Replanishment of uzbek vocabulary with the help of borrowings

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

ABSTRACT

English language is an international language used in order to communicate in the fields of education, technology, trade and politics so that it is learnt as a foreign language in many countries around the world, as well as in Uzbekistan.

Teaching grammar has been regarded as crucial to the ability to use language. For this reason, this qualification paper explores the use of functional approaches in English classrooms' atmosphere, furthermore expresses advantages of using them in teaching grammar. The proposed steps are expected to be an alternative pathway for English teachers to teach grammar, particularly teaching it not in traditional way, but with communicative methods.

The research paper contains eight chapters within appendix. It includes Statement of intent, Literature review, Procedure and process, Results and Discussion, Final reflection, reference list, bibliography and appendix.

In Statement of intent, it is admitted concise information of the analyzed theme as well as the reason why I have chosen this very topic. Literary review illustrates key assertions that make in support of this research. Procedure and Process is considered one of the vital part and it subdivided into two steps. The first is research plan in which I explicitly state the goal and objectives, my assumptions, predictions as well as expectations of the study and the research questions. In the second section, data collection, I give all of the specific information about how I actually collected data. In Results and Discussion it is illustrated the determinations and analyses of the found data counting its advantages and drawbacks. The next section is Final reflections in which I reflect upon the entire research process as well as, it is described in it how this research influenced the way I will teach in the future. Reference list includes books, articles and interviews that directly related to my research. Bibliography contains other related references in the research that are helpful, but which I do not cite in my literature review.

ITRODUCTION

grammar morphology communicative context

Grammar teaching in the foreign language classroom has constituted an important and debated issue for the last fifty years. In the history of language teaching, the role of grammarhas been addressed by a number of linguistic theories, methodologies, and currently, withinthe European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). Functional grammar, a grammar model developed by Michael Halliday in the 1960s, while still new to most EFL teachers, has aroused great interest for researchers. In spite of controversies about its application into classroom teaching, (e.g. too many concepts and terms) functional grammar is gaining popularity in schools and is helpfulfor EFL students to achieve success. In the field of language teaching, functional grammar has more applications to speaking and writing. The main reason is that functional grammar serves the communicative purpose of EFL students' learning the English language and provides the opportunity for EFL students to recognize the linguistic features of the language, which they need to learn for success at school. This paper is based on abstract, introduction, literature review and discusses several questions such as Whatare functional approaches? What are thekey concepts of functional grammar? What are the fundamental differences between teaching grammarwith traditional and functional approaches? What are the implications for English teaching and learning? The purpose of this paper is tohelp EFL teachers have an overall understanding of using functional methods in grammar teaching, and torealize its importance for EFL students to achieve success in school contexts or academic registers. Bloor (2005) argues that a language teacher ought to know as much as possible about the language and thatknowledge should include, as a major component, knowledge about grammar; and that given a good commandof the target language, a non-native speaker with appropriate professional training and a good understanding ofthe way that the language works can do an excellent job. Accordingly, through a detailed discussion of functionalgrammar, this paper will facilitate the present language teaching and learning.

Literature review

Language is further said to be a puzzling phenomenon, and so deserves to be studied more closely. This view is expressed by Moravcsik (2010) when he stated that the use of language is so much a part of our life that it is difficult to step back and attempt to view it as just another natural phenomenon. On the surface, what one observes is humans making noises at each other. The `noises' we emit, according to Moravcsik, fall into patterns. These patterns enable the `noises' both to be intelligible to humans and to describe parts of reality. This way of viewing language, he noted was articulated first by Aristotle. In chapter 1 of De Interpretation, 16 a 3-8, Aristotle writes: “Spoken sounds are symbols of affection in the soul, and written marks are symbols of spoken sounds. And just as written marks are not the same for all humans, neither are spoken sounds''. (Quoted in Moravcsik, 2010, p.92).

From the social point of view, it has been observed that language plays a considerable role in the day-to-day functional and social relationships of a learner. In this regard, Akere (2004) remarks that the English language occupies a significant position as a linguistic tool for effective public as well as private interactions. He used the situation- oriented analysis of speech acts, and the works of the interactionists to show the interface between individual use of language and the force conveyed by particular linguistic forms.

