全屏显示专题章节

In the early years of World WarⅡ，American military authorities discovered the degree to which the study of languages had been neglected in the United States when they were faced with a totally inadequate supply of interpreters for communication with their allies and with enemy contacts.In an attempt to rectify this situation as quickly as possible，they called for the help of the American Council of Learned Societies，whose members had already been at work analyzing lesser-known languages and developing intensive language-teaching programs in certain universities.

In this wartime setting，understanding a native speaker and speaking a language with near-native accent were first priorities.With high motivation，small classes，explanations of structure by linguistic experts，and long hours of drilling and active practice with native informants，using graded materials based on this analysis of structure，selected members of the armed forces acquired a high degree of auraloral skill for specific purposes and situations.The origins of the intensive language-teaching methods developed in the 1940s and 1950s may be found in the work of the American structural linguists and cultural anthropologists who were working in the same climate of opinion as the behaviorist psychologists.In the twenties and thirties，the call had been sounding for a strictly scientific and objective investigation of human behavior.In linguistics，this investigation took the form of a descriptive approach to the study of language.Structural linguists tried to describe the sound patterns and word combinations of each language as they observed them in a corpus，without attempting to fit them into a preconceived framework based on the structures of Greek and Latin，or the traditional grammar of English.The descriptive approach was particularly appropriate，since a number of these linguists were interested in the description of American Indian languages and other littleknown non-European languages，which they found to be very different from the languages to which they were accustomed.

The descriptive approach led to research into what people really say in their mother tongue，in contradistinction to what traditional grammarians may maintain they ought to say.（For most of the linguists in this American context，the mother tongue was English.）At this period，much research was being carried out by anthropologists into patterns of human behavior in a culture.To them，language was clearly an activity learned in the social life of a people，just as were other culturally determined acts.Language use was a set of habits，established，as later behaviorist research in psychology was to suggest，by reinforcement or reward in the social situation.The native language as learned behavior was acquired by the infant in spoken form first，and this led to the assumption that students will acquire a second language with ease if it is presented in the spoken form before the written form.This notion seemed even more self-evident to the early structural linguists because many of the languages they were studying did not exist in written form，or possessed very little written literature.

New teaching materials for high school and undergraduate study of the commonly taught languages（French，Spanish，German，and later Russian and Portuguese）were prepared by experienced teachers with the advice of linguists who had made descriptive analyses of the languages，and these teaching materials were tried out in schools.After successive revisions，the earliest materials of this type came on the American market in the late fifties.

The new emphasis on being able to communicate in another language led to the coming of the term“Aural-Oral”for a method which aimed at developing listening and speaking skills first，as the foundation on which to build the skills of reading and writing.As“Aural-Oral”was found to be confusing and difficult to pronounce，Brooks suggested the term“Audio-Lingual”for this method（Brooks，1964：263）.Both terms are still in use.

In 1958，American concern about the language-learning situation in schools found expression in the National Defense Education Act（NDEA）.This act provided funds for research in language teaching and learning，and for intensive training courses（for practicing teachers）in listening and speaking skills，in the understanding of linguistic principles，and in the use of the Audio-Lingual techniques in the classroom.

New aids for teaching，in the form of magnetic tape and language laboratory equipment，were becoming available，and these were found to be very useful for practice in listening and sound production as well as practice with grammatical structure.Matching funds were also made available by the U.S.government for installing such equipment in schools and colleges.The approach developed by linguists at Michigan and other universities became known variously as the Oral Approach，the Aural-Oral Approach，and the Structural Approach.It advocated aural training first，then pronunciation training，followed by speaking，reading，and writing.Language was identified with speech，and speech was approached through structure.This approach influenced the way languages were taught in the United States throughout the fifties.As an approach to the teaching of English as a foreign language the new orthodoxy was promoted through the University of Michigan's journal Language Learning.This was a period when expertise in linguistics was regarded as a necessary and sufficient foundation for expertise in language teaching.Not surprisingly，the classroom materials produced by Fries and linguists at Cornell，Yale and elsewhere evidenced considerable linguistic analysis but very little pedagogy.They were widely used，however，and the applied linguistic principles on which they were based were thought to incorporate the most advanced scientific approach to language teaching.If there was any learning theory underlying the Aural-Oral materials，it was a commonsense application of the idea that practice makes perfect.There is no explicit reference to then-current learning theory in Fries's work.It was the incorporation of the linguistic principles of the Aural-Oral approach with state-of-the-art psychological learning theory in the mid-fifties that led to the method that came to be known as Audiolingualism.

