교수법 < 자연적 접근 방법

The Natural Approach

자연적 접근 방법(The Natural Approach)은 Tracy Terrel이 개발하고 Stephen Krashen이 지지한 언어 교수 접근법으로 언어 학습은 우리 인간들이 모국어를 자연스럽게 습득하는 방식으로 언어 학습이 생산된다고 주장하는 접근법입니다. 이 접근법은 언어 교수에 대한 의사소통 접근법(a communicative approach)을 지지하고, 한편 이전의 교수법인 청화식 방법 (the audiolingual method)과 상황 언어 교수 접근법 (the situational language teaching approach)에 반대합니다. 

 

 

Krashen과 Terrel (1983)은 후자의 방법론들이 "언어 습득에 대산 실제 이론이 아니라 언어의 이론과 구조"에 기반하지 않다고 믿었습니다.  (사진: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiTsduRreug&t=579s)

자연적 접근 방법 vs. 직접식 방법

"자연적(Natural)"이란 말이 외국어 학습 방법도 모국어 습득과 같이 자연스러운 상황에서 무의식적으로 이루어지는 것이 바람직하다고 생각해서 사람들은 이 두 가지 접근법을 동일하게 생각하기도 하지만, 자연적 접근 방법과 직접식 방법 (자연적 교수법, Natural Method로도 불림) 일부 특징을 공유하고 있고 중요한 차이점이 있습니다. 직접식 방법과 같이 자연적 접근은 다음과 같습니다. 

"제2언어 습득에서 발견되는 자연주의적 원칙에 부합한다고 믿었다. 그러나 직접식 방법과는 달리 교사의 독백, 직접적인 반복, 형식적 질문화 대답, 그리고 목표어 문장의 정확한 생산을 그리 중요시하지 않았다"  (Richards and Rodgers, 1986:129)언어 이론

Krashen과 Terrell은 의사소통은 언어의 일차적인 기능으로 보았고, 쓸모없는 언어 구조보다 교수 소통 능력을 중시하면서 언어 교수에 의사소통적 접근을 지지했습니다.  자연적 접근 방법과 다른 방법들과 접근법을 정말로 구별하는 것을 언어 사용에 관한 전제이고 어휘의 중요성이라고 주장했습니다. 

• 의사소통 수단과 메시지를 위한 도구로서의 언어
• 언어가 기본적으로 언어의 어휘이기 때문에 어휘가 가장 중요

이 의미는 언어 습득자가 목표어로 메시지를 이해할 수 없고 충분한 어휘 목록으로 개발되지 않는다면, 언어 습득은 일어날 수 없다는 의미입니다. 사실, 문법 구조만을 포함하는 메시지보다 어휘 목록만을 포함하는 메시지를 구축하는 것이 더 쉬울 것입니다. 

 

학습 이론

Krashen은 여러 가지 학습 원리에 자연적 접근 방법을 구축하였습니다.

 

1. 습득-학습 가설 (The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis)

Krashen의 습득과 학습 사이의 차이를 두었습니다.

• Krashen은 실제 의사소통을 위한 언어를 사용함으로 개발되는 능력으로 습득을 정의한다.  습득은 어린이들에서 발견되는 제1언어 개발과 같이 하나의 언어를 말하기 위한 능력을 개발하는 자연적인 방법이며, 여기에는 언어 이해를 통한 그리고 유의미한 언어소통을 위한 언어 사용을 통한 자연스러운 언어 능력의 개발이 포함된다.
• 그러나 학습은 한 언어의 형식적인 지식을 의미한다. 그것은 한 언어에 대한 의식적인 규칙이 개발되는 과정이다. 그 결과는 언어의 형태에 대한 명시적 지식이며 이 지식을 발화하는 능력으로 이어진다. 형식적인 교수는 "학습"이 일어나기 위해 필요하고, 오류의 수정은 학습된 규칙의 개발과 같이 도움이 된다.
  
  

2. 감시 장치 가설 (The Monitor Hypothesis)

의식적으로 학습된 것은 습득된 체계의 출력을 점검하거나 고치는 조정자(monitor) 또는 편집자(editor)로서만 기능할 수 있습니다. 모니터 가설은 학습된 지식을 사용하여 우리가 의사소통할 때 스스로 수정할 수 있는 것을 의미하지만, 의식적인 학습은 이 기능만을 가지고 있습니다. 아래의 3가지 조건이 감시 장치의 성공적인 이용을 보장합니다.

