halliday in the classroom

GE: Halliday in the Classroom | Danyal | September 13th, 2001

The GE module is fascinating and provides one with far deeper insights into contemporary English grammar. But as a fellow course participant remarked to me recently, can it be, or when should it be applied in the classroom?

SFPCA does allow a clause to be divided into meaningful groups with an apparent logic to the teacher, and to me at least, this is its greatest strength. But surely I can only meaningfully articulate this to students who have benefited from prior exposure to this grammar?

I hope we can have a discussion here based on any other teacher's tentative steps into the area of Hallidayan grammar application in the classroom, particularly since I teach many academic writing classes, who might best benefit from this.

Regards,

Danyal

Re: Halliday in the Classroom | Colin Graham | September 13th, 2001

Hi Danyal, and other interested grammarians,

My views about GE are:

a) Why is it only a single unit?

b) Why is it only Hallidayan [see (a)]?

c) Why did Chomsky get it almost entirely wrong [see (a)]?

d) Why is it so difficult to get a really narrowed focus for an assignment {see (a)}? and

e) Why do so few participants take it or get scared off by it?

The thing I really like about the systemic approach (why not more about the Prague school [see (a)]?) is that it feels right and it seems to make sense. I have used it with students, in a limited way, but the approach I am taking is trying to get them to make their own grammars and become aware of language patterns for themselves, especially patterns with verbs.

I used to be a math teacher, and I think that the problem many people have/had with learning math was that everyone needs to build their own mathematics from scratch. I see math as being the language/science of describing pattern, and I think learning a foreign language and learning math have many more characteristics in common than compared with other 'academic' subjects. Grammar, to me, is the patterning of language, so it looks like math, so it's scary....

Anyway, enough of the ramble. Good luck with the GE module, There are a few of us on the list who can blind you with technicalities, if that's what you want, but if you can't convince ESOL teachers to study it, how can you expect your students to do so...?

Colin Graham

Re: GE: Halliday in the Classroom | Pinkie | September 13th, 2001

Danyal:

Very interesting question. Here's my two ha'p'orth! I'm an ardent fan of GE, Halliday, and grammar in general. On the whole, my view is that grammatical analysis at this level of complexity is much more useful to the teacher than to the student. In particular, I think grammatical analysis skills are very important for course design and materials writing, and more relevant to teaching writing than to teaching speaking (because the accuracy vs fluency balance is different).

My own experience is that I often go into some aspect of language in considerable depth, then "retreat" from that depth in presenting it to Ss. Here's a rather fanciful metaphor! I'm a naturalist-guide working on the Great Barrier Reef: I take tourists out on snorkeling trips. But before doing that, I go out myself with the full scuba kit, exploring and looking for the best spots. Hallidayan grammar (or whatever other framework I use) is my scuba kit; the pedagogic "rules" I offer my Ss are snorkels [Told you it was fanciful!].

One aspect of academic writing for which I've been scuba diving and then given my Ss snorkels is anaphoric reference. I've been racking my brains to think of other aspects for which I've used Hallidayan terminology (or some other formal grammatical terminology) directly in my classes. The only thing I can think of is a sort of simplified process-participant terminology for talking about the ways in which the passive is used. I've tried fairly sophisticated classroom analyses of the choice between definite article and no article, though I'm far from satisfied with the outcome so far (which I guess is is a rather common experience!).

I also think that Given/New ordering could be taught "directly", though as yet I've never focused on this in my classes [Also, my own feeling is that Given/New ordering is better seen as a "discourse" issue than a "grammatical" issue].

I too would be VERY interested to hear what other CPs have to say about this- including you, Danyal!

Best,

Pinkie

GE: Halliday in the Classroom) | Pinkie | September 20th, 2001

I shan't enter into the terrifying-current-situation debate, though I can certainly see that if you're giving general English classes at the moment then it's of pretty much unavoidable relevance to your work.

To respond very briefly to a couple of Colin's comments....

Why did Chomsky get it almost entirely wrong?

