Use of English textbooks vital for uniformity

by W.M.J.B. Wijekoon

A great deal has been said and written about teaching/learning of English as a second language over a long period of time. Needless to say that the most prominent mode of language teaching/learning is teaching/learning it in classroom setting in which textbooks are inseparable elements as most ESL (English as Second Language) learners do not have access to second language acquisition in natural settings. Quite interestingly, a cavalcade of methodologies and approaches have emerged and disappeared, which undoubtedly connotes the importance, difficulties and paradoxes stemming from second language teaching and learning. However, it is quite well understandable and obvious that in any denominated methodology or approach, textbooks are of primary importance in language teaching/learning in classroom setting.

Use of textbooks

The teachers of English as a second language in government schools for many years have been, most of the times, assigned to teach it with the help of textbooks. Insistence upon the use of the textbooks may perhaps be due to the agreed principles of education, maintaining uniformity of teaching standards countrywide for the sake of administrative purpose, and/or sometimes to facilitate the teacher as well as teaching. However, teaching of masterpieces of literature as textbooks by means of paraphrasing and criticism is different in this respect. Not only teachers, but also some people belonging to older generation who had received minimum education in English medium in colonial and near post-colonial eras are seen to have used textbooks to make their children understand and practise basic sentence patterns of English language. Hence, textbooks are sine qua none in the classrooms of teaching ESL. Those prescribed textbooks, however, in turn, become targets of criticism from academic and intellectual quarters and the replacements too are frequent as a panacea, a self-idealized stratagem and as a subterfuge into the bargain.

Different perspective

So, this endeavour is to look at textbooks from a different perspective in terms of the popular new outlook of language i.e., Universal Grammar. One interesting factor that prompts one to think in terms of this Universal Grammar, is the 'mental grammar' and 'syntax' explained therein and the differences in parameters of languages. The question here is that should those differences of parameters of the two languages be taken for granted in designing textbooks. For example, in designing of ESL textbooks for the students whose mother tongue is Sinhala or Tamil, should not the parameter differences of those languages from that of English be considered? This point may be substantiated by the Head Directionality Parameter, as the Head Directionality parameter of Sinhala is ' head-last, complement-first, specifier-first, head-last' whereas in English it is 'head-first, complement-last, specifier-first, head-last' which makes it difficult for the Sinhala speakers to acquire phrase structure patterns of English (English Phraseology). Hence, shouldn't there be a specific strategy to instil 'mental grammar of phrase structure of the target language' within ESL learners. The other important factor that had not been considered is the word order patterns of the languages, namely the target language and the first language.

Second language

The Sri Lankan students in government schools learn English as the second language, not as the first language, and therefore it is very hard for them to get the new pattern of word order of the target language internalised getting out of the fossilised word order pattern of the first language. Here, the question arises why the designers of ESL textbooks have not taken this difference, i.e., word order, for granted. English language is an SVO language in which morphological inflections are poor, whereas Sinhala and Tamil languages are SOV languages in which morphological inflections are rich. Tensed agreement, for example, in tenses and aspects of English more or less 'syntactical bindings with inclusion of derivatives of be and verbal inflections', when it is more or less morphological(verbal) inflections in Sinhala and Tamil.

Aren't these factors left untouched?. And therefore it would be necessary that complexities involved in textbooks designing, in this regard specifically in designing activities and lessons, be unresolved productively to instil and internalize 'second language syntax' within ESL learners. Once the writer of this article saw a poster displayed in public places like Railway Stations close to Gampaha, which said that "English is easy to speak - why not join his class". (May God save his students!). The problem here is crystal clear. This so-called veteran tuition master had not been able to properly reset and fix the Pro-Drop parameter/Null Subject parameter of Sinhala in the process of acquisition of the use of expletives, or perhaps the Verb Movement in English syntax.

However, recently, the generative approach to explanation of second language acquisition has become a favourite approach to provide a viable and sustainable outlook to see whether the principles and parameters in Universal Grammar are available for second language learners. But it is very hard to establish whether anybody has so far looked at textbooks in the syllabuses of ESL with a view of building up of 'mental grammar of syntax' (Hawkins 2000) within learners. If such were the case, it would be felt necessary to look at the second language syntax of ESL textbooks from a generative perspective. This article, in other words, is then simply to form an argument about whether the ESL textbooks are able to build up mental grammar of second language syntax of English, or more specifically is an attempt to assess whether those lessons and activities in ESL textbooks can set and reset parameters, and fix new parameters in the process of learning and acquisition of ESL effectively.

Generative studies

Recent developments in generative studies in first language acquisition founded by Chomsky (1965, 1968, 1970 and 1972) have led to explanation of the second language acquisition (Epstein 1998, Flynn 1987, 1988, Clahsen 1988, Musken 1988, Swartz 1986, Matohardjono 1988, Vannikka and Young-Scholten 1988 and Hawkins 2000 etc.). The principles and parameters set out by generative syntax of Universal Grammar of Chomskyan theory is characterised by human inborn capacity to acquire first language through the language faculty of human mind. It is argued that the UG fully constrains, partially constrains or does not constrain second language acquisition. However, Epstein, Flynn, Flynn and O'Neil, Matohardjono, Swartz, Gass, Statcher, Krashen, Terrel, Dulay et. al. and Hakins formulate seemingly tenable arguments to prove 'full access/full transfer' of UG in second language acquisition. More importantly, the interesting factor that arrests attention is Universal Grammar, which is itself a testimony for its validity and importance. Thus it is quite understandable the UG is the central concern in second language acquisition whether or not it transfers. The languages of Sinhala and Tamil, the first language for about 90% students out of total student population in Sri Lanka for whom the textbooks are designed to teach ESL, are more or less diglossic. The written forms are more rhetorical and formal when the spoken forms are less rhetorical and less formal.

Differences

The null subject parameter/pro-drop parameter, phrase structure patterns (head directionality), word order patterns, may be the basic parameter differences of the three languages, whereas the presence of inflectional morphology, for example, subject verb agreement in all tensed inflections of all the three languages, though different in nature, may be explicated as the principles in UG. However, due to these differences and relations, the learners need, though unintelligibly, to set and fix the command relationships, government, binding, and movements in Whs, verbs and subjects; and adjacency and subjacency in order for them to internalise the grammar of English.

The common errors in the repertoire made by Sinhala and Tamil speakers learning ESL may be attributed to the above mentioned parametric differences; that is impossible to be discussed and analysed here due to obvious reasons. However, given the argument that Universal Grammar constrains second language acquisition for parameter setting and fixing, it certainly needs to be considered in textbook designing. But, it is hardly to be found an analytical review of textbooks from the point of view of parameter fixing for forming mental grammar of second language syntax. Emphatic attention in the forums and workshops for designing of ESL textbooks has been focused on the cultural impact, approaches to language teaching, methods and methodologies of English language teaching, correct language productions and correct pronunciation etc. along with the hackneyed terms such as accuracy, fluency and competency, the common jargon in the Communicative Approach to second language acquisition that stood very prominently in 80s, fully brushing aside the fact that those methodologies have been contrived out of developments of linguistic theories of second language acquisition, perhaps without the knowledge that probably the latest one is the Principle and Parameter framework.

To be continued