Goals, Method, and Theory in Language Instruction

  • H. Stephen Straight

Abstract

The present paper addresses three very different questions about language instruction. First, WHY is there language instruction? A review of the variety of reasons why people might have a use for learning a language leads to the conclusion that a very great variety of methods of language instruction should be employed.

Keywords

Arena Defend Univer Romania Terrell 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Asher, James, J., 1969, The total physical response approach to second language learning. Modern Language Journal, 53: 3 - 7.Google Scholar
  2. Asher, James, J., 1972, Children’s first language as a model for second language learning. Modern Language Journal, 56, 133 - 139Google Scholar
  3. Asher, James, J., 1977, Learning another language through actions: the complete teacher’s guidebook. Sky Oak Productions, Los Gatos, Calif. Pages 36-52 reprinted as The total physical response approach, in Blair, ed., 1982: 54 - 66.Google Scholar
  4. Asher, James, J., 1981, Comprehension training: the evidence from laboratory and classroom studies. In Winitz, ed., 1981; 187 - 222.Google Scholar
  5. Belasco, Simon, 1967, The plateau; or the case for comprehension: the concept approach. Modern Language Journal, 51: 82 - 88.Google Scholar
  6. Blair, Robert, W., ed., 1982, Innovative approaches to language teaching. Newbury House, Rowley, Mass.Google Scholar
  7. Burling, Robbins, 1978, An introductory course in reading French. Language Learning 28: 105 - 128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burling, Robbins, 1982, Sounding right: an introduction to comprehension-based language instruction. Newbury House, Rowley, Mass.Google Scholar
  9. Davies, Norman, F., 1976, Receptive versus productive skills in foreign language learning. Modern Language Journal 60: 440 - 443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davies, Norman, F., 1980, Putting receptive skills first; an experiment in sequencing. Canadian Modern Language Review 36: 461-467.Google Scholar
  11. Diller, Karl, C., 1981, Neurolinguistic clues to the essentials of a good language teaching methodology: comprehension, problem solving, and meaningful practice. In Winitz, ed., 1981: 141 - 153.Google Scholar
  12. Dulay, Heidi, Burt Marina and Krashen Stephen, 1982, Language two. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Gary, Judith Olmsted and Gary Norman, 1980, Comprehension-oriented foreign language instruction-an overview. The Linguistic Reporter 23 (3): 4 - 5.Google Scholar
  14. Gary, Judith Olmsted and Gary Norman, 1981, talking may be dangerous to your linguistic health! The case for a much greater emphasis on listening comprehension in foreign language instruction. I.R.A.L. 19: 1 - 14.Google Scholar
  15. Ingram, Frank, Nord, James, R. and Dragt, D., 1975, A program for listening comprehension. Slavic and East European Journal 19: 1-10 (Cited in Gary and Gary 1981: 3 )Google Scholar
  16. Krashen, Stephen D., 1981, The input hypothesis. In James D. Alatis, ed., 1981, Georgetown University Round Table on Language and Linguistics, 1980, Georgetown University Press, Washington, D.C. pp. 168 - 180.Google Scholar
  17. Krashen, Stephen D., 1982, Theory versus practice in language training. In Blair, ed., 1982: 15 - 30.Google Scholar
  18. Landis, G.B., 1978, Eureka! A surefire second language curriculum. System 6: 148-157 (Cited in Nord 1981).Google Scholar
  19. Mackay, Ronald and Mountford A.J., eds., 1978, English for specific purposes: a case study approach. Longman, London.Google Scholar
  20. Mackay, Ronald and Palmer, Joe Darwin, eds., 1981, Languages for specific purposes: program design and evaluation. Newbury House, Rowley, Mass.Google Scholar
  21. Mackey, W.F., 1971, Free language alternation in early childhood education. Paper presented at the Conference on Child Language, Chicago, November 1971. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED-060-755) (Cited in Nord 1981 ).Google Scholar
  22. Matthews, Peter, H., 1979, Generative grammar and Linguistic Competence. Allen and Unwin, Winchester, Mass.Google Scholar
  23. Munby, John, 1978, Communicative syllabus design: a sociolinguistic model for defining the context of purpose-specific language programmes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  24. Nord, James, R., 1980, Developing listening fluency before speaking: an alternative paradigm. System 8: 1 - 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nord, James, R., 1981, Three steps leading to listening fluency: a beginning. In Winitz, ed., 1981: 69 - 100.Google Scholar
  26. Postovsky, Valerian A., 1974, Effects of delay in oral practice at the beginning of second language learning. Modern Language Journal 58: 229-239. Reprinted in Blair, ed., 1982: 67 - 76.Google Scholar
  27. Postovsky, Valerian A., 1981, The priority of aural comprehension in the language acquisition process. In Winitz, ed., 1981 170 - 186.Google Scholar
  28. Sapon, Stanley, M., 1971, On defining a response: a crucial problem in the analysis of verbal behavior. In Paul Pimsleur and Terence Quinn, eds., The psychology of second language learning, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, pp. 75 - 85.Google Scholar
  29. Scherer, George, A.C., 1950, The psychology of teaching reading through listening. German Quarterly 23: 151 - 160.Google Scholar
  30. Scherer, George, A.C., 1952, The importance of auditory comprehension. German Quarterly 25: 223 - 229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Straight, H. Stephen, 1976, Comprehension versus production in linguistic theory. Foundations of Language 14: 525 - 540.Google Scholar
  32. Straight, H. Stephen, 1978, Consciousness as anti-habit. In K.D. Irani, Louise Horowitz, and Gerald Myers, eds., Pathology and consciousness: theory of consciousness, theory of mind, linguistics, Haven Publishing, New York, pp. 1 - 4.Google Scholar
  33. Straight, H. Stephen, 1980, Auditory versus articulatory processes and their development in children. In Grace H. Yeni-Komshian, James F. Kavanagh, and Charles A. Ferguson, eds., Child phonology, Volume 1: Production, Academic Press, New York, pp. 43 - 71.Google Scholar
  34. Straight, H. Stephen, 1982, Structural commonalities between comprehension and production: products of monitoring and antici-Google Scholar
  35. pation. In Francis Lowenthal, Fernand Vandamme and Jean Cordier, eds., Language and language acquisition, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 177-180.Google Scholar
  36. Terrell, Tracy, D., 1982, The natural approach to language teaching: an update. Modern Language Journal 66: 121 - 132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wilkins, D.A., 1974, Second language learning and teaching. Edward Arnold, London.Google Scholar
  38. Wilkins, D.A., 1978, Notional syllabuses. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  39. Winitz, Harris, ed., 1981, The comprehension approach to foreign language instruction. Newbury House, Rowley, Mass.Google Scholar
  40. Winitz, Harris & Reeds, James A., 1973, Rapid acquisition of a foreign language ( German) by the avoidance of speaking. I.R.A.L. 11: 295-317.Google Scholar
  41. Winitz, Harris & Reeds. James A.,I975, Comprehension and problem solving as strategies for language training. Mouton, The Hague.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Stephen Straight
    • 1
  1. 1.State University of New York at BinghamtonBinghamtonUSA

Personalised recommendations