Various definitions of the term `grammar' have been given in several dictionaries, and the term has also been defined by grammarians and others who work on language. Before starting the discussion of grammar, some of these definitions are as follows:

1. “We shall use grammar in reference to the mechanism according to which language works when it is used to communicate with other people. We cannot see this mechanism concretely because it is represented rather abstractly in the human mind. One way of describing this mechanism is a set of rules which allow us to put words together in certain ways, but which do not allow others.” (Leech, DeucharandHoogenraad, 1982:51)

2. “A description of the structure of a language and the way in which linguistic units such as words and phrases are combined to produce sentences in the language. It usually takes into account the meanings and functions these sentences have in the overall system of the language. It may or may not include the description of the sounds of a language.” (RichardsandSchmidt, 1992:161)

3. “At its heart, then, grammar consists of two fundamental ingredients- syntax and morphology- and together they help us to identify grammatical forms which serve to enhance and sharpenthe expression of meaning.” (Batstone, 1994b: 224)

4. “Grammar is set of rules that define how words are combined or changed to form acceptable units of meaning within language.” (Ur, 1996: 87)

5. “…grammar(ing) is one of the dynamic linguistic processes of pattern formulation in language, which can be used by humans for making meaning in context-appropriate ways.”

(Larsen-Freeman, 2003: 142)

As observed in these definitions, the term `grammar' refers to a common idea related to the overall structure of language, and this idea has found explanations in many different ways. In other words, they seek minimally to explain the same phenomena: how words are formed (morphology) and how words are combined (syntax).

Instead of discussing all these definitions one by one, an insight into the nature of the topic is desired to be given. By aiming to involve the purposes which are searching for pedagogical grammar in the learning environment and the real use of structures in the communicative context, the following interpretation of grammar by Leech for this dissertation is used:

“I understand communicative grammar to mean an approach to grammar in which the goal is to explore and to formulate the relations between the formal events of grammar (words, phrases, sentences, and their categories and structures) and the conditions of their meaning and use. In linguistic terminology, this means relating syntax and morphology to semantics and pragmatics… `Grammar acquired progressively as a system… So grammatical knowledge evolves organically, rather than growing in discrete steps” (1994:19).

The concept of communicative competence was proposed by Hymes (1972), who claimed that the study of human language should place humans in a social world. The definition of communicative competence is what a speaker needs to know in order to communicate in a speech community (Hymes, 1972). For example, in the everyday contexts, not only is a speaker expected to produce a grammatical sentence, but she or he should also consider the situation or context in which the sentences are used. In relation to this, Ying (2010) argues that communicative competence refers to a language learner's ability to use the target language successfully in real world communication.

According to Hymes (1972, p. 63), competence should be viewed as “the overall underlying knowledge and ability for language which the speaker-listener possesses.” That is, the concept of communicative competence entails knowledge of the language and the ability to use the knowledge in context. Hymes (1972) proposed four sectors of communicative competence. First, “whether or not something is formally possible” refers to the notion of grammatical competence. It is concerned with whether an utterance is grammatically correct. Second, “whether something is feasible” deals with its acceptability, in addition to being grammatically possible. Third, “whether something is appropriate” means that a sentence should be appropriate to the context in which it is used.

Finally, “whether something is in fact done” implies that a sentence may be grammatically correct feasible, and appropriate in context, but have no probability of actually occurring (Hymes, 1972, p. 63). It can be argued that communicative competence consists of knowledge of linguistic rules, appropriate language usage in different situations, connection of utterances in a discourse, and language strategies.

Different researchers have presented their understandings in relation to communicative language teaching. Ying (2010) argues that CLT is an approach to the teaching of second languages that emphasises interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language. It is also referred to as a “communicative approach to the teaching of foreign languages” or simply as the “communicative approach” (Ying, 2010, p, 2). In relation to this, Larsen-Freeman (2000) argues that CLT aims broadly at the theoretical perspective of a communicative approach by enabling communication. Communicative competence is the goal of language teaching by acknowledging the interdependence of language and communication (Larsen-Freeman, 2000).

It is clear to see that CLT here means that the language teacher uses communication as a teaching approach to enhance students' communicative competence. In relation to this, Ellis (1997) also supports that the pedagogical rationale for the use of communicative approach in a language teaching class depends in part on the claim that they will help develop learners' communicative skills and in part on a claim that they will contribute incidentally to their linguistic development. Here, it becomes clear that in relation to being able to communicate, language teaching not only needs the mastering of linguistic knowledge, but also communicative competence.

