21. Stages of the formation of the theory and methodology of teaching IL as a science.

The history of learning foreign languages ​​goes back centuries. During the existence of ancient Rome, knowledge of foreign languages ​​was already necessary to maintain trade and cultural relations between states. The main foreign languages ​​were: Greek (in the Roman era) and Latin (in the Middle Ages). Moreover, the Latin language was studied as a foreign language for almost 15 centuries. The method of teaching Latin has had a significant impact on the teaching of living Western European languages.
The formation of national languages, as well as the efforts of such scholars as V. Ratikhia, Ya. A. Komensky and others, contributed to the penetration of the native language into the school. After the schools began to teach in the students' native language, Latin has indeed become a foreign language. Hence the need to use translation as a means of disclosing the meaning of Latin words. Ratikh (1571-1635) took the first steps in applying translation as a means of semantization. The basis of teaching Latin as a foreign language, he proposed to put the original text. And he preferred vocabulary, not grammar. In the history of the methodology, the method of teaching a foreign language, proposed by V. Ratikhiy, was called the analytical-inductive method. Ya.A. Komensky (1592-1670) for the first time proposed and tried to put into practice the principle of conscious learning of foreign skills and demanded that the study of languages ​​be visual, i.e. went along with the study of things. He assigned a large role to student activity in the classroom. Unlike V. Ratikhiya, Ya.A. Komensky proposed to analyze specially composed light and accessible texts of an educational nature. The way of teaching foreign languages, proposed by Ya.A. Komensky, was called the visual-intuitive method.
The grammar-translation method of teaching living foreign languages ​​prevailed over 200 years to the 70s of the 19th century. Its vitality is explained by the following reasons: a) an established tradition of learning foreign languages ​​for the development of formal logical thinking of students, b) its relative flexibility of adaptability to the changing social requirements of society, c) little demanding of theoretical practical training of teachers of foreign languages.
In accordance with the rationalistic concept of the XIX century, the ide was seen as a reflection of logical categories, therefore the basis of language learning was grammar. It was studied mechanically regardless of the text. The grammar rules were illustrated with examples. Students first memorized individual words with their translation and then constructed separate sentences based on grammatical rules. The language material was fixed by performing exercises in translating individual sentences from the native language into a foreign one. Thus, the process of mastering the language wore a synthetic character. Among the representatives of this method can be called I. Meydingera, G. Ollendorf and others.
In 1783 the French grammar written by M. Neidinger was published. He believed that the best way to learn a foreign language is to learn grammar rules, words and sentences. The prevailing place in his book is transferable exercises. Sentences are constructed by substituting foreign language words into phrases of the native language. To facilitate the translation, sentences of the native language will be developed according to the syntax rules of the language being studied. For example, instead of "I have a book", "" I have a book. " 3. Lexical-translational or analytical method.
In the method of teaching living languages, the lexical-translational method develops in parallel with the grammar-translation method. The essence of this method lies in the analysis of a coherent text, and not in an abstract study of grammar. Students are immediately invited to read the original text with the literal word for word translation to it. The text is currently analyzed, its grammatical commentary is given. The rules of grammar and tin are learned after reading and parsing the text; the prominent theorists of this method were Frenchman J.Jacoto and the Englishman DGamilton.
The main socio-economic factors of direct methods include the rapid economic development of the main capitalist countries (USA, Germany, Japan, Russia and other countries), as well as technical discoveries that contributed to the strengthening of international relations and evolved Great need for people fluent in foreign languages. In addition, the increased seizure of colonies necessitated the preparation of a large number of people who know foreign languages.
The emerging social demands of society in the mass preparation of people fluent in foreign languages ​​could not be solved with the help of translation methods. Therefore, they were replaced by direct methods of teaching foreign languages.
The direct method or the method of reform took shape in the 80s of the XIX century and existed for about 40 years. The direct method is not a uniform flow. The general principles inherent in the direct method were advanced by V. Fietor in 1882 and to some extent shared by all its representatives. The basic principles of the direct method are as follows:
1) oral speech is the basis of learning;
2) the sound of speech is primary, so the focus should be the sound, not the letter;
3) vocabulary is learned only in a phrase;
4) the grammar is learned inductively;
5) translation from the native language is excluded;
6) the language is learned on the basis of imitation and analogy.
MDBerlitz built training mainly on conversation (dialogue). A foreign language, according to the author, should be learned in the same way as a child masters the native language, by imitation, repetition and direct association of the word with the subject.
Francois Gouin (1631 -1898)
The main prerequisites of F.Guen's system are the same as in MD. Berlitz
New in his system is that the semantics of vocabulary is introduced with the help of "internal clarity", based on a logical sequence of actions taken; and all vocabulary is classified on the basis of 5 thematic series (“home life”, “school”, “society”, “nature”, “crafts”), which in turn are divided into 10-15 smaller thematic subseries, each of which is divided for 50 lessons. Each lesson includes 20-30 consecutive phrases, which are consistently the development of a particular action. The teacher does a series of actions calling them. At a more advanced stage, the series are presented as text. Grammar is also assimilated in series-based actions.
The system developed by F. Guzne is more thoughtful, consistent, integral and emotional. At the beginning, the “series” of instruction arouses students' interest, develops all types of speech activity, then turns into its opposite, students stop thinking and repeat phrases mechanically. The absence of a natural form of conversation-dialogue and a coherent text give the whole work an artificial character due to the extremely fine crushing of each series and inventing strained, unnatural situations.
MD Berlitz and F. Guen played a large role in the reform of the teaching of foreign languages, but in general, their system was not used in school. Certain elements of both systems were readily used and used by textbook authors and teachers. It should not be forgotten that these two systems are on the threshold of that stage, which in the methodology of teaching foreign languages ​​is called the period of "Reform".
The same group of supporters of the direct method, who completely excluded their native language from learning foreign languages, includes S. Schweitzer, E. Simono and M. Walter.
After the congress of neophilologists, official recognition of the new method gradually began in all the leading countries of Europe. In Prussia in France, in Russia a new method is introduced by circulars of the ministries of education.
The period of "Reform" is one of the most difficult historical stages in the development of teaching foreign languages. During this period there were completely different methods and directions (grammar-translational and direct methods), and at the same time the origins of the conscious-comparative method were born. The leading place was taken by the direct or visual-intuitive method.