 

1. 시간(Time): 학습자가 학습된 규칙을 선택해서 적용하기 위한 충분한 시간
2. 형태에 초점(Focus on form): 정확성이나 출력의 형태에 초점
3. 규칙에 대한 지식(Knowledge of rules): 규칙을 아는 것이 감시 장치를 사용하기 위해 필수적
   
   

3. 자연 순서 가설 (The Natural Order Hypothesis)

문법 구조의 습득은 예견할 수 있는 순서로 진행된다. 영어를 제1언어로 습득할 경우 다른 사람들보다 먼저 어떤 문법적 구조나 형태소들을 습득할 수 있다. 자연 순서 가설은 제2언어 습득에서도 같은 자연 순서가 발견된다고 주장한다. 그리고 오류도 자연스러운 발달의 과정의 조짐이다. 학습자들의 모국어가 달라도 습득하는 도중에 (학습하는 도중이 아니라) 비슷한 오류가 나타난다.  

 

4. 입력 가설 (The Input Hypothesis)

입력 가설은 학습이 아니라 습득과 관련이 있다. 사람들은 그들의 현재의 언어 능력 수준을 약간 초과하는 입력을 이해함으로써 언어를 가장 잘 습득할 수 있다. Krashen은 이것을  L +1 으로 언급하는데 (여기에서 L+1은 자연 순서를 따른 L을 바로 뒤따르는 상태이다.) 세계, 어떠한 상황의 맥락 등에 대한 지식을 포함하여 언어적, 언어외적 문맥 단서를 통하여 이해가 습득될 수 있다.  충분한 양의 이해 가능한 입력이 보장되는 결과로써만 유창성이 나타나는 것처럼 이해가 발화의 결과를 선행한다. 이해 가능한 입력으로 Krashen은 발화를 일종의 단순화 코드로 구성되는 언어적,언어외적 문맥에 기반하여 학습자들이 이해하는 것을 의미했다. 그는 이러한 이해 가능한 입력이 있을 때, 언어 습득이 성공적으로 진행된다고 주장한다. 그는 또한 이러한 이해 가능한  입력이 충분하다면, L+1은 일반적으로 제공된다고 주장한다.

 

5. 정의적 여과 장치 가설 (Affective Filter Hypothesis)

습득에 영향을 줄 수 있는 3가지 유형의 감정적 태도 요인이 있는데, 이것들은 습득을 위해 필요한 입력을 방해하거나 차단하거나 자유롭게 지나간다. 그것들은 동기, 자신감, 불안감이다. 높은 정서적 필터를 가지고 있는 습득자들은 능력 개발에 상당한 영향을 받을 수 있다. 다시 말하면 정의적 여과 장치가 낮은 습득자들은 언어 습득에 동기가 높고 많은 입력을 찾아 받아들이고, 자신감이 높고, 불안감이 낮아서 언어 입력에 더욱 적극적이다.

 

마치면서... 

자연적 접근 방법에 따른 교수는 다음과 같은 원칙을 포함합니다. 

• 자연적 접근 방법에 따른 교수는 의사소통 능력을 강조한다.
• 그 목적 중의 하나는 초급자를 중급자로 될 수 있도록 돕는 것이다.
• 어휘는 구문 구조를 우선한다.
• 많은 이해 가능한 입력이 제공되어야 한다.
• 이해를 돕기 위한 시각 자료를 사용한다.
• 듣기와 읽기가 우선. 말하기는 다음에.
• 다음을 통하여 높은 정서적 필터를 낮춘다:
  • 형식보다는 유의한 의사소통 중요시
  • 흥미로운 이해 가능한 입력의 제공
• 이 접근법에서 사용되는 기술은 자주 다른 방법론에서 빌려서 접근법의 요구에 부합하도록 조정한다. 다음이 포함된다.
  
  • 전신 반응 교수법의 명령 훈련법(drill)
  • 직접식 방법의 활동 무언극, 제스처 및 문맥을 사용하여 질문과 답변을 유도
  • 학습자들이 과업을 수행하기 위하여 정보를 교환하는 의사소통 교수법의 그룹 활동

결론

자연적 접근 방법은 L1 습득의 특징이 L2 습득 내에서 사용되는 언어 습득의 전통에 속해 있습니다. 이 방법은 다른 방법론과 접근법의 다양한 기술을 사용합니다. 이 점은 이 방법의 장점 중의 하나인 목적을 달성하기 위함입니다. 그러나 이 접근법의 독창성은 이러한 기술에 있는 것이 아니라 언어의 문법적 숙달에만 기반된 것이 아니라 이해 가능한 입력과 유의미한 의사소통에 중점을 둔 활동을 강조한다는 점입니다. 

