IntroductionPreviously, one of the most controversial issues about grammar was whether to teach it or not. Some, such as Krashen (1981), assume that second language learning is very much like the acquisition of first language. Krashen argues that comprehensible input is the only true cause of second language acquisition. He recommends that teachers should abandon grammar teaching, and concentrate instead on providing lots of comprehensible input so that learners can acquire a second language naturally, in much the same way they have acquired their mother tongue. According to Richard (as cited in Celce-Murica, 1988, p.1), the basic assumption of such an approach is that "communicative classrooms provide a better environment for second language acquisition than classrooms dominated by formal instruction." Richard claims that no actual empirical studies have been conducted proving that communicative classrooms produce better language learners than the more traditional teacher-dominated classrooms.Today, the idea of not teaching grammar has been discarded, but there is some controversy over how to teach it. Should it be taught explicitly or implicitly? Or a combination of both is sufficient. Some researchers, such as Long and Robinson (1998), Rutherford and Sharewood Smith (1985) agree that explicit teaching methods are more beneficial than implicit ones while others, such as Williams (1999), agree with the opposite of this idea .There are some, such as Lynch (2005) who believe a combination of the two methods are beneficial for optimal learning.Different attitudes have led to different approaches and methods of instruction in grammar. Two approaches are implicit and explicit instruction. Ellis (2009) states in implicit instruction learners are required to induce rules from examples given to them while in explicit instruction learners are given a rule which they then practice using. It should be noted that implicit / explicit instruction is defined from the perspective of teacher's, material writer's, or course designers'; while implicit/explicit learning is defined from the learners' perspective. There is no correlation between them.Statement of the ProblemThere are various theories on how a second language is learned, how to implement those theories in the classroom. Two of which are implicit and explicit instruction. In implicit instruction, English grammar is learnt naturally without paying much conscious attention to rules of grammar. The learners are expected to induce the rules. In explicit instruction, it is believed that grammar should be taught explicitly. Learners are given the rules and they practice using them.This study focuses on comparing these two approaches of instruction in grammar. The grammatical structure that will be taught is prepositions of time and place.2.Literature ReviewUr (2011) argues that implicit teaching requires students to use grammatical forms and meanings without verbalizing the rules. Implicit teaching is similar to inductive teaching which means that students infer the rules from the examples presented to them. They are never taught the actual rules. Ellis (2009) defines the term instruction as "an attempt to intervene in interlanguage development" (p.16). He divides the language instruction into two categories of indirect and direct intervention .He maintains that indirect intervention aims to "create conditions where learners can learn experientially through learning how to communicate in the L2" (p.16).Task-based syllabus is the best type of this instruction. He also defines direct intervention as "the pre-emptive specification of what it is that learners are supposed to learn and, typically, draws on a structural syllabus" (p.16). According to Ellis implicit and explicit instruction are not the same as this distinction but can be mapped onto it. Implicit instruction enable the learners to infer rules without awareness .It provides learners with specific examples of a rule or pattern and they infer the rule or pattern without being focused explicitly on it . …
[1]
W. Rutherford,et al.
Consciousness-raising and Universal Grammar
,
1985
.
[2]
V. Scott.
An Empirical Study of Explicit and Implicit Teaching Strategies in French
,
1989
.
[3]
R. Schmidt.
The role of consciousness in second language learning
,
1990
.
[4]
Virginia M. Scott,et al.
Explicit and Implicit Grammar Teaching Strategies: New Empirical Data.
,
1990
.
[5]
M. Smith.
Speaking to many minds: on the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner
,
1991
.
[6]
Michael H. Long.
Focus on Form: A Design Feature in Language Teaching Methodology
,
1991
.
[7]
J. Metheny.
Consciousness-Raising Activities:"For and Since"and"Too and Either"
,
1997
.
[8]
R. Ellis,et al.
Preemptive Focus on Form in the ESL Classroom
,
2001
.
[9]
Rod Ellis,et al.
Methodology in Language Teaching: Grammar Teaching – Practice or Consciousness-Raising?
,
2002
.
[10]
Roxanne Silvaniuk.
Methodology in Language Teaching:An Anthology of Current Practice
,
2003
.
[11]
Karen L. Ziemer Andrews,et al.
The Effects of Implicit and Explicit Instruction on Simple and Complex Grammatical Structures for Adult English Language Learners.
,
2007
.
[12]
Nastaran Nazari.
The Effect of Implicit and Explicit Grammar Instruction on Learners’ Achievements in Receptive and Productive Modes
,
2013
.