Pedagogical grammar as the framework of TEFL research. Part 19. Correlation between the form of rules of linguistic and pedagogical grammars

Keywords: form-focused tasks, linguistic grammar rules, meaning-focused tasks, pedagogical grammar rules, teaching foreign languages

Abstract

The nineteenth paper in the series continues to discuss the correlation between linguistic (LG) and pedagogical (PG) grammars in the development of communicative grammar skills. This time, the author addresses the issue of the form of LG and PG rules, aiming to answer a series of questions. What is the general attitude of researchers towards using LG grammar information in the classroom? Are LG rules effective for grammar teaching in their current linguistic form? How can their efficiency be increased by changing their form, bearing in mind the psychological nature of the process of developing grammar skills?  An analysis of contemporary literature on this topic revealed a significant shift in attitude towards explicit focus on linguistic form in teaching, moving away from the zero tolerance of LG information in communicative language classrooms of the 1970s and 1980s. While maintaining strict adherence to the communicative nature of teaching and the prevalence of meaning-focused tasks in the classroom, researchers also acknowledge the importance of explicit attention to form for language acquisition. Stressing the teacherʼs role as a facilitator, the authors praise the use of pre-task modelling techniques, which positively impact learnersʼ attention to linguistic forms and facilitate second language skill development. Conversely, the author cautions against the uncritical revival of grammar-translation techniques, asserting that PGʼs primary objective is to foster studentsʼ communication abilities rather than their comprehension of LG structure. Based on this, he suggests that PG can disregard the principles of LG structure and establish its own rules, which may differ from those of LG. The author convincingly demonstrates the validity of this principle using examples  from  the  pre-zero-tolerance era and shows  the potential of types of pedagogical information such as models and algorithms as specific forms of PG rules. The author suggests a number of requirements for PG rules, promising to extend this list in his next contribution to the series.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Chernovaty, L.M. (1978). On some conditions of the development of grammar skills. Visnyk Kharkiv university, 170, pp. 96-101 [in Ukrainian].

Banegas, D. (2021). Understanding the impact of teaching systemic functional grammar in initial English language teacher education. International Journal of Applied Linguistics. 31, pp. 492-507. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/IJAL.12346

Candlin, C.N. (1979). The status of pedagogical grammars. The Communicative Approach to Language Teaching. London: Oxford Univ. Press, pp. 72-81.

Chernovaty, L. (1995). Transtecon Elementary English Course. Kyiv: Olena Teliga Publishers.

Chernovaty, L.M. (2016-2025). Pedagogical grammar as the framework of research in teaching foreign languages. Parts 1-17. Teaching Languages at Higher Educational Establishments at the Present Stage. Intersubject Relations. Kharkiv, Issues 29-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/2073-4379-2025-46-06

Collins, L., Ruivivar, J. (2021). Research agenda: Researching grammar teaching and learning in the second language classroom. Language Teaching. 54(3), pp. 407-423. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444821000070

Crookes, G.V. (2021). Critical language pedagogy: an introduction to principles and values. ELT Journal. 75(3), pp. 247-255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ELT/CCAB020

Kim, Y. (2013). Effects of pre-task modelling on attention to form and question development. TESOL Quarterly. 47(1), pp. 8-35. DOI: https://doi.org/doi:10.1002/tesq.52

Leão, L.B.C. (2012). How grammar can be best taught. Domínios de lingu@gem. Revista Eletrônica de Linguística. 6(1). ISSN 1980-5799 242. URL: http://www.seer.ufu.br/index.php/dominiosdelinguagem

Nassaji, H. (2016). Research timeline: Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition. Language Teaching. 49, pp. 35-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444815000403

Pawlak, M. (2019). Grammar learning strategies as a key to mastering second language grammar: A research agenda. Language Teaching. 53, pp. 1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000314

Samuda, V. (2001). Guiding relationships between form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher. In: Bygate, M., Skehan, P., Swain, M. (Eds.). Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching, and testing. pp. 119-140. Harlow, UK: Longman.

Shortall, T. (2003). Grammar Rules: Teaching Grammar in the Foreign Language Classroom. Birmingham: DELPHI. URL: http://www.delphi.bham.ac.uk

Spada, N., Lightbown, P.M. (2008). Form-focused instruction: Isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly. pp. 181-207. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00115

Toth, P.D. (2008). Teacher- and learner-led discourse in task-based grammar instruction: Providing procedural assistance for L2 morphosyntactic development. Language Learning. 58(2), pp. 237-283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00441

Wilkins, D.A. (1972). Linguistics in Language Teaching. London: Arnold, 3.

Published
2025-12-30
How to Cite
Chernovaty, L. (2025). Pedagogical grammar as the framework of TEFL research. Part 19. Correlation between the form of rules of linguistic and pedagogical grammars. Teaching Languages at Higher Educational Establishments at the Present Stage. Intersubject Relations, (47), 178-189. https://doi.org/10.26565/2073-4379-2025-47-11