---

언어 습득 강의 (동영상)

[Stephen Krashen on Language Acquisition]

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiTsduRreug&t=579s( ← Stephen Krashen의 언어 습득 강의)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiTsduRreug&t=579s

The most important question, and that is: How do we acquire language? And I'd like to begin this discussion, this presentation, with an outrageous statement. In my opinion we all acquire language the same way. The reason this is an outrageous thing to say, is that these days in education, we're living in an age of invidudual variation. We're very concerned about how our student are different, not how our students are the same.

 

Those who've been around in the field for a while, remember: about 15-20 years ago, people were very concerned about something called field dependent learners and field independent learners. You give people a certain test and one group gets this treatment, one group gets the other. Then, about 15 years ago, it was left side of the brain, right side of the brain. Some people are left hemisphere thinkers, some people are right hemisphere. 

 

Then, about 10 years ago: cognitive style. The cognitive style of the home culture differs from the cognitive style of the school culture. We have a clash, etc. Well, each of the examples I gave you is probably correct. There is individual variation, and there is quite a bit of. Nevertheless, there are some things we all do the same. Let me give you some examples. 

 

Digestion: we all digest food the same. No significant individual variation. First you put it in your mouth, then you chew it up, then it goes down your throat, then into your stomach. That's how it's done everywhere. That's how it's done in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa. That's how it's done everywhere in the world. 

 

The visual system is the same everywhere. It's always the occipital lobe in the back of the brain. It's never in the side of the brain. It's never in the front of the brain. It's never in the elbow. It's done exactly the same everywhere you go. 

 

By the way, I used to use sex as an example of things everyone does the same, but some counter examples have been pointed out to me recently. Actually, I saw this movie, if you really want to know the truth. Anyway... We all require language the same. And rather than just talk about it, I'd like to show you. I'd like to take just a couple of minutes and give you some sample language lessons.

 

I'll use a language that I'm sure you've heard before and maybe some of you speak. And you can tell me, which of these two, very brief lessons you like better. Here's lesson number one: 

---

[Talking in German]... What do you think? Good lesson so far? Do you think if I kept talking to you like that, you'd pick up German? Not very likely. How about if I repeated it? Would that help? Probably not. How about if I said it louder, would that help? Probably not. How about if I said it and you repeated it back? Again, I don't think that would help. How about if I wrote it out for you, and you could see it on your television screen? That wouln't help either. How about if I wrote it out for you, and you copied it down? How about if I read it out for you, and deleted every fifth word, and you try to guess what the word is? The truth is that none of these things help, none of these things mean anything. And I hope you can see that now. Here's lesson number two.

---

And for this, you have to watch me carefully! [In German with gesture] Das ist meine Hand. Verstehen Sie dad, Hand? Everyone say "Ja!". I can hear you even though it's a TV audience. Good! Kopf. Das ist mein Kopf. Verstehen Sie Kopf? Ja? Gut! Kopf. And here I'll draw a picture now. [Drawing a picture] Kopf. Ist gut, ja? Schon. Kopf. Das ist Mr. Spock. Ja? Mr. Spock hat zei Ohren. Ohren, verstehen Sie Ohren? Er hat zwei Ohren. Ok, Mr. Spock, ja ach nein, Entschuldigung. Verstehen Sie Augen? Augen. Wie viele Augen? Eins, zwei, drei Augen. Drei Augen. Ist das richtig, drei Augen? Wie viele Augen? Eins, zwei, drei Augen. Wie viele Augen? Eins, zwei, drei Augen. Drei Augen. Ist das richtig, drei Augen? Nein! Wir haben nur zwei Augen. Mund. Verstehen Sie Mund? Und dann: hier ist eine Zigarette, ja? Nein! Zigaretten sind nicht gut. 

---

If you understood lesson number two, not every word, but more or less, I did everything necessary to teach you German. And now, I'm going to share with you the most important thing I have learned about language. Probably the best-kept secret in profession. We acquire language in one way and only one way: when we understand messages. We call this comprehensible input. We acquire language when we understand what people tell us. Not how they say it, but what they say. Or when we understand what we read. 