It also states that communicative competence is the ability to understand the logical basis of linguistic competence (Finch, 2003). According to Finch, there are three kinds of logic: the first one is formal logic, which is connected with the rules which govern valid argument and gets us so far in understanding the basis of communication. Then to be fully competent, we need knowledge of natural logic, which means understanding what people are trying to do through language. In addition to these two logics, we also need to understand the force of our utterance, which requires us to understand the meaning of our utterances according to its social context or particular situational settings.Gonzales (1995) supports this, by arguing that communicative competence includes mastery of language that is needed to handle various situations.

Therefore, when it is deliberately taught to students, the language teaching will create language appropriate for such language-use situations as ordering in restaurants, giving directions or applying for a job. To summarise, communicative competence not only includes good mastery of linguistic knowledge, but also the ability to understand the logic to handle realistic situations. Furthermore, the other researchers also argue that there is considerable debate as to appropriate ways of defining CLT, and no single model of CLT is universally accepted as authoritative (McGroarty, 1984). However, according to Richards and Rodgers (2001), CLT starts with a theory of language as communication, and its goal is to develop learners' communicative competence.

CLT has become popular and widespread in second foreign language teaching (Brown, 1994). Contrary to the teacher-centred approach, in which teachers are regarded as knowledge-givers and learners as receivers, CLT reflects a more social relationship between the teacher and learner. This learner-centred approach gives students a greater sense of “ownership” of their learning and enhances their motivation to learn English (Brown, 1994).

CLT emphasises the process of communication and leads learners to roles different from the traditional approach. The role of the learner is negotiator between the self, the learning process, and the object of learning. Learners are actively engaged in negotiating meaning by trying to make them understood and in understanding others within the classroom procedures and activities (Richards & Rodgers, 1986). Teachers also take particular roles in the CLT approach. First, the teacher facilitates the communication process between all participants in the classrooms. The teacher is also a co-communicator who engages in communicative activities with the students (Larsen-Freeman, 2000). In addition, the teacher acts as analyst, counsellor, and group process manager (Richards & Rodgers, 1986).

CLT has been become widespread in English language teaching since its emergence in the 1970s (Littlewood, 2007). Beside its quick expansion in English as a Second Language (ESL) context, CLT has been implemented in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context too. ESL essentially refers to the learning of English as the target language in the environment in which it is spoken as the primary language of interaction, communication, as well as business. EFL, on the other hand, differs from ESL in that EFL refers to the learning of English in the environment of one's native language (Ozsevik, 2010; Ellis, 1996). For example, Lao speakers who learn English in Laos or Russian speakers who learn English in Russia are EFL learners. It is noteworthy to identify the fundamental differences between ESL and EFL to gain a better understanding of their implications on the use and implementation of CLT in each different learning and teaching environment.

To increase the number of learners who are able to effectively communicate in English, national language education policies in many EFL countries have moved towards CLT since the 1990s (Littlewood, 2007). Traditionally, the teaching of EFL has focused on knowledge about the structure and grammar of English language instead of the actual use of English form communication. Traditional approaches such as the grammar translation method and audio-lingual methods, commonly used for English teaching, were accepted because few people had opportunities to use English for real communication in EFL contexts. However, because of rapidly growing international needs for business, travel and technology, EFL learners now need to use English for communication purposes. These traditional approaches are seen as no longer serving the needs of EFL learners.

It can be argued that the communicative approach is the most popular direction in ESL and EFL teaching settings. Most modern teaching methods emphasise it and most textbooks are designed for it (Anderson, 1993). In relation to this, many universities of EFL nations have offered courses that focused on integrated English skills or specific topics. For instance, Liao (2000) stated that CLT was introduced as a problem-solving instrument into secondary schools in China in the early 1990s. In addition, the general English courses offered to university freshmen, elective courses were also offered in the second, third or fourth year to develop students' English proficiency (Rao, 2002). Moreover, Shin (1999) investigated English programmes in Taiwanese universities and found that English courses had changed from a traditional form-base to a communication-base, with emphases on language functions and learners' needs.

