AUDIOLINGUAL METHOD VERSUS COMMUNICATIVE METHOD Finocchiaro and Brumfit 1983

1
AUDIOLINGUAL METHOD VERSUS COMMUNICATIVE
METHOD(Finocchiaro and Brumfit 1983)

• Late 1960s- 1970s
• Need to focus in lang teaching on communicative
  proficiency rather than on mere mastery of
  structures.
• Forerunners C. Candlin, H. Widdowson, Hymes).
  European Common Market. 1980 Van Ek and
  Alexander (the Threshold level), Wilkins, Brumfit
  (functional-notional categories).
• Meaning is paramount. Dialogs, if used, centre
  around communicative functions and are not
  normally memorized.
• Contextualization is a basic premise.
• Lang learning is learning to communicate.
• Communicative activities from the very beginning.
• Comprehensible pronunciation. Native lang
  accepted where feasible.
• Translation accepted in cases.
• All skills.
• Language is created by the individual often
  through trial and error.
• Fluency.
• Competence and performance.

• 1940s
• Origins and forerunners Behavioural psychology
  (Skinner), structural linguistics (Bloomfield,
  Fries, Lado), ASTP (Army Specialized Training
  Programs)
• Attends to structure and form, more than meaning.
• Demands memorization of structure-based dialogs.
• Language items are not necessarily
  contextualised.Lang learning is learning
  structures, sounds, or words.
• Drilling is a central technique.
• Native-speaker-like pronunciation.
• Use of native lang forbidden.Translation
  forbidden.
• Reading and writing deferred.
• Language is habit, so errors must be prevented at
  all costs.
• Accuracy.
• Linguistic competence.