in two senses!

BTW, I wasn't talking about students studying rules or even teachers giving them - my view is that the teacher at least should study grammar and develop linguistically- if not psycholinguistically sound, convincing and appealing materials and activities. The reason why students can feel so compelled themselves to study grammar is often simply because their so "obviously" teachers haven't! But there is no reason why a teacher has to actually/directly teach what they've learnt or rather come to realize (new spin: to realize - to make or try to make materials and activities that distill the essence of what the teacher has sweated long and hard to learn and understand; to transform or attempt to transform stodgy grammar into a more palatable and nutritious form). So we sort of agree that things can be picked up from the ether, but there has to be considerable effort on at least the teacher's part beforehand, in planning and design, and even then, the learner may be advised to get bilingual study aids and get a bit more up to speed before shelling out serious shekels for monolingual, "direct" and/or "immersion" learning.

Despite your best efforts? No, maybe it's BECAUSE OF them! (Do a search for keyword 'Thorsen'!).

The following thread might be interesting for those who've not read it (Why Everyone Should Study Linguistics'):
http://forums.eslcafe.com/teacher/viewtopic.php?t=8624

The stuff that's actually relevant to this discussion here begins on the second page (many readers might begin to feel the urge to skip the first, with its long opening quote!).

[fluffyhamster]

I think too many people assume that children don't have to struggle and grapple with language learning simply because no-one remembers learning their mother tongue. To infer that adult learners are at a huge disadvantage is a little misguided in my opinion. True enough, they will struggle with a language they have no knowledge of but they have one major advantage when taking this task on: they know what language is.

That would read better to me with a 'however' somewhere before the 'is a little misguided IMO', and maybe an 'in turn' or 'from that' or something before the 'infer'. Am I reading you right? If so, again, we would appear to be in some agreement!

Kids have no choice but to knuckle down and "silently" suffer the slings and arrows of an outrageous language; adults meanwhile may know what "language" generally is and is for, but that can actually be a problem: it can take a fair bit of contrastive thinking if not anaylsis by an in this case reasonably bilingual teacher to anticipate potential problems (and again, it is the teacher who should be doing the brunt of this or whatever work IMO. Students are ultimately computers - I hesitate to say blank discs or drives - that want filling with as much quality software, in fact an overall new operating system and language, as soon and as quickly as possible).

[mesomorph]

I think too many people assume that children don't have to struggle and grapple with language learning simply because no-one remembers learning their mother tongue. To infer that adult learners are at a huge disadvantage is a little misguided in my opinion. True enough, they will struggle with a language they have no knowledge of but they have one major advantage when taking this task on: they know what language is.

With the psychological processes involved in learning a language adults are at a huge disadvantage to children.

Children learn language faster and easier than adults. They are programmed to learn.

I don't think most adults do actually know what language is.

Most adults will have the implicit grammar they have learnt as a child, but will now have to consciously reflect upon a second language grammar much more than the open minded child version of himself would have with his native tongue, or with a second language he could have had exposure to.

Children are much better equiped to pick language up than adults who have to wrestle with the grammar much more consciously.

[woodcutter]

I'm not sure what Mesomorph is trying to get at in this thread - it seems to be much more than the title would suggest.

The best learners of Korean in Korea seem to be the south-east Asian housewives. They may be able to wax lyrically about the grammar of Korean, but I doubt it.

They are definitely the ones with the most exposure and need to learn. Nuff said.

[mesomorph]

Whether you can 'wax lyrically' or not grammar is indespensible.

[fluffyhamster]

Whether you can 'wax lyrically' or not grammar is indespensible.

The issue with grammar in ELT is not so much if it can be dispensed with, but if (and if so, then how) it can be dispensed!

[mesomorph]

I suppose that could be taken as an argument for not actually explicitly teaching it.

However, explicit or not, it is dispensed, as per your implication.

[woodcutter]

If you can consciously reflect on grammar then that means you can tell other people about it too.

I suspect that adult learners bathed in input, starved of home, can learn without a large amount of reflection (and that kids do a little anyway).

That would a nice thing to research, the linguistic talents of poorly educated south-east asian brides, I suppose someone may have done so, but most people seem to be too busy doing pseudo-experiments with statistical crunchings.