Even though national policies and school curricula shifted toward CLT in a variety of EFL contexts, researchers have pointed out that there is still a gap between policy and teaching practices (Nunan, 2003; Littlewood, 2007). The implementation of CLT has encountered problems and resistance in several EFL classrooms (Ellis, 1996; Li, 1998; Liao, 2000; Karim, 2004; Rao, 2002; Savignon, 2002; Yu, 2001). Various research projects reported that instruction in EFL classrooms is still predominantly based on traditional approaches (Li, 1998; Liao, 2000; Rao, 2002; Nunan, 2003; Littlewood, 2007). The ideas of CLT are different from the educational values and traditions of many EFL settings (Burnaby & Sun, 1989; Li, 1998). In addition, situational factors such as large class size, test-oriented instruction and students' low proficiency have also influenced CLT practices. Even if the policies and curricula support the adoption of CLT, ultimately it is only the classroom teachers who decide what really happens in their classrooms.

Researchers have also reported that the situational constraints in local contexts affecting teachers' success in implementing CLT. Various research studies showed that teachers usually used form-based instruction because they felt pressure to help students pass the exams (Karim, 2004; Li, 1998; Liao, 2000; Liao, 2004; Menking, 2001; Dong, 2007; Rao, 2002; Yu, 2001). In addition, the research findings suggest that teachers find it difficult to manage group work for large-size classes (Li, 1998; Liao, 2000; Liao, 2004; Karim, 2004; Yu, 2001). There are also factors that arise from the teachers and students. Some teachers are concerned about their non-native English proficiency.

In some studies, EFL and ESL teachers expressed difficulties in including cultural aspects into their classes because of lack experience in an English-speaking country (Yu, 2001; Liao, 2004). Students' resistance and low-English proficiency also deter teachers from using CLT (Li, 1998; Liao, 2000; Yu, 2001; Liao, 2004; Chang, 2011). These situational factors may weaken the teachers' efforts to use CLT. Whether or not teachers face difficulties in implementing CLT in EFL settings, it is necessary to count their voices in the discussion.

The literature on CLT has focused on a range of issues, such as English proficiency of both teachers and students, the design of classroom activities, facilities, social interaction activities, listening activities and the role of teachers, students, funding and instructional materials. Here according to the literature, some of the identified major themes influencing the implementation of CLT in EFL classrooms in a Lao higher education English classroom: teachers have a low level of English language proficiency, teachers lack professional development, low English proficiency of students, students learning behaviour, class size, test-oriented instruction and an over-emphasis on grammar and lack of social interaction. These issues will be discussed in the following sections.

The behaviour and classroom participation of teachers and students play an important role in the successful implementation of communicative language teaching in EFL contexts. In the CLT classroom, it seems to be student-centred which does not depend on their teachers all the time, waiting for instructions, words of approval, correction, advice or praise (Jones, 2007; Ozsevik, 2010; Chang, 2011). They do not ignore each other, but look at each other and communicate with each other. They value each other's contributions; they cooperate, learn from each other and help each other in order to reach the goal of communication (Jones, 2007; Ozsevik, 2010; Chang, 2011). When in difficulty or in doubt, they do not immediately ask the teacher for help or advice, but only after they have tried to solve the problem among themselves with an emphasis on working together in pairs, groups and as a whole class. At the same time, the teacher's role in the CLT classroom acts as a facilitator or instructor, who guides the students, manages their activities, and directs their learning process in order to develop their language skills (Jones, 2007; Ozsevik, 2010; Chang, 2011).

Similarly, Ozsevik (2010) and Chang (2011) argue that learners in CLT classrooms are supposed to participate in classroom activities that are based on a collaborative, rather than individualistic, approach to learning. They are portrayed as active participants in the language learning process (Ozsevik, 2010, Chang, 2011; Jones, 2007). In addition, CLT as a methodology has much to do with interaction (Breen and Candlin, 1980; Doherty & Singh, 2005). Accordingly, it would be wise to claim that a teacher's and students' roles in the CLT classroom are a dynamic feature and thus they tend to vary all the time (Breen and Candlin, 1980; Jones, 2007; Ozsevik, 2010, Chang, 2011).

