|WikiProject Linguistics / Applied Linguistics||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
… what is the teacher's role in such a method? why is a method and not an approach; in other words, how is a language teaching method different from a language teaching approach? what then can we call a technique?
Teacher's role in GTM: detailed explanation of grammatical rules error correction (immediate) asking comprehension questions etc.
As for technique and method: step (item, technique): the smallest possible unit in a language teaching process eg.: reading aloud, fill the gap, repeat what you hear etc.; process: consists of steps, a logical series of steps eg.: dialogue exploitation; method: a finite number of steps in which the arranged language content and classroom teaching form are organically entwined to ensure the necessary dedactic phases for acquisition during the whole process.
I hope this helps.
The Disadvantages section looks like POV to me and needs citation - for example the classification of the Grammar Translation method as 'unnatural' and then a reference to hearing/speaking/reading/writing looks very much like most of the advertising blurb that goes with language courses, or the untested theories of modern linguistics scholars. Can citations be added please?
Besides, there are no clear sources supporting the notion that Grammar-Translation neglected speech. There are many textbooks back from the eighteen century to teach foreign languages (like Adler's Latin course) that strengthened fluent speech all along. Furthermore Europe, South America and even in the States people learnt to speak, write and read perfectly through centuries through this technique. This text needs to be thoroughly edited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2011 (UTC)Last modified on 18 November 2012, at 09:38