Brief Analysis of Structural Syllabus in English Teaching

【Abstract】From modern language teaching began to take shape， an endless stream of teaching methods and syllabuses come into being. A important representative of them is structural syllabus. This paper will briefly introduce the historical background， theoretical foundation， main characteristics， pro and cons of it and deepen readers’ understanding of structural syllabus.

【Key words】syllabus； structural syllabus； English teaching

【作者簡介】沈美序（1994- ），女，遼寧鐵嶺人，沈陽師范大學大學外語教學部碩士在讀，研究方向：課程與教學論

（英語）。

I. Introduction

Syllabus is the description of the planning and framework for a course of study， and may list the learning goals， objectives， contents， processes， resources， and means of evaluation planned for learners. It is fundamental to language teaching. Therefore it is necessary to have an in-depth understanding of its main components and characteristics.

II. Structural Syllabus

1.The Background and Characteristics of Structural Syllabus

Structural syllabus is also known as formal syllabus or grammatical syllabus. According to Wilkins’s（1976） view， it is a synthetic syllabus. This syllabus originated in the 1920s. It was deeply influenced by dominant structuralists’ view of language and behaviorism. 1915 Switzerland linguist Saussure’s Course in General Linguistics came out， which laid the foundation of structural linguistics. Structuralists mainly represented by Bloomfield believe that language is made up of a system of descriptive language items or structural items at different levels from phonemes to sentences. On the basis of structuralism， structural syllabus holds that language is a visible code， so that language learning is to get a set of grammar rules and structure. Language learning is like to build a house which is accumulated by knowledge. What Learners face are isolated parts of the target language. All contents are carefully arranged in accordance with the teaching situation. Learners are supposed to learn and accumulate individual and unrelated language items， then recombine them. Meanwhile， Structuralism adopted behaviorism’s view that was the most authoritative at that time into their theory. So under structural syllabus， learners must establish a set of stimulus-response habits of language.

2.Aim of Structural Syllabus

Structural syllabus’s aim is to require learners to master linguistic form， like phonemic system， morphemic system， syntactic system. They need to know the sounds in language， the rules for determining which sounds can combine with each other and in which order to form words. They also need to know these rules of word formation in the language and grammar rules to form grammatical correct sentences. When they know all these rules and have learned selected vocabulary， they know the language naturally. Students are expected to use language after combining language items. Recombination of language is the ultimate aim of language learning. So it pays more attention to language accuracy than fluency. Structural syllabus’s major application is in the audiolingual method and situational language teaching.

3.Merits and Demerits of Structural Syllabus

Structural syllabus was formed before the emergence of modern language teaching. So it is a traditional and complete syllabus after a long practice with a lot of experience. For teachers， it’s convenient to arrange courses according to structural syllabus. In addition， it provides learners with systematic teaching materials with a complete range of structures. Meanwhile accuracy of linguistic form and the sentences are highly emphasized， so they can master main sentence patterns and the language rules to make grammatically correct sentences easily. But because of too much emphasis on accuracy and a large number of vocabulary memory in language teaching， learners can often only use grammar and vocabulary to do some translation exercises or drill patterns in practical application. And the most important is that though learners master the knowledge and linguistic forms of the target language， they do not understand how to use these language items in real life and communication with people. The root cause is that structural syllabus cannot provide true communicative competence.

III. Conclusion

At present， the structural syllabus is still the most commonly used syllabus in our language teaching. Its concise and clear structure facilitates students to form systematic theoretical construction， and facilitates teachers to arrange teaching activities. For its shortcomings， we should combine with other teaching syllabus to make up for its limitations in communication.

References：

[1]Janice Yalden，Principles of course design for language teaching[M].Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2000.