Grammar–translation method? Why a history of the methods?Considerations from a Spanish perspective

ABSTRACT

This article seeks to draw attention to the particular situation regarding knowledge of the Grammar–Translation Method (GTM), or lack thereof, which still dominates a great part of the teaching and research scenes. Considering mainly what has been published in Spanish, it provides answers to the questions outlined in its title. To that end, it briefly addresses some aspects covered by research on the GTM which show how imprecise knowledge of this method can be. It focuses then on the teaching scene in Spain regarding the GTM in the context of a history of the methods. Its aim is to refute the belief presented in many academic forums by those who still assume that the History of Foreign Language Teaching and Learning begins with the GTM and summarise it as a history of the methods used to teach mainly grammatical contents.

KEYWORDS:

• Grammar-Translation Method
• foreign language teaching
• foreign language learning

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

¹ From now also understood as ‘the history of our discipline’.

² As can be seen, for example, in Klippel (1994) or Kemmler (2019).

³ Later on, we will have the opportunity to find out which of these designations are adopted by other authors. They are not mentioned here to avoid further repetition.

⁴ ‘[…] a method of foreign or second language teaching which makes use of translation and grammar study as the main teaching and learning activities. The Grammar–Translation Method was the traditional way Latin and Greek were taught in Europe. In the nineteenth century it began to be used to teach “modern” languages such as French, German, and English, and it is still used in some countries today. A typical lesson consists of the presentation of a grammatical rule, a study of lists of vocabulary, and a translation exercise. Because the Grammar Translation Method emphasizes reading rather than the ability to communicate in a language there was a reaction to it in the nineteenth century (see natural approach, direct method), and there was later a greater emphasis on the teaching of spoken language’ (Richards and Schmidt 2010: 252-253).

⁵ [A method of teaching second languages that uses the study of grammatical rules, memorisation of vocabulary and translation as essential learning activities. This method, which has had different names, was first used in classical language teaching and later on to help learners read and appreciate the literature and culture of modern languages. Since this approach emphasised reading rather than the learner’s ability to communicate orally in the second language, there was a strong reaction against it in the 20th century, as can be seen in the natural method and the direct method].

⁶ [The denomination ‘traditional method’ (TM from now on) allows us to refer to this methodological configuration throughout its historical evolution (XVII-XX centuries), in its diverse variants (…). The denomination grammatical-translation method is used by Ch. Puren (1988: 35) to refer to the particular form that the traditional method acquires in the second half of the XIX century].

⁷ [The TM is based on a rationalist postulate: learning is about understanding. Knowing the organisation and internal functioning of the language (knowledge that is provided only by grammar) is therefore the basis of learning a language (…). The TM is characterised as an indirect method, since access to the FL is always mediated by the mother tongue (…). Once the rules by which a language is organised are understood, memorising them, together with the memorisation of vocabulary, allows the acquisition of language skills through continuous translation exercises (version and theme). Knowledge of a foreign language is achieved when one is able to make the shift from one (mother) language to another (foreign) language, or the reverse, instantaneously and correctly (replacing the terms and applying the rules properly)].

⁸ [(…) this grammar-translation method, unlike the commūnis opiniō, is a fairly recent introduction to classical language teaching and does not go back further than the 19th century].

⁹ [(…) considered as such by the greatest humanists, who devoted long treatises to contrasting the methods of the new education that was emerging with the scholastic education of earlier times].

¹⁰ [The traditional or Prussian method, also known as the grammar and translation method, fully developed by the American Sears from 1845 onwards, was mainly based on the teaching of Latin as an educated language, but was later developed for the learning of other European languages as well].

¹¹ [JOHANN VALENTIN MEIDINGER (1756-1822), professor of French and Italian in Frankfurt am Main, occupies a prominent place in the history of language didactics. His manual Praktische Französische Grammatik ([1783] 1804) immediately met with immense success throughout Europe (37 editions until 1857) and introduced the method commonly known as grammar-translation, which dominated the end of the 18th century and a large part of the following century].

¹² From the original work Les sciences du langage, un défi pour l’enseignement?

¹³ CEDE stands for Centro Documentación de Estudios y Oposiciones [Documentation Center for Studies and Public Examinations], see CEDE (1999/2021).

¹⁴ Text extracted from the material prepared by the team of teachers at CEDE that the enrolled students receive.

¹⁵ Text written in Spanish. All translations here are my own. The original text is part of the course guide for the academic year 2018-2019 and can be found on: https://webges.uv.es/uvGuiaDocenteWeb/guia?APP=uvGuiaDocenteWeb&ACTION=MOSTRARGUIA.M&MODULO=40615&CURSOACAD=2019&IDIOMA=C.

¹⁶ PhD in English, French and German Philology (2003-2007), PhD in Language and the Information Society: Linguistics and its Applications (2004-2009), PhD in Language, Literature and Thought: Perspectives from the 21st century (2007-2009), Master’s Degree in Linguistics and its Applications (2009-2013). Also as part of the subject ‘Sociocultural and Linguistic Aspects of Second Language Teaching’, within the Interuniversity Master’s Degree in Applied Linguistics (2013-2015).

¹⁷ Written over the course of ten years in Babel Afial, a journal published by the University of Vigo Publications Service. Please see Corvo Sánchez (2004-2013) in the references section.

¹⁸ [The treatment of grammar as such offered no other novelty than the inclusion in the book of practice exercises on the grammatical topics dealt with. The exercises were not presented as a block at the end of the manual, but gradually in each lesson, once the rules had been explained, and they consisted of translations of phrases or topics related to the parts of speech].

¹⁹ In this context, the editing work carried out by these authors in 2018 is very interesting. Please see the references section: McLelland and Smith (2018a, 2018b, 2018c).

²⁰ [(…) most authors agree on the grammar-translation method (…)], [(…) there is no direct relationship between teaching methods and theoretical models (…)].

²¹ [(…) the predominance of interest in written, cultured and literary language and a focus on normative correctness. Learning a language with this method meant knowing the definition of the parts of speech, learning a more or less extensive vocabulary and knowing some rules of word combination. And all this from a point of view that is more receptive (being able to translate and read) than productive (being able to communicate)].

²² I would also like to highlight others, such as those by Kelly (1976), Germain (1993) and Caravolas (2001) outside the Spanish context.

²³ However, the result offers an incomplete introduction, since in the second stage, from the 17th century onwards, the focus is only on the study of modern languages and did not cover the teaching of the classical languages. As reading material for classes, it is adapted to the needs of the students and they were especially interested in modern languages.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

María José Corvo Sánchez

María José Corvo Sánchez is a lecturer at the Department of English, French and German Philology at the University of Vigo (Galicia, Spain). Her research interests relate mainly to the fields of history of foreign language teaching and learning in Europe and German literature, with particular dedication to German as a foreign language and Children’s and Young People’s Literature.