Several roles are assumed for teachers in communicative language teaching, the importance of particular roles being determined by view of CLT adopted. Breen and Candlin (1980, p. 99), describe teacher roles in the following terms:

The teacher has two main roles: the first role is to facilitate the communication process between all participants in the classroom, and between these participants and the various activities and texts. The second role is to act as an independent participant within the learning-teaching group. The latter role is closely related to the objectives of the first role and arises from it. These roles imply a set of secondary roles for the teacher; first, as an organiser of resource and as a resource himself, second as a guide within the classroom procedures and activities…. A third role of the teacher is that of a researcher and learner, with much to contribute in terms of appropriate knowledge and abilities, actual and observed experience of the nature of learning and organizationalcapacities

This quotation draws attention to a distinctive feature of CLT - that of a “learner-centred and experience-based view of second language teaching” (Richards & Rodgers, 2001, p. 69). Thus, it is advisable for teachers adopting a communicative approach to produce and use authentic teaching materials that meet the needs of their particular learners (Richards & Rodgers, 2001). Moreover, teachers need to motivate their students, as well as provide them with a comfortable classroom atmosphere for language learning (Breen and Candlin, 1980; Jones, 2007; Chang, 2011). Littlewood (1981) states that the roles of a teacher in a CLT classroom consists of coordinator and manager of activities, language instructor, source of new language, consultant when needed, as well as participant.

In addition, it is typical in a CLT classroom that it is not merely the teacher, but everyone present who manages the classroom performance (Allwright, 1984). Allwright argues that teachers can no longer be regarded simply as teachers and learners just as learners, since they both are managers of learning. On the other hand, the traditional image of teachers as the dominating authority figure in the classroom is dissolved into such a role that necessitates facilitating the communicative process in the classroom where students feel safe, unthreatened and non-defensive (Ozsevik, 2010).

The emphasis in communicative language teaching in the processes of communication, rather than mastery of language forms, leads to different roles for learners from those found in a more traditional second language classroom. Breen and Candlin (1980, p, 110) describe the learner's role within CLT in the following terms: (cited in Richards and Rodgers, 2001, p. 166)

The role of learner as negotiator - between the self, the learning process, and the project of learning - emerges from and interacts with the role of joint negotiator within the group and within the classroom procedures and activities which the group undertakes. The implication for the learner is that he should contribute as much as he gains, and thereby learn in an interdependent way.

Furthermore, Jin, Singh and Li (2005, pp. 95-96) propose that the roles of students in the CLT classroom are supposed to be “those of negotiators for meaning, communicators, discoverers, and contributors of knowledge and information”. Likewise, Ozsevik (2010), in his descriptions of students and the teacher's role in a CLT classroom, asserts that students are vigorously involved in expression, interpretation, and negotiation of meaning while the teacher takes on more of a facilitator and participant role in the language classroom. Finally, Deckert (2004, p. 13), referring to the student centred characteristic of CLT, emphasises that “the CLT approach features low profile teacher roles, frequent pair work or small group problem solving, students responding to authentic samples of English, extended exchanges on high interest topics, and the integration of the four basic skills, namely speaking, listening, reading and writing.” She further states that CLT discourages pervasive teacher-controlled drills, quizzing of memorised material, and extensive explanation of forms of English.

On the other hand, characteristics of both teachers and students in the EFL classroom do not seem to meet the CLT classroom's characteristics because of the low proficiency of students, students' behaviour, and a culture of expressing ideas.

The use of functional approach in teaching Grammar, based on systemic linguistics, emphasizes the way spoken and written language operate indifferent social situations. In particular, it is very useful in showing how texts work beyond the level of thesentence, how different texts are structured, and how language varies to suit the purpose of the users. It takes ona descriptive approach and focuses on groups of words that function to make meanings.In his classic book An Introduction to Functional Grammar, Halliday (1994) points out that functional grammaris so-called because its conceptual framework is a functional one rather than a formal one. It is functional inthree distinct senses: in its interpretation (1) of texts, (2) of the system, and (3) of the elements of linguisticstructures. In the first sense, functional grammar is designed to account for how the language is used. Every text(everything that is said or written) unfolds in some context of use. Over tens of thousands of generations ofwww.ccsenet.org/elt English Language Teaching Vol. 6, No. 10; 2013constant use, language has shaped into a system which can satisfy human needs. Therefore, “A functionalgrammar is essentially a `natural' grammar, in the sense that everything in it can be explained, ultimately, byreference to how language is used” (Halliday, 1994, p. xiii).

