The Role of Teaching Grammar in First Language Education

Abstract

Grammar; while originating from the natural structure of the language also is the system which makes it possible for different language functions meet within the body of common rules especially communication. Having command of the language used, speaking and writing it correctly require strong grammar knowledge actually. However only knowing the rules cannot be the indicator of using the language correctly and effectively. For the individual, who learns the rules of the language but cannot transform it to daily life, grammar teaching can be difficult and boring. Instead of considering grammar teaching as an independent and abstract lesson, realizing it through integrating with other learning fields will increase the effect and level of success in grammar teaching. The purpose of this research is to determine the views of first language teachers regarding teaching grammar. The study group of the research consist of 10 Turkish language teachers who work in a city in Turkey (Elazig). Within this research, which was carried out with qualitative pattern, the data was gathered with one on one interview technique using semi structured interview form, which consisted of 10 questions. The data gathered was analyzed with content analysis and interpreted being categorized. Regarding the findings frequency distributions were given and interpreted. As a result of the study it was seen that teaching grammar differs in terms of teachers’ views, in addition in some matters they were under expectations.

Keywords

• First language education,teaching grammar,language skills,communication

References

1. Ahmed, S. & Alamin, A. (2012). The communicative approaches revisited and the relevance of teaching grammar. English Language Teaching. www.ccsenet.org/elt Vol. 5, No.1; January 2012.
2. Alghanmi, B. & Shukri, N. (2016). The relationship between teachers’ beliefs of grammar instruction and classroom practices in the saudi context. English Language Teaching. ISSN 1916-4742, E-ISSN 1916-4750. Vol. 9, No. 7; 2016.
3. Al-Mekhlafi, A. M. & Nagaratnam, R. P. (2011). Difficulties in teaching and learning grammar in an EFL context. International Journal of Instruction. www.e-iji.net p-ISSN 1694-609X. e-ISSN: 1308-1470. July 2011, Vol. 4, No. 2.
4. Andrews, R. (2005). Knowledge about the teaching of [sentence] grammar: The state of play. English Teaching: Practice and Critique. December, 2005, Volume 4, Number 3, pp. 69-76.
5. Arulselvi, E. (2011). Effect of instructional media in the learning of English grammar on the achievement of teacher training students at Namakkal district. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching. Vol. 1, No. 3, July-September 2011.
6. Azar, B. (2007). Grammar-based teaching: A practitioner’s perspective. TESL-EJ: Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Volume 11, Number 2, September 2007.
7. Bao, J. & Sun, J. (2010). English grammatical problems of Chinese undergraduate students. English Language Teaching. www.ccsenet.org/elt. Vol. 3, No. 2; June 2010.
8. Bao, X. (2015). Senior high school students’ errors on the use of relative words. English Language Teaching. ISSN 1916-4742, E-ISSN 1916-4750. Vol. 8, No. 3; 2015.