Bit polemical that, no Colin?! I certainly agree that he got a lot of it wrong (most notably the "pre-programming" of grammar in the brain) but not absolutely everything! Also, I don't think that Halliday vs. Chomsky is a very helpful way of looking at things. I think they're looking pretty much at two different areas: Chomsky at the "combining rules" governing the way in which words can be put together to make "grammatical" sentences, Halliday at the reasons for choices between "grammatical" alternatives. In my view both approaches are important and valuable: though each have conceptual and methodological problems. I think there's sometimes a danger of saying "I prefer Halliday to Chomsky, so the combining-rules approach is wrong". I disagree with that.

Why is it so difficult to get a really narrowed focus for an assignment

Dunno. Perhaps because it's particularly difficult to find an unanswered question? Perhaps because grammar IS tricky, so that it's a problem getting sufficiently to grips with it in a relatively short time? One of my biggest problems with my own GE assignment was not realizing what I've argued above: that Hallidayan grammar is basically about reasons for choices between grammatical alternatives, not grammaticality per se.

On to Something Entirely Different ...does anyone know of a book or other source that provides a list of common lexicogrammatical problems among speakers of different languages? Let me explain ...I teach Spanish students, so I know about the common Spanish-English grammatical interferences (e.g. using "the" when they shouldn't) and false friends (e.g. "actually" to mean "at the moment"). But I've never taught anywhere else (except VERY briefly to mixed-nationality and Japanese-speaking classes in the UK): so I don't have much idea of the most common problems for speakers of other "major" languages. Is there any sort of magic reference book to solve this problem?

BTW- I'd really be interested in hearing other people's views on the classroom relevance (or irrelevance) of grammatical analysis.

Best,

Pinkie
Spain

GE: Halliday and stative verbs | Rob Salter | September 20th, 2001

Does anybody know a reference for Halliday's take on stative verbs not being used in the present progressive? I know that some of these verbs (look, smell, taste, remain, etc) could be listed under the heading of Attributive Process, but I am not certain how something such as "I am knowing his telephone number" would be described.

Rob Salter

Re: Halliday in the Classroom | Rita Balbi | September 20th, 2001

That's a question I asked myself and I don't think I have found an answer yet. What I consider important for the classroom is to base grammar on the analysis of authentic language rather than on invented examples and I have started some activities along this line; I am not convinced yet that using his terminology with students who are accustomed to a different one would help; teaching the terminology would be time consuming and, for some, it might be a cause of confusion. I would consider it appropriate for students specializing in languages or linguistics at university level.

Rita Balbi

Re: Reply to Pinkie | Francesca | September 20th, 2001

Hi Pinkie,

In reply to your request for a reference book of difficulties encountered by different nationalities when learning English, I have a copy of Learner English by Michael Swan and Bernard Smith (Cambridge 1987) that I had to buy during my diploma course. It's a reference book for teachers of English as a foreign language and looks at 19 major languages in terms of interference and other problems (there are sections on grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary and punctuation). I think it might be what you're looking for but you'll need to find out whether it's still in print.

As for the relevance of grammatical analysis in the classroom, I didn't take GE but I did take TDA, which led me to reading in detail about Halliday's functional grammar. At the time I can remember feeling particularly confident when grammatical issues came up and being able to explain the finer points of relative clauses to students with a confidence that I had never felt before. Although I'm no grammar fan, I acknowledge that some learners are and find that deeper grammatical explanations help them to learn. In this case, it is very useful to have a thorough knowledge of grammar. Unfortunately, I've now forgotten a great deal of what I learnt then, but I do still teach anaphoric and cataphoric (retrospective and advance) labeling for students of the Cambridge Advanced Exam (without using the terminology, I hasten to add) as there is a task in the reading paper where one has to reassemble a text and being able to see connections within the discourse is essential for success.

Go to the workshop if you can, here in S America there aren't any, so you should make the most of it.

Francesca

Re: Quickly for Francesca and Rob | Pinkie | September 28th, 2001

Francesca ...MANY thanks for the "Learner English" reference- this is precisely what I was looking for. I've checked up on it, and a second edition has just come out (Eds Swan and Smith, CUP, 2001; details at eg amazon.co.uk).

Rob ...I think Halliday talks about this (present tense choice for mental vs. material processes) on p.116 of "An Introduction to Functional Grammar" 2 nd Ed.