In the second sense, the fundamental components ofmeaning in language are functional components. According to the analysis of Halliday, all languages are organized around two kinds of meanings, the `ideational' (to understand the environment), and the`interpersonal' (to act on the others in it). Combined with these two is a third component, the `textual', whichbreathes relevance into the other two. These three components are calledmetafunctions in the terminology of FGtheory. In the third sense, each element in a language is explained by reference to its function in the totallinguistic system. Accordingly, “a functional grammar is one that construes all the units of a language - itsclauses, phrases and so on. In other words, each part is interpreted as functional with respect to the whole”(Halliday, 1994, p. xiv).

Based on Halliday's model, Thompson (1996) explains the three metafunctions of functional grammar in aninformal way as follows:

1) we use language to talk about our experience of the world, including the world inour minds, to describe events and states and the entities involved in them.

2) We also use language to interactwith other people, to establish and maintain relation with them, to influence their behavior, to express our ownviewpoint on things in the world, and to elicit or change theirs.

3) Finally, in using language, we organize ourmessages in ways which indicate how they fit in with the other messages around them and with the wider contextin which we are talking or writing.

Similarly, Martin, Matthiessen and Painter (1997) define functional grammar as a way of looking at grammar interms of how grammar is used. In the field of linguistics, formal grammar, which is an alternative to functionalgrammar, is concerned with the ways our genes constrain the shape of our grammar, and thus constrain what a person can and cannot say. Contrastively.Functional grammar is not genetically oriented to our neurophysiology in this way. Rather, it focuses on thedevelopment of grammatical systems as a means for people to interact with each other - functional grammar seesgrammar as shaped by, and as playing a significant role in shaping, the way we get on with our lives. Itsorientation is social, in other words, rather than biological (Martin, Matthiessen& Painter, 1997, p. 1).Therefore, functional grammar, based on cultural and social contexts, is very useful for describing and evaluatinghow language can be used to write and speak more appropriately and effectively. Using functional grammar canhelp us to read more carefully and critically.

Key Concepts of using Functionalapproaches in teaching grammar/

Functional grammar has many concepts, so it is not easy to provide a clear and ordered explanation of them.Different books arrange the concepts in different orders. Those charts, tables or paradigms, plus considerableterminology, look terrible for new learners. In the book A Theoretical Grammar of English, Xu (1993)academically introduces the theory and its concepts in detail. However, this paper intends to explain the keyconcepts in a simple way so that EFL teachers can get a vivid picture of functional grammar and how to apply it.

In traditional grammar, there are 10 parts of speech: noun, verb, adjective, adverb, pronoun, number, article,preposition, conjunction, and interjection. Then each of these ten classes can be divided into subcategories basedon their functions. In functional grammar, these classes of words do not disappear. However, functional grammarplaces English words into four big groups: noun group, verb group, adjective group, and prepositional group. (see example 1) In addition, traditional grammar analyzes a sentence structure into subject, predicate, object,attributive, adverbial, and complement, while functional grammar gives a clause different functional labelsdepending on three kinds of metafunctions.

Example 1.

Traditional grammar

His good friend wrote this book in America.

Functional grammar

His good friend wrote this book in America.

Nominal group Verbal group Prepositional group

Example 2.

Traditional grammar

This bridge was built before the 19th century.

Subject Predicator Adverbial

Functional grammar

This bridge was built before the 19th century.

Theme Rheme

Functional grammar

This bridge was built before the 19th century.

Goal Process Circumstance

From these two examples, we can see that functional grammar has its own characteristics. To serve itscommunicative purpose, its concepts are quite different from traditional grammar. Based on current books onfunctional grammar, its key concepts include: functions and systems, hierarchical ranking of units, word order, word groups, functions of the sentence, theme, mood, transitivity, and the clause complex. The major andimportant concepts will be explained in the following section.

Functions and Systems

Functional grammar looks at how language works in terms of the functional relationships of its constituent parts,and systems of choice which we make whenever we use language. The term “functional” is used because itdescribes the approach which sees grammatical categories in terms of their communicative functions. Its systemnetwork is like a computer program. When we start to run the program, the computer presents us with a “menu”of possible functions which the program can perform. After we select one of these functions, we will have sets of options to choose from. Let's take the following language “menu” as an example.