The emergence of the Audio-Lingual Method resulted from the increased attention given to foreign language teaching in the United States toward the end of the 1950s.The need for a radical change and rethinking of FLT methodology was prompted by the launching of the first Russian satellite in 1957.The U.S.Government acknowledged the need for a more intensive effort to teach foreign languages in order to prevent Americans from becoming isolated from scientific advances made in other countries.The National Defense Education Act（NDEA）（1958），among other measures，provided funds for the study and analysis of modern languages，for the development of teaching materials，and for the training of teachers.Teachers were encouraged to attend summer institutes to improve their knowledge of foreign languages and to learn the principles of linguistics and the new linguistically based teaching methods.Language teaching specialists set about developing a method that was applicable to conditions in U.S.colleges and university classrooms.They drew on the earlier experience of the army programs and the Aural-Oral or Structural Approach developed by Fries and his colleagues，adding insights taken from behaviorist psychology.This combination of structural linguistic theory，contrastive analysis，Aural-Oral procedures，and behaviorist psychology led to the Audio-Lingual Method.Audiolingualism（the term was coined by Professor Nelson Brooks in 1964）claimed to have transformed language teaching from an art to a science，which would enable learners to achieve mastery of a foreign language effectively and efficiently.The method was widely adopted for teaching foreign languages in North American colleges and universities.It provided the methodological foundation for materials for the teaching of foreign languages at college and university level in the United States and Canada，and its principles formed the basis of such widely used series as the Lado English Series（Lado，1977）and English 900（English Language Services 1964）.

（2）Principal features

This method of the sixties has the following distinctive characteristics（a）emphasis on the primacy of the audio-lingual over the graphic skills（b）separation of the skills—listening，speaking，reading，and writing（c）emphasis on certain practice techniques，mimicry，memorization，and pattern drills（d）the use of dialogues as the chief means of presenting the language（e）establishing a linguistic and psychological theory as basis for the teaching method（f）the use of the language laboratory.

In the Audio-Lingual Method，the dominant emphasis is placed on the fundamental skills，i.e.，listening and speaking.While reading and writing are not neglected，listening and speaking are given priority，and in the teaching sequence precede reading and writing.Like the Direct Method，audiolingualism tries to develop target language skills without reference to the mother tongue.

Brooks（1964），for example，regards a co-ordinate command of the second language as the ideal，outcome of language learning.While audiolingualists were not impervious to the cultural aspects of second language instruction，language learning，in the first instance，was viewed as the acquisition of a practical set of communicative skills.

In what way do the techniques of the Audio-Lingual Method differ from those of the G-T Method or the Direct Method？Audiolingualism does not emphasize a presentation of grammatical knowledge or information as the G-T Method and but it does not taboo it completely.It does reject the intellectual，problemsolving approach of the G-T Method and does not favor the isolation of paradigmatic features such as lists of pronouns or verb forms.The use of the first language in the language class or in learning materials is not asseverely restricted in the Audio-Lingual Method as it was in the Direct Method.The Direct Method was criticized by audiolingualists for its lack of a linguistic basis and its failure to grade language data with sufficient scientific care.

