Hostname: page-component-6d856f89d9-sp8b6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T04:45:36.270Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Communicative Processes in the Foreign Language Classroom: Preconditions and Strategies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Hans-Jürgen Krumm
Hans-Jürgen Krumm
Affiliation:
Universität Hamburg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Most current foreign language teachers and those about to enter this profession have themselves learned the foreign language by structural methods. The curricula under which they studied are not likely to be exchanged for communicative curricula, as such decisions are not made at the classroom level. Because of these conditions, my paper will concentrate on pragmatic problems of a communicative methodology – problems that arise in attempting to answer the question: does the functional-notional approach, without being either a curriculum or a method, and while operating under the constraints of the present school system, help develop a framework and a set of principles that will help teachers make foreign language learning more communicative than it is at the moment?

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , Fall 1980 , pp. 71 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES AND MATERIALS

Abbs, B., and Sexton, N.. 1978. Challenges. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Augustin, V., and Haase, K.. 1978. Blasen-Geschichten Deutsch als Fremdsprache (Frankfurt: Pädagogische Arbeitsstelle des DVV).Google Scholar
Black, C., and Butzkamm, W.. 1977. “Klassengespräche.” Heidelberg. Most of their dialogues are very teacher-centered.Google Scholar
Boettcher, W., and Sitta, H.. 1978. Der andere Grammatikunterricht. Munich: Urban and Schwarzenberg.Google Scholar
Carrier, M., and Treacher, P.. 1978. Take Five: Games and Activities for the Language Teacher. London: Center for British Teachers.Google Scholar
Dakin, J. 1973. The Language Laboratory and Language Training. London.Google Scholar
Dietrich, I. 1979. Kommunikation und Mitbestimmung im Fremdsprachenunterricht. Second edition. Kronberg: Scriptor.Google Scholar
Engel, U., Krumm, H.-J., Wierlacher, A. et al. , 1977, 1979. Mannheimer Gutachten zu ausgewählten Lehrwerken Deutsch als Fremdsprache. Vol. 1 (1977); vol. 2 (1979). Heidelberg: Groos.Google Scholar
Göbel, R. 1979. Lernen mit Spielen. Frankfurt: Pädagogische Arbeitsstelle des DVV.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, F. 1977. “Lernen in Freiheit — im Fremdsprachenunterricht.” Praxis des neusprachlichen Unterrichts, 24, No. 3, 227–36.Google Scholar
Krumm, H.-J. 1974. “Der Unterrichtsprozeβ als Kommunikationssituation.” Unterrichtswissenschaft, No. 4. 30–38.Google Scholar
Krumm, H.-J., “Lehrertraining in der Ausbildung und Fortbildung von Fremdsprachenlehrern.” Neusprachliche Mitteilungen, 32, No. 2, 66–70.Google Scholar
Krumm, H.-J., ed. 1979. Sprachunterricht und Sprachlernforschung. Book 4 (1979) of the series Unterrichtswissenschaft. Munich: Urban and Schwarzenberg.Google Scholar
Ludwigshafen Symposium. 1979. A European Unit/Credit System for Modern Language Learning by Adults. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. The report of the symposium, which look place in 1977, is one of a series of papers on the modern language project of the Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Marcks, M. 1978. Krümm dich beizeiten. Second edition. Heidelberg: Quelle and Meyer, p. 82.Google Scholar
Neuner, G., Schmidt, R., Wilms, H., Zirkel, M.. 1979. Deutsch aktiv. Vol. 1. Berlin: Langenscheidt.Google Scholar
Piepho, H.-E. 1979. Englischunterricht in Stundenskizzen. Heidelberg: Quelle and Meyer.Google Scholar
Roβ, K., and Walmsley, J.B.. 1976. “Überlegungen zur Erstellung und Durchführung einer Simulation.” Die neueren Sprachen, No. 1, 39–51.Google Scholar
Schiefer, B., and Schmitz, D.. 1976. “Moglichkeiten der Pragmalinguistik in den ersten swei Jahren Englischunterricht.” Praxis des neusprachlichen Unterrichts, 23, No. 4, 355–65.Google Scholar
Verrel-Beneke, C. 1976. “Plädoyer für die Entschulung des Fremdsprachenunterrichts.” Zielsprache Deutsch, No. 4, 11–18.Google Scholar
Wilkins, D.A. 1978. “Learning a Language is Learning to Comunicate.” In A European Unit/Credit System for Modern Language Learning by Adults. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, pp. 6–8.Google Scholar