Methodological typology of grammar content Introduction

2.2 Methods of teaching foreign languages
Let us turn to the consideration of the methods used in teaching a foreign language.
The author of the article, M. L. Vaisburd [2], rightly points out that the following teaching methods are distinguished in the works on the methodology:
grammar-translation method;
direct and natural method;
communicative method.
I. L. Kolesnikova and O. A. Dolgina [4], write that the grammar-translation method of teaching foreign languages is based on understanding the language as a system and relies on a cognitive approach to learning. This method was widely used in Europe when teaching Greek and Latin, and in the 19th century it began to be used in the teaching of modern languages: French, German and English.
In the "English-Russian terminological reference book on the methods of teaching foreign languages" [4], the main points of this method are highlighted:
The purpose of education is reading literature, since a foreign language is considered as a general educational subject and its role is to develop the intellect and logical thinking of students. The main attention is paid to written language, the teaching of oral speech is not provided, speaking and listening are used only as a means of teaching. The basic unit of learning is the sentence. (There were attempts to use the text, but this direction - the textual-translation method - was not widely used, since working with the text turned out to be very difficult for students.)
Grammar is studied on the basis of deductive and systematic approaches, rules, translation exercises, comparison of the studied grammatical phenomenon with the corresponding phenomena in the native language are used.
Translation is the goal and means of learning, the main way of semantization , so much attention is paid to translation exercises, examination tasks mainly consist of written translation. The principle of relying on the native language is the leading one, which makes it possible to explain new linguistic phenomena and compare the phenomenon under study with its equivalent in the native language ( Richards and Rodgers 1991, pp . 3-4). According to the article by M. L. Weisburd [2], the grammar-translation method had both positive and negative aspects. It can be considered positive that students got acquainted with the works in the original language, grammar was studied in context, the native language served as a means of semantization , analysis, elements of comparison and comparison were used. The negative features of this method can be considered the following: language teaching was reduced to the study of its grammatical structure, passive forms of work prevailed, too much attention was paid to translation. Scott Thornbury [17], speaks of the grammatical-translational method as follows: “Lessons using the grammatical-translational method are taught with the explicit statement of the rules, followed by translation exercises both from the target language into the native language, and vice versa.” (See Annex 5) M. L. Vaysburd [2] also says that when extracting linguistic phenomena from a coherent text, one inevitably touches their meaning and thus avoids the formalism that may appear when working on isolated linguistic phenomena. However, building a course of study on the basis of isolated linguistic phenomena, it is possible to present them in the form of a certain system, as well as to provide the necessary gradation of difficulties.
The direct teaching method was developed as a counterweight to the grammar-translation method. I. L. Kolesnikova and O. A. Dolgina [4] consider a group of direct methods: the direct method and the natural method, which is a kind of direct method.
The direct method is based on the idea that teaching a foreign language should imitate the acquisition of a native language and proceed naturally, without specially organized training. The name "direct method" follows from the position that the meaning of a foreign word, phrase and other units of language should be transmitted to students directly, by creating associations between language forms and their corresponding concepts, which are demonstrated using facial expressions, gestures, actions, objects, situations. communication, etc.
I. L. Kolesnikova and O. A. Dolgina [4] believe that the main provisions of the direct method are as follows:
Education should be carried out only in a foreign language, the native language of the trainees, as well as translation from the native language and from a foreign language, are completely excluded from the educational process.
The purpose of training is the formation of oral speech skills. Of all types of speech activity, preference is given to listening and speaking, however, modifications of the direct method allow for the reasonable use of reading and writing, which contributes to the consolidation of new material.
Vocabulary training is carried out on the material selected in accordance with the principle of usage in oral speech. The unit of learning is the offer. The introduction and training of lexical units is carried out on an oral basis with the help of paraphrase, visualization, demonstration of actions and objects. When introducing words denoting abstract concepts, such techniques as interpretation, antonymous and synonymous pairs, oppositions, etc. are used.
Grammar teaching is carried out inductively, the use of grammar rules is not allowed. Much attention is paid to the grammatical correctness of speech, errors are corrected as students make them in speech.
The formation of phonetic skills is put forward as one of the tasks of training.
The language material is graded according to the degree of difficulty and mastering it is carried out strictly in accordance with the developed program.
Imitative teaching methods are widely used when students repeat phrases and sentences after the teacher in order to achieve phonetic and grammatical correctness of speech.
Domestic methodologists [2, 3] single out textual - imitative and structural- imitative directions of the direct method. The first is based on working with the text: the teacher reads it or tells it, accompanying it with gestures, facial expressions, interpretation and demonstration of various visual aids. Translation of the text is not expected. Then students receive tasks of an imitative -reproductive nature for mastering lexical and grammatical material.
The structural - imitative direction uses the sentence-structure as a unit of learning. Work on the structures is carried out with the help of language exercises that involve repeated repetition in order to create stereotypes for the use of selected structures in oral speech.
Scott Thornbury [17] writes: "Considered to be a natural method, the direct method provides for conversational skills, while the study of grammatical structures overrides the explicit teaching of grammar." (see annex 6)
A variation of the direct method is the natural method. The natural method of teaching foreign languages is a variation of the direct method; it was widespread in the 19th century. The terms "direct method" and "natural method" are often used interchangeably.
The natural method has the following characteristics:
Education is built on the same principle as the child's mastery of his native language, that is, in a natural (natural) way.
The main goal of training is the formation of oral and speech skills; the importance of writing is underestimated.
The learning process is aimed at intensive training of grammatical structures and lexical units. The use of external visualization for semantization and vocabulary training.
The natural method, being a variation of the direct method, has the same disadvantages. The ideas of the natural method, as well as the direct method in general, served as the basis for the development of other methods and approaches.
The most common teaching method is the communicative teaching method.
According to the authors of the English-Russian Terminological Dictionary on the Methods of Teaching Foreign Languages [4], the communicative method of teaching foreign languages is based on a communicative approach, the fundamental provisions of which are interpreted differently by scientists, resulting in a variety of interpretations of this method.
Many modern foreign scientists [14, 17] adhere to an extreme point of view: they consider the communicative method in its purest form. They believe that the learning process should be based only on the content side, real communication and exclude work on the language form. To do this, it is necessary to use truly communicative tasks that are adequate to the goal. The principle of conscientiousness in learning is underestimated, and the cognitive processes characteristic of mastering a foreign language are not taken into account.
The other extreme is typical for some domestic methodologists and practitioners [2, 5], who, declaring the use of the communicative method, actually teach the language system, use formal language exercises, and only at the final stage of working on the topic offer students to compose dialogues or express their own opinion on the problem. .
M. L. Weisburd [2] writes that most domestic and foreign methodologists accept such an interpretation of the communicative method, according to which the learning process should reasonably combine systemic and content approaches, include work on both form and content. speech. Such an interpretation of communicativeness allowed domestic methodologists to introduce the term "communicative-cognitive method", that is, to draw attention to the cognitive side of the process of mastering a foreign language, when the language is studied outside the language environment and many features of its use, in particular socio-cultural ones, are acquired at the level of knowledge. The existence of various variants of the communicative method allows us to conclude that the method has not yet been formed, and its development will probably go in different directions, reflecting the specifics of teaching a foreign language in different conditions.
To optimize the learning process, the communicative teaching method is most often used, since it includes work on both the form and the content of speech.