Language Acquisition Pedagogy

Salutations:

I think all will agree that language acquisition is best obtained by the student through expressing him or herself in that language. This is why in most language courses a great deal of emphasis is placed on conversation.

As a young immigrant, I had learned English in primary school naturally, even though I had around six years' worth of catching up to do vis-à-vis my native-born peers. In time, I acquired an intermediate level of proficiency in French, such that I've not had occasion to feel helpless during my Parisian visit. As for German, I have also been rather successful for a part-time self-learner, after a year or so of which initial "reconnaissance" I finally proceeded to take actual college-level courses. As with English, I found it absloutlely crucial that grammar and vocabulary were made meaningful to me through conversation and written expression. I daresay that rote memory is actually a poor substitute for simply expressing oneself, particularly through writing. I acheived my intermediate level of success because of my attempts at essays, short stories, even "poetry" of my own in English, French, and German.

(I even became proficient at mathematics (as opposed to mere "arithmetic") up to Calculus II in college, simply on the basis of this realization of the power of language -- that is, any vehicle of communication, including music and sex and now dancing and even, IMHO, violence itself -- to express and transform; once it all became personally meaningful, I was able to own the language, and begin its mastery.)

Why do language teachers not recognize this? I realize how much harder it is to mark such exercises, rather than simple multiple-choice or blank-fill-in questions, yet there is no better way for language acquisition than through self-expression. Unfortunately, it is just that opportunity for self-expression, with the learned correction by an instructor WRT technical matters, which is almost always absent in courses and texts.

As I try my old tactic of reconnoitering the subject beforehand, in anticipation of Latin 101 this Fall, and become increasingly, though not "fatally", dismayed at the very stodgy state of pedagogy in this tongue as reflected in the comparatively few available texts for it (if Wheelock is the best y'all can do, then "Houston" ("mission control", if you get my drift) definitely has problems), I'm convinved that the issue is of a "customer service" sort, where the end-user has not been always kept faithfully in mind.

For I've perused "Ecce Romani", "Henle's Latin", "Oxford Latin", and Moreland & Fleischer's intensive-study volume (as well as the aforementioned Wheelock (this in two editions, natch!)), and I'm coming to an epiphany of sorts about language teaching: somehow, missing is the sense that language is a vehicle for expression and communication. These Latin textbooks in particular (even "Ecce Romani", for all its "user-friendly" color graphics) demonstrate more "documentary" concerns, almost as if they were reference works. Why is this?

Would I were a master of these languages, that I may write my own texts, with an emphasis on empowering the student to speak and write and think in the language! Surely all instructional materials purport just those goals, but I haven't seen one yet with a demonstrable concern for expression...I'm not trying to get around the absolute necessity of drudge-work where grammar and vocabulary is concerned; I'm simply advocating that teachers investigate the psychological heart of a language and structure their texts and/or lesson plans accordingly! For language is about conversing and writing, and an emphasis, even during the first year, on helping the student express his or her own thoughts and feelings will, I am convinced, imbibe grammatical rules and vocabulary much more quickly, easily, and securely than otherwise.

For example, instead of simply having students learn vocabulary and verb conjugations in the abstract, instructors/authors ought to, say, present the following exercise: given a set of verbs and a vocabulary (wild some-things provocative and melodramatic, like "(Sabine) women" and "(final) assault", say), construct a few short paragraphs culminating in a certain sentence (e.g., "after the final Roman assault, the Sabine women ran away in anticipation of the fashions of war in those days")....

Sigh...I'm just frustrated that sight seems to be lost of the penultimate purpose of language, as evidenced by long-standing pedagogy in the classes and texts with which I'm familiar...the protest that novitiates must learn some rules first is a red herring, for even a dilettante can be taught to mix subtle shades and nuanced tones from the primary colors -- how much moreso the well-guided student!

Oh well let me get back to my Wheelock and Schaum's Outline....