1. Teaching grammar
Grammar is the system of language that governs the conventional arrangement
and relationships of words in a sentence (Brown, 2001). Cook (2008) adds to this
definition that grammar is a central part of language in which other parts such as
pronunciation and vocabulary revolve. Indeed, they connect to each other through
grammar. This system of language is probably the most controversial one which after
being considered the central aspect of the grammar translation method, it became a
nearly forbidden aspect in methods such as the direct method or natural approach since
the memorization of grammar rules had been highly criticized. Nowadays, in a
communicative language learning context, the question is no longer whether grammar
needs to be taught or not; the question now is how to teach grammar.
Cook (2008) differentiates four types of grammar; the first is prescriptive
grammar which is the rules found in schoolbooks and, as the name says, it prescribes
what people ought to do. Prescriptive grammar deals with the reasons why some
grammatical forms are “better” than others but just based on certain criteria instead of
grammar itself. This kind of grammar is at some point considered as obsolete since
language should be taught as it is not as an artificial form that nobody uses. However,
one area where prescriptive grammar still thrives is spelling and punctuation as
everybody believes that there is a single “correct” selling for every word. The second
type of grammar is the traditional grammar which concerns the parts of speech; this
means labelling the parts with names such as nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc. and giving
rules that explain how they may or may not be combined. The third type is called
structural grammar which is based on the concept of phrase structure that show how
words go together in a sentence and some do not. The phrase structure is usually
presented in tree diagrams that show how words build up into phrases and phrases build
up into sentences describing how these elements fit together in an overall structure.
However, the fourth type is the one in which second language acquisition relies on; this
type is called grammatical competence which refers to the knowledge of language that
the speaker possesses in the mind. This competence is the cognitive state that contains
all those aspects of form and meaning, and their relation. According to Brown (2001)
grammatical competence plays an important role in the communicative competence,
without the grammatical competence our language would be chaotic.

2. Form which is the organizational components of language and systematic rules
of the structure might be considered the central aspect of the grammatical competence,
nevertheless, forms are literally meaningless without semantics (meaning) and
pragmatics (meaning depending on the context). However, a form-based instruction is
not an inconvenient option depending on learners’ age, proficiency level and
educational background. Brown (2001) suggests that the focus on form is more
important when the learners are literate adults at an advanced proficiency level. On the
contrary it is less important to focus on form when the learners are young children at
beginning levels as they do not possess the abstract intellectual capabilities that adults
do.
On another vein, there are two major perspectives related to learning grammar.
Nunan (1998) suggests that there is a linear approach which is based on the premise that
learners acquire one grammatical item at a time that must be learnt properly before
moving to the next item. Metaphorically speaking, learning grammar is like
constructing a wall in which every linguistic brick is put at a time. The easy bricks build
a foundation for the difficult ones consequently they build this wall in a correct a way in
order to avoid collapsing under its own ungrammaticality. Even though, the author does
not agree with this perspective, instead, there is an organic perspective which can enrich
the understanding of second language acquisition. It explains it better as accuracy does
not increase in a linear way but it decreases at times. Hence learners’ mastery of a
particular item can increase or decrease at different times. The organic perspective sees
grammar learning as growing a garden in which flowers do not grow at the same rate
likewise, learners do not learn an item perfectly in order to move on a next more
complex one but they learn numerous items simultaneously and imperfectly.
Due to the undeniable importance of learning grammar in communicative
language learning, Cook (2008) suggests that explicit grammar teaching has the purpose
of convey grammar rules learnt consciously into unconscious processes of
comprehension and production. Although this objective is not always achieved, some
learners that have learnt a language by studying traditional grammars have turned into
fluent and spontaneous speakers who declare that grammar rules are useful as they
sometimes visualize verbs paradigms to check what they are saying. This phenomenon
leads to an important concept related to second language acquisition which is language
awareness. Cook (2008) declares that language awareness is a goal for second language