The learning process is viewed in the Audio-Lingual Method as one of habituation and conditioning without the intervention of any intellectual analysis.In other words，on the explicit-implicit issue，it favors an implicit rather than an explicit learning strategy.The intention is to make language learning less of a mental burden and more a matter of relatively effortless and frequent repetition and imitation.Emphasis is laid on active and simple practice.The Audio-Lingual Method has introduced memorization of dialogues and imitative repetition as specific learning techniques.In addition，it has developed pattern drills（also called structural drills or pattern practice）.Such drills were not unknown before，for example in the work of Palmer.But they became essential features of audiolingualism and as such were diversified and refined as a technique of language learning beyond anything previously known.Audio-Lingual techniques，therefore，appeared to offer the possibility of language learning without requiring a strong academic background and inclination.The simplicity and directness of approach that was advocated seemed to bring language learning within the scope of the ordinary learner.Moreover，speaking，which in language learning had hitherto been more of an addition to book learning，was now brought right into the center of the stage，and the teaching techniques with tape recordings and language laboratory drill offered practice in speaking and listening which，without being actual conversations，rehearsed the verbal exchanges of ordinary talk in the stylized form of stimulus and response.

（5）Theoretical assumptions

The language teaching theoreticians and methodologists who developed Audiolingualism not only had a convincing and theory of language to draw upon but they were also working in a period when a prominent school of American psychology—known as behavioral psychology—claimed to have tapped the secrets of all human learning，including language learning.Behaviorism，like structural linguistics，is another antimentalist，empirically based approach to the study of human behavior.To the behaviorist，the human being is an organism capable of a wide repertoire of behaviors.The occurrence of these behaviors is dependent upon three crucial elements in learning a stimulus，which serves to elicit behavior；a response triggered by a stimulus；and reinforcement，which serves to mark the response as being appropriate（or inappropriate）and encourages the repetition（or suppression）of the response in the future.

Reinforcement is a vital element in the learning process，because it increases the likelihood that the behavior will occur again and eventually become a habit.To apply this theory to language learning is to identify the organism as the foreign language learner，the behavior as verbal behavior，the stimulus as what is taught or presented of the foreign language，the response as the learner's reaction to the stimulus，and the reinforcement as the extrinsic approval and praise of the teacher or students or the intrinsic self-satisfaction of target language use.Language mastery is represented as acquiring a set of appropriate language stimulusresponse chains.

The theory of language underlying audiolingualism was derived from a view proposed by American linguists in the 1950s—a view that came to be known as structural linguistics.Linguistics had emerged as a flourishing academic discipline in the 1950s，and the structural theory of language constituted its backbone.Structural linguistics had developed in part as a reaction to traditional grammar.Traditional approaches to the study of language had linked the study of language to philosophy and to a mentalist approach to grammar.Grammar was considered a branch of logic，and the grammatical categories of Indo-European languages were thought to represent ideal categories in languages.Many nineteenth-century language scholars had viewed modern European languages as corruptions of classical grammar，and languages from other parts of the world were viewed as primitive and underdeveloped.

The reaction against traditional grammar was prompted by the movement toward positivism and empiricism，which Darwin's Origin of the Species had helped promote，and by an increased interest in non-European languages on the part of scholars.A more practical interest in language study emerged.As linguists discovered new sound types and new patterns of linguistic invention and organization，a new interest in phonetics，phonology，morphology，and syntax developed.By the 1930s，the scientific approach to the study of language was thought to consist of collecting examples of what speakers said and analyzing them according to different levels of structural organization rather than according to categories of Latin grammar.A sophisticated methodology for collecting and analyzing data developed，which involved transcribing spoken utterances in a language phonetically and later working out the phonemic，morphological（stems，prefixes，suffixes，etc.），and syntactic（phrases，clauses，sentence types）systems underlying the grammar or the language.Language was viewed as a system of structurally related elements for the encoding of meaning，the elements being phonemes，morphemes，words，structures，and sentence types.The term structural referred to these characteristics：（a）Language samples could be exhaustively described at any structural level of description（phonetic，phonemic，morphological，etc.）（b）Elements in a language were thought of as being linearly produced in a rule-governed（structured）way（c）Linguistic levels were thought of as systems within systems—that is，as being pyramidally structured；phonemic systems led to morphemic systems，and these in turn led to the higher-level systems of phrases，clauses，and sentences.