9. Bilgin, N. (2014). Sosyal Bilimlerde Icerik Analizi: Teknikler ve Ornek Calismalar. Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
10. Bozavli, E. (2017). Effect of phonetic association on lexis learning in natural language context: a comparative study of English, French and Turkish words. Educational Research and Reviews. www.academicjournals.org/ERR. Vol. 12(2), pp. 45-53, 23 January, 2017. Doi: 10.5897/ERR2016.3104
11. Buyukozturk, S., Kilic Cakmak, E., Akgun, O. E., Karadeniz, S. & Demirel, F., (2014). Bilimsel arastirma yontemleri. Ankara, Pegem Akademi.
12. Corzo, C. C. (2013). Formal grammar instruction: theoretical aspects to contemplate its teaching. PROFILE: Issues in Teachers’ Proffessional Development. ISSN 1657-0790 (printed), 2256-5760 (online). Vol. 15, No. 2, October 2013.
13. Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2015). Karma yontem arastirmalari: Tasarimi ve yurutulmesi. (Cev. Edt. Yuksel Dede ve Selcuk Besir Demir), Ankara: Ani yayincilik.
14. Creswell, J. W. (2016a). Arastirma deseni: Nitel, nicel ve karma yontem yaklasimlari. (Cev. Edt. Selcuk Besir Demir), Ankara: Egiten Kitap
15. Creswell, J. W. (2016b). Nitel arastirma yontemleri: Bes yaklasima gore nitel arastirma yontemleri. (Cev. Edt. Mesut Butun ve Selcuk Besir Demir), Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
16. Cuéllar, M. T. A. (2013). Process writing and the development of grammatical competence. HOW, A Colombian Journal for Teachers of English. ISSN 0120-5927. October 2013, pp. 11-35.
17. Demir, C. & Yapici, M. (2007). Ana dili olarak Turkcenin ogretimi ve sorunlari. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(2), S. 177-192.
18. Dolunay, S. K. 2010. Dil bilgisi ogretiminin amaci ve onemi. TUBAR-XXVII-Bahar, s. 275-284.
19. Erdem, I. & Celik, M. (2011). Dil bilgisi ogretim yontemi uzerine degerlendirmeler. Turkish Studies – International Periodical For The Language, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic. Vol. 6/1 Winter. p.1030-1041.
20. Ezzi, N. A. A. (2012). Yemeni teachers’ beliefs of grammar teaching and classroom practices. English Language Teaching. ISSN 1916-4742, E-ISSN 1916-4750. Vol. 5, No. 8; 2012.
21. Fearn, L. & Farnan, N. (2007). When is a verb? Using functional grammar to teach writing. Journal of Basic Writing. Vol. 26, No. 1, 2007.
22. Feng, Zhiwen (2013). Functional grammar and its implications for English teaching and learning. English Language Teaching. ISSN 1916-4742, E-ISSN 1916-4750. Vol. 6, no. 10.
23. Gocer, A. (2015). Temel dil becerilerinin gelistirilmesinde dil bilgisi ogrenme alaninin yeri, islevi ve ogretimi: butunluk ilkesi ve tumevarim yontemi ekseninde tematik bir yaklasim. Egitim ve Ogretim Arastirmalari Dergisi. ss. 233-242.
24. Gocer, A. & Sayin, H. (2014). 6, 7 ve 8. sinif Turkce kilavuz kitaplarindaki metinlerin dil bilgisi ogretimindeki yeterliligi ve kullanim durumlarinin incelenmesi. Journal of European Education JEE. ISSN 2146-2674, Vol. 4 Issue 2, s.11-28.
25. Gutiérrez, X. (2017). Explicit knowledge of the Spanish subjunctive and accurate use in discrete-point, oral production, and written production measures. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics. 20, 1 (2017): 1-30
26. Gunes, F. (2012). Testlerden etkinliklere Turkce ogretimi. Dil ve Edebiyat Egitimi Dergisi. Cilt 1, Sayi 1, S. 31-42.
27. Gunes, F. (2013). Turkcede metin ogretimi yerine metinle ogrenme. Adiyaman Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi Turkcenin Egitimi Ogretimi Ozel Sayisi. Sayi 11, S. 605-637.
28. Huang, J. (2010). Grammar instruction for adult English language learners: a task-based learning framework. Journal of Adult Education. Vol. 39, No. 1, 2010.
29. Irzawati, I. & Asiah, N. (2013). Using webquest in learning grammar: students’ perceptions in higher education. Advances in Language and Literary Studies. Vol. 4, No. 1; January 2013.
30. Imer, K., Kocaman, A., Ozsoy, A. S. (2013). Dilbilim sozlugu. Istanbul, Bogazici Universitesi Yayinevi.