When we speak an utterance, we must choose whether we wish to give it the form of a statement, question,exclamation, greeting, request, suggestion, etc. Once we choose to form a question, we then have a range ofpossible interrogative options in English, such as starting with Wh-, How, Do/Does, Will/Would, or with someother verbs by making inversions. Or we could simply let intonation and context do the job and retain the basicword order of a statement. Thus, selection of A is the entry condition of B, and selection of B will be the entrycondition of C, and so on.Such choice is not arbitrary or whimsical, and we do in fact have good reasons for choosing one form instead ofanother. Our grammatical choices will be determined by various stylistic and contextual factors; for example,whether the speaker is referring to new or given information, the degree of formality and politeness involved and so on.

Functional grammar has only a short history, but it has now come to be recognized as a major force in worldlinguistics. As EFL teachers,it is necessary to have a good knowledge about functional grammar because it ispart of the English language and may bring a great change to EFL teaching and learning. Pedagogically,functional grammar, in spite of its terrible jargon, has its own advantages and can facilitate EFL students toachieve success in academic registers if EFL teachers can find a good way to teach its concepts in order. Also, itcan help EFL students to achieve success in other subject areas like history and science. Besides its significancein teaching and learning, functional grammar has opened a wide research field in linguistics. With functionalgrammar, language teaching and learning will be more interesting and meaningful.

Influenced by both Malinowski and Firth, Halliday (1975) refers to the relationship between meaning and context of situation. He emphasizes sociolinguistic and functional perspective and the development of functions in the communicative language and language functions in society are connected to his formal linguistic theory known as systemic functional grammar. This leads to the development of notionalfunctional syllabus as the base for the modern functional approach to language teaching. According to his idea, language acquisition is seen as the mastery of linguistic functions.

Brown (1987) as a functionalist believes that there are two levels of language development: the functional level, and formal level. On the functional level, the development is paced by the growth of conceptual and communicative capacities, operating in conjunction with innate schemas of cognition. On the formal level, development is paced by the growth of perceptual and information-processing capacities operating in conjunction with innate schemas of grammar.

Crystal (2003) defines functional grammar as a linguistic theory that was founded in the 1970s as an alternative to the abstract focused on the rules which govern verbal interaction which is seen as a form of cooperative activity, and focuses on the rules of syntax, semantics, and phonology which govern the linguistic expressions that are used as instruments of this activity while formalized view of language presented by transformational grammar. According to the studies done before, functional grammar helps in attaining the notion of grammatical accuracy among second/foreign language learners. It is termed systemic-functional grammar and lexical-functional grammar in accordance with those who see language as a system of systems and those who see it as a combination of lexical relations rather than transformations or operations on phrase structure trees as a means of capturing linguistic generations. Dalrymple (2001) defines lexical-functional grammar as a linguistic theory, which studies the various aspects of linguistic structure and the relations between them.

Bresnan (2001) include studies on rhetorical structure, semantic structure, and other linguistic structures. These investigations correlate with the view of Olga and Marianna (2012) that the functional approach to the teaching of grammar is a rich resource for making contextualized meaning in a culture- and language- specific way.

According to Fromkin and Rodman (1993), "Grammar is comprehensively defined as a description of the speaker's competence and as unconscious linguistic system which underlies the native speaker's use of language in terms of comprehension and production".

PROCEDURES AND PROCESS

A) Research plan:

The steady decline in the performance of secondary school students in English Language internal and external examinations, has been of much concern to educationists in the country. This situation is because most of the students are deficient in the use of grammar. They have not acquired the basic knowledge of grammatical structures and expressions to enable them articulate their thoughts meaningfully in written medium.

The problem of this study put in a question form is: what is the effect of the Functional Approach to English Language teaching on students' achievement in Grammatical Structures at the secondary school level?

Purpose of the Study/

The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of the Functional

Approach on students' achievement in English grammar.

Specifically, the study sought to:

Determine the difference in the achievement of students taught English Grammar using the Functional Approach and those taught using the traditional method (Grammar Translation Method).

Determine the effect of gender on the achievement of students taught English grammar using the Functional Approach.

Determine the effect of school location on the achievement of students taught English grammar using the Functional Approach.

Determine the interaction effect of method and gender on the achievement of students taught English grammar using the Functional Approach.

Determine the interaction effect of method and location on the achievement of students taught English grammar using the Functional Approach.