Learning a language，it was assumed，entails mastering the elements or building blocks of the language and learning the rules by which these elements are combined，from phoneme to morpheme，form word to phrase to sentence.The phonological system defines those sound elements that contrast meaningfully with one another in the language（phonemes），their phonetic realizations in specific environments（allophones），and their permissible sequences（phonotactics）.The phonological and grammatical systems of the language constitute the organization of language and by implication the units of production and comprehension.The grammatical system consists of a listing of grammatical elements and rules for their linear combination into words，phrases，and sentences.Rule-ordered processes involve addition，deletion，and transposition of elements.

An important tenet of structural linguistics was that the primary medium of language is oral.Since many languages do not have a written form and we learn to speak before we learn to read or write，it was argued that language is“primarily what is spoken and only secondarily what is written（Brooks，1964）.”Therefore，it was assumed that speech had a priority in language teaching.This was contrary to popular views of the relationship of the spoken and written forms of language，since it had been widely assumed that language existed principally as symbols written on paper，and that spoken language was an imperfect realization of the pure written version.

The descriptive practices of structural linguists suggested a number of hypotheses about language learning，and hence about language teaching as well.For example，since linguists normally described languages beginning with the phonological level and finishing with the sentence level，it was assumed that this was also the appropriate sequence for learning and teaching.Since speech was now held to be primary and writing secondary，it was assumed that language teaching should focus on mastery of speech and that writing or even written prompts should be withheld until reasonably late in the language learning process.Since the structure is what is important and unique about a language，early practice should focus on mastery of phonological and grammatical structures rather than on mastery of vocabulary.

Out of these various influences emerged a number of learning principles，which became the psychological foundations of audiolingualism and came to shape its methodological practices.Among the more central are the following：

（a）Foreign language learning is basically a process of mechanical habit formation.Good habits are formed by giving correct responses rather than by making mistakes.By memorizing dialogues and performing pattern drills，the chances of producing mistakes are minimized.Language is verbal behavior—that is，the automatic production and comprehension of utterances.

（b）Analogy provides a better foundation for language learning than analysis.Analogy involves the processes of generalization and discrimination.Explanations of rules are therefore not given until students have practiced a pattern in a variety of contexts and are thought to have acquired a perception of the analogies involved.Drills can enable learners to form correct analogies.Hence the approach to the teaching of grammar is essentially inductive rather than deductive.

（c）Language skills are learned more effectively if the items to be learned in the target language are presented in spoken form before they are seen in written form.Aural-oral training is needed to provide the foundation or the development of other language skills.

（d）The meanings that the words of a language have for the native speaker can be learned only in a linguistic and cultural context and not in isolation.Teaching a language thus involves teaching aspects of the cultural system of the people who speak the language（Rivers，1964：19-22）.

In advocating these principles，proponents of audiolingualism were drawing on the theory of a well-developed school of American psychology—behaviorism.The prominent Harvard behaviorist B.F.Skinner had elaborated a theory of learning applicable to language learning in his influential book Verbal Behavior（1957），in which he stated，“We have no reason to assume...that verbal behavior differs in any fundamental respect from non-verbal behavior，or that any new principles must be invoked to account for it”（1957：10）.

In the early sixties，audiolingualism had raised hopes of ushering in a golden age of language learning.By the end of the decade，people found its theoretical basis weak，it became the whipping boy for all that was wrong with language teaching.Empirical research did not conclusively establish its superiority，and teachers，using audiolingual materials and applying the Audio-Lingual Method conscientiously，complained about the lack of effectiveness of the techniques in the long run and the boredom they engendered among students.

In view of these criticisms，it is necessary to remind oneself of the major contributions of audiolingualism to language teaching.First，it was among the first theories to recommend the development of a language teaching theory on declared linguistic and psychological principles.Second，it attempted to make language learning accessible to large groups of ordinary learners.In other words，this theory proposed that language teaching should be organized in such a way as not to demand great intellectual feats of abstract reasoning to learn a language.Third，it stressed syntactical progression，while previously methods had tended to be preoccupied with vocabulary and morphology.Fourth，it led to the development of simple techniques，without translation of varied，graded，and intensive practice of specific features of the language.Last，it developed the separation of the language skills into a pedagogical device.