TE A C H IN G G R A M M A R

INTRODUCTION
Over the centuries, second language educators have alternated between two types
of approaches to language teaching:
1. those that focus on analyzing the language
Students learn the elements of language
building toward students' being able to use the
elements to communicate.

2. those that focus on using the language

encourages students to use the language from
the start
• Shift from the more form-oriented grammar- translation approach to
the use-oriented direct method (Celce-Murcia 1980).

• A more recent example of the shift is the loss of popularity of the

cognitive-code approach, and the rise of more communicative
approaches.
In contrast, research has shown that teachers who focus
students’ attention on linguistic form during communicative
interactions are more effective than those who never focus
on form or who only do so in decontextualized grammar
lessons (Spada and Lightbown 1993; Lightbown 1998).
It follows, then, that most educators concur with the need to
teach grammatical form. However, they advise doing so by
“focusing on form” within a meaning-based or communicative
approach in order to avoid a return to analytic approaches in
which decontextualized language forms were the object of
study.
Equating grammar with form and the teaching of grammar
with the teaching of explicit linguistic rules concerning form
are unduly limiting, representing what we have called myths
(Larsen- Freeman 1995).
Grammar is about form and one way to teach form is to
give students rules; however, grammar is about much
more than form, and its teaching is ill served if students
are simply given rules.
A THREE-DIMENSIONAL GRAMMAR FRAMEWORK

Since our goal is to achieve a better fit between grammar and communication, it is
not helpful to think of grammar as a discrete set of meaningless, decontextualized,
static structures, nor is it helpful to think of grammar solely as prescriptive rules
about linguistic form, such as injunctions against splitting infinitives or ending
sentences with prepositions. Grammatical structures not only have
(morphosyntactic) form, they are also used to express meaning (semantics) in
context- appropriate use (pragmatics).
In dealing with the complexity of grammar, three
dimensions must concern us: structure or form,
semantics or meaning, and the pragmatic conditions
governing use.
In dealing with the complexity of grammar, three
dimensions must concern us: structure or form,
semantics or meaning, and the pragmatic conditions
governing use.
1. In the wedge of our pie having to do with structure, we have those overt lexical,
and morphological forms that tell us how a particular grammar structure is
constructed and how it is sequenced with other structures in a sentence or text.
With certain structures, it is also important to note the phonemic graphemic
patterns.

2. In the semantic wedge, we deal with what a grammar structure means. Note that
the meaning can be lexical (a dictionary definition for a preposition like down, for
instance) or it can be grammatical (e.g. The conditional states both a condition and
outcome or result).
3. We can limit pragmatics to mean "the study of those relations between language
and context that are grammaticalized, or encoded in the structure of a language”
(Levinson 1983. p. 9).
a. That context can be social (i.e. A context created bv interlocutors, their
relationship to one another, the setting)
b. It can be a linguistic discourse context (i.e, The language that precedes or
follows a particular structure in the discourse or how a particular genre or register of
discourse affects the use of a structure),
c. It can mean the presuppositions one has about the context.
The influence of pragmatics may be ascertained by asking two questions:

1. When or why does a speaker/writer choose a particular grammar structure over

another that could express the same meaning or accomplish the same purpose? For
example, what factors in the social context might explain a paradigmatic choice such
as why a speaker chooses a yes-no question rather than an imperative to serve as a
request for information (e.g. Do you have the time? versus Please tell me the time)

2. When or why does a speaker/writer vary the form of a particular linguistic structure?
For instance, what linguistic discourse factors would result in
a syntagmatic choice such as the indirect object being placed
before the direct object to create jenny gave hank a brand-new
comb versus jenny gave a brand-new comb to hank ?
• Let us consider an example. A common structure to be taught at a high-beginning
level of English proficiency is the 4 possessive form.

• Form of possessive. This way of forming possessives in English requires inflecting

regular singular nouns and irregular plural nouns not ending in s with ’s or by adding
an apostrophe after the s ending of regular plural nouns and singular nouns ending in
the sound /s/. this form of the possessive has three allomorphs: /z/, $/, and /az/.
which are phonetically conditioned: z/ is used when it occurs after voiced consonants
and vowels, s/ following voiceless consonants, and bz! Occurs after sibilants.
• Meaning of possessive. Besides possession, the possessive or
genitive form can indicate description (a debtor's prison). Amount (a
month's holiday), relationship (jack's wife), part-whole (my brother’s
hand), and origin/agent (shakespeare's tragedies).
• Also, although all languages have a way of signaling possession, they
do not all regard the same items as possessable. For example, Spanish
speakers refer to a body part using the definite article instead of a
possessive form.
Use of possessive. Filling in this wedge requires that we ask when the
's is used to express possession as opposed to other structures that can
be used to convey this same meaning. For example, possession in
English can be expressed in other ways—with a possessive determiner
(e.g., His, her, and their) or with the periphrastic of the form (e.g., The
legs of the table). Possessive determiners are presumably used when
the referent of the possessor is clear from the context.
While ESL books will often say that the of the possessive is used with
nonhuman head nouns and ’s with human head nouns, we are aware of
certain conditions where this rule does not apply. For example, native
speakers often prefer to use the 's even with inanimate head nouns if
the head nouns are performing some action (e.g., The train’s arrival
was delayed). Finally, students will have to learn to distinguish
contexts in which a noun compound (table leg) is more appropriate
than either the ’s form or the of the form.
Distributing the features of the target grammatical structure
among the three wedges of the pie can give teachers an
understanding of the scope and multidimensionality of the
structure. In turn, this understanding will guide teachers in
deciding which facts concerning the possessive will be taught
and when and how to do so.
Phrasal Verbs applied to the framework
Form of phrasal verbs. Phrasal verbs are two-part verbs comprising a verb and a
particle (e.g. To look up). Sometimes, they can be constructed with three parts in
that a preposition can follow the particle (e.g., To keep up with). As with all other
verbs, phrasal verbs are either transitive or intransitive. A distinctive feature of
phrasal verbs is that for many of them, the particle can be separated from its verb
by an intervening object (e.g. Alicia looked the word up in the dictionary).
Phrasal verbs also have distinctive stress and juncture
patterns, which distinguish them from verb and preposition
combinations:
•Alicia looked up#the word.
•.Alicia walked#up the street.
Meaning of phrasal verbs. There are literal phrasal verbs, such as to
hang up, where if one knows the meaning of the verb or the particle or
both, it is not difficult to figure out the meaning of the verb-particle
combination. Unfortunately, for the ESL student, there are far more
instances of figurative phrasal verbs (e.g, To run into, meaning "meet
by chance") where a knowledge of the meaning of the verb and of the
particle is of little help in discerning the meaning of the phrasal verb.
Moreover, as with single-word verbs, phrasal verbs can have
more than one meaning (e.g., To come across, meaning "to
discover by chance” as in I came across this old book in the
library, or when used intransitively, "to make an impression”
as in Richard came across well at the convention.
Use of phrasal verbs. When is a phrasal verb preferred to a single-word verb that
conveys the same meaning (e.g., Put out a fire versus extinguish a fire), for the
most part, phrasal verbs seem to be more common in informal spoken discourse as
opposed to more formal written discourse.
When is one form of a phrasal verb preferred to another: ie.. When should the
particle be separated from its verb (e.g., Put out a fire versus put a fire out)}
Erteschik-Shir’s (1979) principle of dominance seems to work well to define the
circumstances favoring particle movement.