 

Comprehensive input, in my opinion, has been the last resort of the language teaching profession. We've tried everything else. We've tried grammar teaching, drills and exercises, computers, etc. But the only thing that seems to count, is getting messages you understand: comprehensible input. 

 

Now, one of the reasons lesson number two is better than lesson number one is: we had Mr. Spock to help us out. So anything that helps make input comprehensible, pictures, knowledge of the world, realia, etc., helps language acquisition. If comprehensible input is true, what we call the Input Hypothesis is true, other things follow from it. 

 

And a very important corollary to the input hypothesis is this: and this may come as a bit of a surprise to some of you, certainly came as a surprise to me, talking is not practicing. "Talking is not practicing", what does this mean? It means if you want to improve your Spanish, it will not help you to speak Spanish out loud in the car, as you drive to work in the morning. It will not help you to go to the bathroom, close the door, and speak Spanish to the mirror. I used to think those things help, now I think they don't. 

 

On the other hand, if we were in a German class and we could hand together for a couple of weeks, say an hour a day of Germany, and I could keep the input light and lively, as the second example, you'd start to acquire German. It would come on its own. And eventually you'd start to talk, your speaking ability would emerge gradually. 

 

Now, we have a lot of evidence that this is true. And the evidence is the professional literature, in books, in journal papers, etc. And if you're an insonmiac, you're welcome to look at all that. But rather than go through that, I'd like instead to tell you a story that illustrate the same point. I've used this story for a long time, so those who've heard it before, I've been using this for about 15 years, and the reason I keep staying with it, is that it makes the point very well. And I've decided, I've discovered, it's just about a universal experience. What has happened to me has certainly happened to you. And bear in mind, if you've heard it before, and you'retired of hearing it: think how I feel. 

---

My experience took place in 1974, when I was briefly living in exile from California, working at the City University of New York at Queens College, as director of English as a second language. And like everyone else in New York, we lived in a big apartment building. And the apartment next door to us was owned by a Japanese company. And every year there would be a new family in the apartment.

 

And every year there were the children wo couldn't speak English. And there I was: director of English as a second language. I will teach English to these children and brag about it to my friends. So I remember going up to the little girl next door, she was four years old, her name was Itomi. And I didn't know about this material on language acquisition then. Nobody did. And I thought then, the way you get people to acquire language, is you get them to practice talking. So I tried to get her to talk. I'd say: "Itomi, talk to me!", "Say good morning", "Say hi!" No response. 

 

Well, clearly, I've decided, I've got to make this more concrete. "Itomi, say ball!" No response. Well, obviously, I've got to break it down into its component parts. Let's work on initial consonants! "Say bah! Look at my lips!" Again, no response. There was a theory going around then, that a lot of people still believe, that children don't really want to acquire language, you have to kind of force it outof them. So I tried that: "I won't give you the ball until you say ball!" That didn't work either. No matter what I said, Itomi wouldn't speak. 

 

She didn't say anything the first week, she didn't say anything the second week, the first month, the second month, five months until she started to speak. Actually that's not entirely true, children during this stage do pick up certain expressions from the other children in the neighborhood. It's not real language. They understand approximately what they mean. Again, it's not real language. They have a rough idea what it means, they use it in roughly appropriate situations. Things like: "Leave me alone!", "Get out of here!" In fact one child I knew, the only thing he could say was "I kick your ass", said it everywhere. He wasn't quite sure what it meant. 

 

After about five months, Itomi started to speak, and several things were interesting about her language. First, it looked a lot like first language acquisition, the same process our children went through. One word, two words, gradually getting more complicated. Second, it came quickly. By the time Itomi and her family went back to Japan, at the end of the year, her English was closing in on the way the other children in the neighborhood were talking. 

 

The quesiton is this: what was going on during those five months? She was listening. She was picking out comprehensible input. When she started to speak, it was not the beginning of her language acquisition. Let me repeat that:  When she started to speak, it was not the beginning of her language acquisition. It was the result of all the comprehensible input she had gotten over those five months. 

 

Now, a silent period for a child in a situation like this, is not pathological, it's normal. It's what you'd expect. You'd like to have a silent period, wouldn't you? How would it be, if you had to study another language, but you went to a class, where you didn't have to say anything? Doesn't that sound wonderful? You can talk all you want, you can raise your hand, you can volunteer, but no one is going to call on you. no one is going to put you on the spot. 

