FUNCTIONAL APPROACH TO LANGUAGE TEACHING: METHODOLOGY AND PRACTICE
Abstract
The article deals with the use of the functional approach to language teaching as the foundation for communicative practice. Functionalism is viewed as the following current trends: integrative functionalism, extreme functionalism, and externalfunctionalism. The focus is made on the correlation ofexternal functionalism and communicative paradigm in language teaching.
About the Authors
Anna Kobysheva
NCFU
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Natalia Moskovskaya
NCFU
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Ahmed A. I. M. 2013. The Functional Approach to Second Language Instruction // World Journal of English Language [Online]. 3(1), p. 92-105. Available from: http://www.sciedu.ca/wjel
2. Amir, M. and Fatemi A. H. 2014. The Impact of Content-based Instruction on Students' Achievement in ESP Courses and Their Language Learning Orientation // Theory and Practice in Language Studies [Online]. 4(10), p. 2157-2167. Available from: http://www.ojs.academypublisher.com
3. Bardovi-Harlig K. 2007. One functional approach to second language acquisition: the concept-oriented approach // VanPatten B. and Williams J. eds. Theories in second language acquisition. New York: Routledge, p. 57-75.
4. Brinton D. M., Snow M. A. and Wesche M. B. 2003. Content-based second language instruction. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
5. Cooreman A. and Kilborn K. 1991. Functionalist linguistics: discourse structure and language processing in second language acquisition. // Huebner T. and Ferguson C. A. eds. Cross currents in second language acquisition and linguistic theory. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
6. Diver, W. 1995. Theory. In: Contini-Morava, E. and Goldberg, B.S. eds. // Meaning as explanation: advances in linguistics sign theory. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 43-114.
7. Duenas M. 2004. The whats, whys, hows and whos of content-based instruction in second foreign language education // International Journal of English Studies. 4(1), p. 73-96.
8. Garcia E. 1979. Discourse without syntax // Givon T. ed. Discourse and syntax. New York: Academic Press, p. 23-49.
9. Goldberg A. E. 1996. Jackendoff and construction-based grammar // Cognitive linguistics. 7, p. 79-89.
10. Halliday M. A. K. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
11. Hopper P. J. 1987. Emergent grammar. Berkeley linguistic society. 13, p. 139-157.
12. Krahnke K. 1987. Approaches to syllabus design for foreign language teaching. New York: Prentice Hall.
13. Krashen S. 1988. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. London: Prentice Hall International.
14. Leaver B.L. and Stryker S. B. 1989. Content-based instruction for foreign language classroom // Foreign Language Annals 22.3, р. 269-275.
15. Malinowski B. 1923. The problem of meaning in primitive languages // Ogden C. K. and Richards I. A. eds. Meaning of Meaning. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp. 296-336.
16. Newmeyer F. J. 2000. Language form and language function. Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
17. Richards J. C. and Renandya W. A. 2003. Methodology in language teaching. An anthology of current practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Richards J. C. and Rodgers T. S. 2004. Approaches and methods in language teaching. Second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Shih M. 1986. Content-based approaches to teaching academic writing. TESOL Quartely [Online]. 20(4), p. 617-648. Available from: http://www.onlinelibrary.com
20. Short D. J. 1993. Assessing integrated language and content instruction. TESOL Quarterly 27.4, р. 627-656.
21. Snow M. A. 2001. Content-based and immersion models for second and foreign language teaching // Celce-Murcia, M. ed. Teaching English as a second or foreign language. Third edition. London: Thomson Learning, p. 303-318.
22. Snow M. A. 1998. Trends and issues in content-based instruction // Annual Review of Applied Linguistics [Online]. 18, p. 243-267. Available from: http://www.journals.cambridge.org
23. Song B. 2006. Content-based ESL instruction: Long-term effects and outcomes. English for Specific Purposes. [Online]. 25(2006), p. 420-437. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com
24. Stern H. H. 1983. Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Stewart T. and Perry B. 2005. Interdisciplinary team teaching as a model for teacher development // Teaching English as a second or foreign language. [Online]. 9(2), p. 1-16. Available from: http://www.cc.kyoto-su.ac.jp
26. Stroller F. and Grabe W. 1997. A six-T's approach to content-based instruction. In: Snow, M. and Brinton, D. eds. // The content-based classroom: perspectives on integrating language and content. White Plains, N.Y: Longman, p. 78-94.
27. Stryker S. and Leaver B. 1993. Content-based instruction in foreign language education. Washington D. C.: Georgetown University Press.
28. Tsai Y. 2010. The Impact of Content-Based Language Instruction on EFL Students' Reading Performance. Asian Social Science [Online]. 6(3), p. 77-85. Available from: http://www.ccsenet.org/ass
29. Xia Y. 2013. Language Theories and Language Teaching - from Traditional Grammar to Functionalism // Journal of Language Teaching and Research [Online]. 5(3), p. 559-565. Available from: http://www.ojs. academypublisher.com
30. Yalden J. 1987. Principles of Course Design for Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Review
For citations:
Kobysheva A., Moskovskaya N. FUNCTIONAL APPROACH TO LANGUAGE TEACHING: METHODOLOGY AND PRACTICE. Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University. 2015;(6):177-182. (In Russ.)
Views:
66
Email this article 