Significance of the Study

The findings of this study will help the students, teachers, parents, school authorities, authors, curriculum designers, and student teachers to proffer useful and practical solutions to the problems of poor and ineffective methods of teaching English language in the secondary schools.

Language is described as a socially learned communication system, that is, language learning is achieved through habit formation. This implies that the child will learn or form new habits by interacting with the new language environment where he finds himself. For instance, in the classroom he interacts with his teacher and mates, there he forms new words (vocabulary), new expressions, and improves on the use of the previous ones he formed. All this is achieved through verbal interactions in the form of reinforcement, repetition or conversation. The child is linguistically active in his social environment. Therefore, he is a functional social person because of the language habits he has formed.

The study will therefore be of benefit in the following ways:

Secondary school students are likely to get more interested and more involved in class activities, since the lessons will employ the techniques of role-play, conversation, dialogues which will require students' full participation in class. The students will find the interactive and participatory process quite rewarding as they get along in exercising their communicative skills. The activities in class make the lessons lively and give no room for boredom. The approach is likely to enhance their achievement in grammatical structures and consequently in their performance in English Language examinations. The teacher is likely to be motivated and derive more job-satisfaction because the approach will engender a high level of interest and enthusiasm in the students. He will be further encouraged to teach especially as his students' language achievement improves.

Parents and guardians will find the improved performance of their children and wards a welcome relief. This will make them appreciate the efforts of the teachers and they will become aware of the use of the Functional-Notional Approach (FNA) which has contributed to the good performance of their wards.

School authorities are likely to benefit when students' performance in English Language improves as a result of the application of the FNA. A high percentage of the credits and above grades in English will uplift the standards of the school because English Language results form the major indices of the overall academic standards of a school.

Curriculum planners are likely to find that the activities embedded in the FNA engage students maximally, making them active participants and contributors to the learning process. They may want to adjust the curriculum to include the new language activities which will likely produce the expected language experience in the students.

Authors may also benefit from this because if they are aware of the language skills applied in the FA, they may need to restructure the lesson units and contents of their books in order to accommodate the innovations in the curriculum, thereby attracting more patronage from students, parents and schools.

Student teachers are equally likely to benefit from this study when the approach is applied in their own curriculum in the teacher training programs, because it will put them in a good stead to be abreast of the innovations in the area of language teaching. They can easily adopt the FNA when they teach.

Scope of the Study

The study is on English Grammar, specifically on the use of Functional Approaches in teaching it.

The grammatical items taught with the approach were:- `can' and `could'; `may' and `might'; `must', `should', `ought to'; as modal auxiliaries to achieve good grammatical expressions. Modal auxiliaries were used as the grammatical items in the study because they provided appropriate words and expressions in such situations as making requests, asking for permission, expressing abilities, capabilities and obligations. This is a recommendation made by Williams (1999) and Baker &Westrup (2005).

The study also examined the effect of the FA on the variables of gender and school location. Although some variables like teacher factor, motivation, attitude, aptitude and intelligence could come to play, the study necessarily focused on the areas of gender and school location. The study is carried out in school 38.

Research Questions

The following Research Questions guided the study:-

What is the difference in the mean scores of students taught English grammar using the Functional Approach and those taught with the traditional method (Grammar Translation Method)?

What are the relative mean achievement scores of male and female students taught English Grammar using the Functional-Notional Approach?

What are the relative mean achievement scores of urban and rural students taught English Grammar using the Functional Approach?

What is the interaction effect of treatment and gender on students' mean achievement scores in English Grammar?

What is the interaction effect of treatment and location on students' achievement scores in English Grammar?

Hypotheses

The following null hypotheses are formulated to guide the study and were tested at 0.05 level of significance.

Ho1 There will be no significant mean difference in the achievement of students taught English grammar using the Functional Approach and those taught with the traditional method (Grammar Translation Method).

Ho2 There will be no significant mean difference in the achievement of male and female students taught English grammar using the Functional Approach.

Ho3 There will be no significant mean difference in the achievement of urban and rural students taught English Grammar using the Functional Approach.

Ho4 There will be no significant interaction effect of male and female students taught

English Grammar using the Functional-Notional Approach.

Ho5 There will be no significant interaction effect of urban and rural students taught

English Grammar using the Functional Approach.

Размещено на Allbest.ur