31. Iscan, A. (2007). Islevsel dil bilgisinin Turkce ogretimindeki yeri. Ataturk Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi. Sayi 1, ss. 253-258.
32. Karahan, L. (2007). Turkcede soz dizimi. Ankara, Akcag.
33. Karasar, N. (2009). Bilimsel arastirma yontemi. Ankara, Nobel Yayincilik.
34. Kong, N. (2011). Establishing a comprehensive English teaching pattern combining the communicative teaching method and the grammar-translation method. English Language Teaching. www.ccsenet.org/elt Vol. 4, No. 1; March 2011.
35. Korkmaz, Z. (1992). Gramer terimleri sozlugu. Ankara, TDK.
36. Li, Z. & Song, M. (2007). The relationship between traditional English grammar teaching and communicative language teaching. US-China Education Review. ISSN1548-6613, USA. Volume 4, No. 1 (Serial No. 26), Jan. 2007.
37. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (2016). Genisletilmis bir kaynak kitap: Nitel veri analizi. (Cev.: S. A. Altun, A. Ersoy). Ankara, Pegem Akademi.
38. Mokhtar, F. A. (2016). Rethinking conventional teaching in language learning and proposing edmodo as intervention: a qualitative analysis. MOJET: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology. Volume 4, Issue 2.
39. Myhill, D. (2005). Ways of knowing: writing with grammar in mind. English Teaching: Practice and Critique. December. 2005, Volume 4, Number 3, pp. 77-96.
40. Naba’h, A. M A. (2012). The impact of computer assisted grammar teaching on EFL pupils’ performance in Jordan. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT). Vol. 8, Issue 1, pp. 71-90.
41. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Nitel arastirma ve degerlendirme yontemleri. (Cev.: M. Butun, S. B. Demir) Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
42. Peng, Y. (2017). A survey of grammar instruction from scholastic perspective. English language teaching. ISSN 1916-4742, E-ISSN 1916-4750, Vol. 10, No. 5; 2017.
43. Rättyä, K. (2013). Languaging and visualisation method for grammar teaching: a conceptual change theory perspective. English Teaching: Practice and Critique. December, 2013, Volume 12, Number 3, pp. 87-101.
44. Sagir, M. (2002). Ilkogretim okullarinda Turkce dil bilgisi ogretimi. Ankara, Nobel.
45. Sermsook, K, Liamnimitr, J. & Pochakorn, R. (2017). An analysis of errors in written English sentences: a case study of Thai EFL students. English Language Teaching. ISSN 1916-4742, E-ISSN 1916-4750. Vol. 10, No. 3; 2017.
46. Singaravelu, G. (2014). Impact of gadget based learning of grammar in English at standard II. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching. Vol. 4, No. 2, April-June 2014.
47. Solikhah, I. (2017). Corrections on grammar, sentence variety and developing detail to qualify academic essay of Indonesian learners. Dinamika Ilmu. Volume 17 (1), 2017.
48. Sonmez, V. & Alacapinar, F. G. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde olcme araci hazirlama. Ankara: Ani Yayincilik.
49. Sun, X. (2014). Ungrammatical patterns in chinese EFL learners’ free writing. English Language Teaching. ISSN 1916-4742, E-ISSN 1916-4750. Vol. 7, No. 3; 2014.
50. Thakur, V. S. (2015). Using supplementary materials in the teaching of English: pedagogic scope and applications. English Language Teaching. ISSN 1916-4742, E-ISSN 1916-4750. Vol. 8, No. 12; 2015.
51. Turkce Sozluk. (2009). TDK s.529
52. Turnuklu, A. (2000). Egitimbilim arastirmalarinda etkin olarak kullanilabilecek nitel bir arastirma teknigi: gorusme. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yonetimi. Sayi: 24, Guz 2000, ss. 543-559.
53. Uludag, E. (2002). Ilkogretim ikinci kademe ogrencilerinin yazim ve noktalama kurallarini uygulama beceri duzeyleri. Erzincan Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi. Cilt-Sayi: 4-1, S. 97-114.
54. Vardar, B., Guz, N. Huber, E. Senemoglu, O. & Oztokat, E. (2002). Aciklamali dilbilim terimleri sozlugu. Istanbul, Multilingual.