|
9.1.1. The Intralingual–Crosslingual Dimension
The terms
intralingual
and
intracultural
refer to those techniques that re-
main within the target language (L2) and target culture (C2) as the frame
of reference for teaching.
Crosslingual
and
crosscultural
pertain to tech-
niques that use features of the native language (L1) and native culture (C1)
for comparison purposes. The intralingual strategy adheres to the policy of
coordinate bilingualism, where the two language systems are kept com-
pletely separate from one another, whereas the crosslingual strategy be-
lieves in compound bilingualism, where the L2 is acquired and known
through the use of L1. As the following box shows, the presence or the ab-
sence of translation as a technique marks the criterial feature of inter-
lingual and crosslingual strategies.
Intralingual
Crosslingual
¬
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
®
Intracultural
Crosscultural
L2 used as a reference system
L1 used as a reference system
Immersion in L2/C2
Comparison between L1/L2, C1/C2
Keeping L2 apart from L1
No translation from and into L2
Practice through translation from & into L2
Direct method
Grammar translation method
Co-ordinate bilingualism
Compound bilingualism
Intralingual and crosslingual teaching strategies
(p. 279)
This dimension is a response to an everlasting controversy about the role
of L1 in L2 teaching. Historically, when grammar-translation or earlier
POSTMETHOD PEDAGOGY
187
methods were popular, crosslingual techniques (particularly, translation-
based ones) were widely employed. But, later methods, including the cur-
rent communicative language teaching, have prohibited the use of L1 in
the L2 class, emphasizing the importance of teaching a foreign language
only through the medium of the foreign language. But in reality, practicing
teachers everywhere have rarely stuck rigidly to intralingual techniques.
Arguing that “the L1-L2 connection is an indisputable fact of life” (p.
282), Stern offers three reasons why L1 should be allowed to be used in the
L2 classroom. First, when we learn a new language, we always set out from a
language we already know. Second, our first language offers a frame of ref-
erence system for L2. “It is in the nature of linguistic and communicative
competence that we behave as if the L1 (or a second language previously
learnt) is the yardstick and guide to our new L2” (pp. 282–283). Third, our
native language and our native culture “are deeply bound up with our per-
sonal lives. A new language and culture demand a personal adjustment” (p.
283). We have to think of ways in which to deal with that adjustment in a
gradual manner. The widely accepted phenomena of language transfer
(see chap. 2, this volume), and the recently proposed concept of multi-
competence (see chap. 1, this volume), both of which are based on psy-
cholinguistic research, add strength to Stern’s arguments against any exclu-
sive intralingual strategy.
Stern treats the intralingual–crosslingual strategy as a continuum (see
the box above) saying that a good case can be made “for either a mainly
crosslingual or a mainly intralingual policy” (p. 284). He suggests that it
may be useful, at the initial stages of language learning, to fall back on com-
parisons between L1 and L2 and explanations of L2 in L1 terms. Toward
the more intermediate and advanced stages, it is important to opt for
intralingual techniques. His conclusion is that “the emphasis on an
intralingual or a crosslingual strategy should be decided in relation to the
goals of the learners, their previous experience in the L2, the context in
which the programme takes place, and the ability of the teacher to function
intralingually or crosslingually” (p. 286).
Taking from popular ESL textbooks, Stern offers, for illustrative pur-
poses, several useful intralingual as well as crosslingual classroom tech-
niques for different stages of language learning. These activities, Stern
points out, range from repetition of sounds, words, phrases, and sentences,
to verbal utterances, based on real objects or pictorial representations, to
drills and exercise, to dictation, to games, to communicative activities, to
residence in an L2 environment. These techniques help to create or stimu-
late an L2 environment in varying degrees. As for crosslinguistic tech-
niques, Stern favors techniques involving the comparison of “the two pho-
nological, lexical, and grammatical systems and help learners to build up
the new L2 reference system by making a gradual and deliberate transition
188
CHAPTER 9
from L1 to L2” (p. 284). He also recommends translation and interpretive
activities. The former may involve L2–L1 translation, and use of an L2-to-L1
dictionary, and the latter may include introducing and summarizing an L2
text in L1, explaining the context of a text in L1; discussing in L1 the signif-
icance of an L2 text, and so on.
Stern makes it clear that at certain stages during the teaching and learn-
ing process, both intralingual and crosslingual strategies will be productive.
His recommendation to teachers who follow a predominantly intralingual
strategy is that, “it is advisable to allow certain well-defined periods in which
the use of the L1 is allowed so that questions can be asked, meanings can be
verified, uncertainties can be removed, and explanations given which
would not be accessible to the learner in L2” (p. 298). Although unequivo-
cally in favor of using L1 in the L2 classroom, he calls for a judicious bal-
ance so that the learner does not “rely too heavily on L1 support instead of
taking the plunge and developing a new independent network of L2 verbal
connections” (p. 292).
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