3. teaching and it should be raised even before learning the second language wanted
because if students know what to expect in the new language, they are more receptive to
it. There is an exploratory approach recalled by Cook (2008) where students investigate
grammar in order to increase their awareness of language by coming up with
grammatical rules by themselves. This approach leads to an issue mentioned by Brown
(2001); this issue refers to the controversy related to the kind of instruction offered to
learners. On one hand it is the inductive approach in which learners practice various
language forms. Such language forms are practiced in order to leave learners discover or
induce rules and generalizations on their own. On the other hand, the deductive
approach refers to grammatical rules or generalizations provided by the teacher or a
textbook, in this approach the practice of such rules comes afterwards. Brown (2001)
suggests that in most of the contexts, an inductive approach is more appropriate
basically because it allows students to get a communicative feel related to the aspects of
language before being overwhelmed by the grammatical explanations and also because
it builds more intrinsic motivation by allowing students to discover rules rather than
being told them. However, there are some occasional moments when the deductive
approach is needed.
In any of these cases, teachers must be aware of how they approach to
grammatical explanation and terminology. Brown (2001) declares that unlike the strong
emphasis made on the grammar translation method, in communicative language
teaching, metalinguistic knowledge might be too complex for students who are already
extremely busy trying to learn the language itself especially if they are young learner; as
explained in previous paragraphs, adults can be benefit from occasional explanation yet,
it is strongly advisable that to keep grammar explanations brief, simple, supported by
clear examples and as far as possible from getting tied up over exceptions rules. As
many of students’ errors in speech and writing are grammatical, it is worth analysing
whether correcting students’ grammatical errors makes any difference or not. Brown
(2001) suggests that students’ self- correction encouragement is ideal but due to the
students’ dependence on the teacher for useful linguistic feedback. It is important for
them to take advantage of their knowledge in order to inject corrective feedback. This
correction must always be injected at an appropriate moment and in an appropriate way,
always taking into account each student’s personality.
So do we need to teach grammar in a separated way or should this be integrated
in other skills? Well according to Nunan(1998) language should be taught in context,

4. this means that if students do not explore grammar in context, it will be much harder for
them to understand it. In many texts or books, grammar is often presented out of
context, this means that students are not able to use grammar in other skills like writing
or speaking because most of teachers only teach student’s grammar rules that they need
to memorize for them to be able to understand grammar rules. Learners most of the time
are given isolated sentences, which they are expected to understand through exercises
which involve repetition, manipulation and grammatical transformation. Unfortunately
many grammar courses fail in making clear the relationship between form and function.
Students are taught about the form but they fail in the use of grammar in other context
or skills. This problem can happened for example when you ask a student to transform
sentences from the active voice into the passive and back into the active voice; however,
no one have explained to the students that they can actually use the passive voice in
other skill for example in speaking. So most of the time, these enable students of being
able to use grammar in other ways.
Brown (2001) thinks that the advisability of embedding grammatical techniques
into general language courses rather than singling grammar out as a discrete “skill”, and
treating it in a separate course. This means that grammar is an enabling system of
component of the communicative competences and grammar in this case is mixed up
with phonology, vocabulary all in one class; therefore grammar helps students to purse
relevant language goals. In some schools or curricula, courses or workshops are done
without grammar instruction and sometimes they appear to be anachronisms.
There are many techniques for teaching grammar. Brown (2001) mentions some
of them, which are charts, which are useful to practice patterns and for clarifying
grammatical relationship. Another technique for teaching grammar is to make students
bring different objects to the class, so they can be able to describe them to their
classmates and also to give the students the chance to communicate with their
classmates by practicing communication rules and using grammatical rules. Finally the
last technique is called maps and drawings, and the aim of this activity is to persuade
students to use grammatical rules such as prepositional phrases, question forms, or
imperatives, when giving directions.
As a conclusion it can be said that grammar is one of the most complicated
systems to be thought in a classroom. This is because in most schools grammar is not
integrated with other systems of the language , therefore grammar is studied as one
separate subject, which most of the time is very hard to understand and use. This is

5. because of all the grammatical rules that exist in the English language, and which in
most of the cases, students find difficult to understand, so they get disappointed because
they are not able to use grammar in real life and they just don’t want to learn it any
more.
This system of language is probably the most controversial one and as it was
said before, the most hard to understand to teach but on the other hand, when grammar
is related to the communicative competences, and in this case is mixed up with
phonology, vocabulary, all in one class, grammar helps students to purse relevant
language goals. This means that grammar should be, nowadays, in a communicative
language learning context, this means that grammar as the other systems of languages,
should be taught together with other skills, like speaking or writing, so the student can
be able to use this system of language in another way, but the question is no longer
whether grammar needs to be taught or not; the question now is how to teach grammar.
Even though they are many techniques for teaching this system of language like
mapping, bringing objects to the classroom, and using charts or filling the gaps, is the
teacher responsibility to teach this system in a interesting way, so students can be able
to understand it and also they are able to see that they can use grammar not only in the
grammar class, but in other classes to. So even though grammar is very hard to teach
and sometimes teachers believe that this system should be taught as a separate subject,
is one of the most important systems of the English language.

6. References.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An interactive approach to language
pedagogy. New York, NY: Longman.
Cook, J. V. (2008). Second language learning and language teaching. London, UK:
Hodder Education.
Nunan, D. (1998). Teaching grammar in context. ETL Journal, 52(2), 101-109.
Stephanie Aedo
Valeska Soto