 

Also, in this perfect class, if the input is incomprehensible, it's the teacher's fault, not yours? That's how we're doing it now, andthe results we're getting aren't a little better than other methods, they're actually much, much better. Before I leave this topic, let me put in a brief commercial message for speaking.

 

I'm not  opposed to speaking, I think when students speak it's fine. but what counts in speaking is not what you say, but what the other person says to you. In other words when you get involved in conversation, what counts is the input you can stimulate from other people. So I'm  in favor of students speaking, but we have to understand it makes an indirect; a helpful, but indirect contribution to language acquisition. 

 

I'd like to discuss one more hypothesis before we move on to literacy, and this is a very important one, called the Affective Filter Hypothesis. Our research in language acquisition has concluded that there are several factors that relate to success in language acquisition, and I'm going to list them here on your screen.

 

One factor is motivation. Students, who are more motivated, do better in language acquisition. of those of you who study this, know that it's a little more complicated than this, but this is a good approximation. Second: self-esteem. Probably the dominant concept today in popular psychology. Students with more self-esteem, more self-confidence do better in language acquisition. Third: anxiety. And here, the correlations are negative: the lower the anxiety, the better the language acquisition. 

 

In fact my hypothesis is, for language acquisition to really suceed, anxiety should be zero. This has happened to you. Have you ever been in a situation, speaking a language that you may not speak very well, when the conversation gets so interesting, you temporarily forget that you're using another language. If this is happening to you, that's when you're acquiring. When your focus is completely on the message, what the other person is saying, and your anxiety is temporarily gone. 

 

By the way as an important footnote to this - I guess today we say sidebar. As a sidebar to all this: I'm not sure that zero anxiety is right for everything. I'm sure it's good for a lot of things, but I'm not quite sure how far to push this. Speaking to you as a college teacher, speaking to you as a parent, I'm not all that free and easy. I think there are certain things in school, childreren absolutely must learn. I think my students at the University of Southern California should suffer. We have hard classes. Tough requirements. You don't do the work, you're out. I finally learned what they tried to teach us in educational psychology: the amount of drive or anxiety necessary to accomplish a task, depends on the task.  Sometimes what we call facilitative anxiety is okay. I don't believe in torture, but sometimes a little anxiety is okay. 

 

Language acquisition though, is different. For language acquisition to suceed, anxiety has to be directed somewhere else, not at the language. Frank Smith puts it this way: for the child to develop literacy, the child has to assume that she's going to be successful. The way we integrate this into the theory is like this: if the student isn't motivated, if self-esteem is low, if anxiety is high, if the student is on the defensive, if the student thinks the language class is a place where his weaknesses will be revealed, he may understand the input, but it won't penetrate. 

 

It won't reach those parts of the brain that do language acquisition. A block keeps it out. We call this block he affective filter. Here's how it works: somewhere in the brain, Chomsky tells us, is a Language Acquisition Device. Our job is to get input into the device. Low-motivation, low self-esteem, high anxiety: the block goes up, the filter goes up, and the input canot get it. This explains how it can be that we can have two children in the same class, both getting comprehensible input, one makes progress, the other doesn't. One is open to the input, the other is closed. 

 

Let me now try to summarize everything I've said in the last 10-15 minutes or so. And I'll summarize it in one sentence. And we'll wonder why it took me that long. We acquire language in one way, and only one way. When we get comprehensible input, in a low anxiety environment.

---

15분이 넘는 강의였는데 너무가 길기도 하고 말도 명확하게 해서 녹취만 했습니다. 크라센은 15분 강의를 한 문장으로 정리합니다. 자연적 접근 방법의 학습이론 중에서 1. 습득-학습 가설 2. 입력 가설 3. 정의적 여과 가설을 많이 설명했는데 3 항목은 세 가지로 즉, 동기, 자신감과 불안감입니다. 동기와 자신감이 높고 걱정이 낮으면 이해 가능한 입력을 학습자가 받아들일 수 있는 반면, 동기와 자신감이 낮고 불안감이 높으면 block이 올라가고 filter가 올라가서 입력이 들어갈 자리가 없다는 설명입니다. 막혀버린다는 설명입니다. 그래서 같은 교실에서 같이 수업받는 학생의 '이해 가능한 입력'이 달라지게 되는 것이라는 설명입니다.