Grammar in Second Language Writing

By Manuel Espinal

Manuel Espinal

There is no doubt that grammar instruction is very important for developing learners’ proficiency in both writing and communicating appropriately and meaningfully in a second language. However, since I have spoken enough about this issue in previous reports (the role of grammar in developing learners’ writing skills), let me limit the influence of grammar rules to a series of variables related to learners, such as: age, learners’ language background and the tasks to be assigned.

With respect to learners’ age, it is well known that adults and younger learners can learn through the use of explicit and implicit rules of the language. Thus, Explicit rules refer to those grammatical rules that are learned as a result of an instructional process, and learners, most of the times, are familiar with the terminology applied to nominate such rules, for example: subject, predicate, noun phrase, head of a noun phrase, verbal phrase, verb phrase, etc., which both adults and younger learners can use them as reference for giving any explanation with regard to that point.  On the other hand, implicit rules are referred to as those that learners or speakers use and respect while speaking or writing, but they are unfamiliar with the terminology for referring to those rules.

Along this line, we need to determine the learners’ language background. However, with regard to the learners’ language background, we must ponder two very important factors: the setting (context) and the abilities of learners. We refer to those learners who live where English, in this case, is spoken (English as a second language) or those where the classroom is the most suitable environment for performing that language (English as a foreign language).

Considering that our primary focus is the role of grammar in writing in a second language (English) researches (see Reid, 1998b and Ferris and Hedgcock, 2004) on that issue claim that those learners who have been exposed to the formality of classroom (EFL or international students) tend to commit less errors in their written texts in comparison to those who has been learning English exposed to the informality of everyday speech (ESL), because the first ones have been educated under the grammar teaching format.

Further to what has been said on the issue, it is imperative to say that students learning English with no or less contact with native speakers use continuously grammatical rules and they keep the formality for writing even for orality, when it is well known that the repertoire for speaking a language is very reduced in comparison to the register for writing. Also, teachers for long time remain detecting and correcting errors when the setting is a country where English is not spoken for everyday activities and the teaching process is completely centered on the classroom setting. In a situation like that, students are regularly exposed to an explicit grammar instruction.

Observing the role of teachers in respect of the errors correctness via explicit rules, there are opposing points of view in which some researchers cast doubts on the effectiveness of correction for improving writers’ accuracy through the time (see Truscott, 1996) and those researchers who argue that is very difficult for adults to be effective if they do not receive attention for their writing activities (see Ferris, 1999, 2011).  

Stephen Krashen

According to Ferris through explicit instruction, adult learners may reduce errors and improve their writing at short-term.  By the same line of preserving the influence of correctness in students’ drafts, Silva (1993) maintains that the effectiveness of correction is a process, and therefore it takes its time. And, naturally, Stephen Krashen (1982) with his Acquisition-learning hypothesis and Monitor hypothesis, who is one of the most critical researcher to the intervention of explicit grammar instruction in the natural process of acquisition of the second language. Krashen see no role of the form-focused instruction for developing skills writers of a second language, on the contrary, he argues that kind of instruction impede the learners’ communicative competences, and nowadays grammar instruction must be focused on developing learners’ abilities for communication, for fluently conveying accurate information. 

And finally, the tasks assigned by teachers must consider the proficiency level of learners.  In the early stage of instruction, the terms to be used must be simple and easy to deal with or understand which turn to be more complex as learners advance in learning grammar rules. The tasks must not be at random, but planned with relation to the learners’ knowledge background and ability to discriminate most of the rules through their formation process.

 Activities such as texts analysis through reading and composing papers must be frequently (that is what I call: practice) developed from basic structures to complex structures. Those tasks or activities might be developed individually or in groups. The tasks might consist of verb tenses combinations, use of the appropriate connectors (cohesive devices) for making transitions from one paragraph to another and giving cohesion and coherence to the written texts, use of the correct clause for giving support to the previous proposition, use of lexical ties such as synonyms and antonyms, etc.

As teachers and students are able to assume their role in the writing process, through explicit or implicit rules instruction, the results will be more positive for both. So, awareness must be raised among them in order to achieve the purposes of grammar in the development of writing skills.