This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
This person has a SecurePRO™ card. Because this person is not a ProZ.com Plus subscriber, to view his or her SecurePRO™ card you must be a ProZ.com Business member or Plus subscriber.
附属机构
This person is not affiliated with any business or Blue Board record at ProZ.com.
服务
Translation, Interpreting, Editing/proofreading, Website localization, Software localization, Transcription, Training
专长
专业领域：
电脑（总称）
艺术、工艺品、绘画
电脑：硬件
证书、毕业证、执照、个人简历
电脑：软件
电脑：系统、网络
教育/教育学
数学与统计
商务/商业（普通）
林业/林木/木材
费率
English英语 – 费率：0.08 - 0.12 USD每字 / 26 - 37 USD每小时
Payment methods accepted
支票, 万事达卡, 汇票, PayPal
翻译样本
已提交的翻译样本: 1
Chinese汉语译成English英语: Rethinking the Chinese Teaching Philosophy of "Integration of Structure, Function and Culture" General field: 社会科学 Detailed field: 语言学
原文文本 - Chinese汉语 “结构—功能—文化相结合”的汉语教学理念再思考
刘 珣 北京语言大学
提 要 汉语作为第二语言教学理念和教学法体系的形成和完善，需要遵循第二语言教学的一般规律，更重要的是要深入研究汉语的特点和汉语教学的特殊规律。三十多年的实践经验证明，为我国大多数对外汉语教师和学者们所认同的“结构—功能—文化相结合”的教学理念和“结构—功能—文化相结合”的综合法，是适合汉语的教学理念和方法，同时也符合第二语言教学发展的总趋势。加强对这一理念和方法的研究，不仅可以探索化解“汉语难”，提高汉语教学效率，而且也是汉语教学工作者对发展世界第二语言教学理论和方法所做的贡献。
关键词 结构—功能—文化相结合 教学理念 教学法
一、引言
新中国的对外汉语教学已有六十多年历史， 进入汉语加快走向世界的新时期也已八九年了，要问起我们所主张的汉语作为第二语言教学的教学理念是什么，在这交际法、任务型教学法盛行的时代，我们所认同的对外汉语教学法又是什么，这个问题其实早有答案。
上世纪80年代初就有很多文章开始进行这方面的研究，1988 年出版的中国对外汉语教学学会汉语水平等级标准研究小组研制的《汉语水平等级标准和等级大纲（试行）》中，就明确提出了“结构—功能—文化相结合”的教学原则。“大纲”中说：“三十年来，对外汉语教学在继承传统和不断吸取各种教学法长处的基础上，正在形成富有中国特点的教学法体系，向结构—功能—文化相结合的道路上前进。”90年代，学界曾展开过热烈的讨论，当时的论文中，已经用“教学路子的共识”“主导教学法体系”等来称述这一中国特色的汉语教学法。更为重要的是，在实际的课堂教学中，我们大多数学校和教师也一直是按此理念实践的。可是近十多年来，在海内外汉语教学大发展、汉语国际教育本科专业和研究生专业如雨后春笋般地涌现、每年都要为新入行的教师或志愿者开办至少几十个培训班的新形势下，对这样一个事关一线教学、事关人才培养和学科建设、既重要也迫切需要、既是理论也是实践的问题，除了个别文章有所涉及外，相关的研究成果却很少看到，以致至今仍缺乏对我们所主张的这一“主导教学法体系”专门的、全面的、系统的理论阐述，一些年轻的同行们也许对它还闻所未闻。
本文想从第二语言教学的大背景下，结合个人这些年来对这个问题的思考，特别是在《新实用汉语课本》等教材的编写中对它的实践体验，再次提出这个问题，求教于关心教学理论和教学方法研究的同行。
二、重视第二语言教学的一般规律
对外汉语教学作为整个第二语言教学的一个组成部分，必然体现第二语言教学的共性，也应该与世界第二语言教学相接轨。特别是居于第二语言教学领先地位的英语教学的经验和研究成果，非常值得我们重视和借鉴。第二语言教学的一般规律，原则上也适用于对外汉语教学。
2.1 第二语言教学的新理念
第二语言教学的专家们提出过很多新的理念。本文认为其中最重要的、适合于汉语教学的，主要是以下几点：
培养交际能力——第二语言学习的根本目的是为了交际，要培养学习者综合运用语言的能力，特别是跨文化交际能力，而不是仅仅掌握语言知识。
强调互动运用——语言是一种能力，能力就需要在“用中学”，学了才能用；讲只能讲懂，练才能练会。
重视认知规律——语言与思维密切相关，互相促进；语言学习是认知活动，是智力活动。特别是对逻辑思维能力强的成人学习者，必须强调以理解为基础，重视语言规则的掌握。
体认多元文化——了解目的语文化才能得体地运用目的语；通过文化对比，才能更好地认识母文化，增强多元文化意识。
突出学生主体——语言学习是否成功，主要取决于学习者本身，特别是他的动机、态度和学习策略。
2.2 要研究第二语言教学理论的新发展及其对对外汉语教学的启示
西方学者们提出的新教学理论很多。本文认为用来诠释学生如何学习的“社会建构主义理论”和用来诠释什么是教师的教学的“后方法理论”是非常值得我们关注的两个理论。
社会建构主义理论强调知识不是由外部灌输的，而是由学习者在原有经验的基础上对当前事物加以主动理解而自己建构的。只有主体自我建构的知识，才能真正得到内化。而个人对知识的建构，又必须借助于外界的环境，发生在与他人的交往（合作、磋商、调整、修正）当中，是社会互动的结果。社会建构主义的学习观突出了学习者的主体作用，强调了主体的活动、认知、情感的重要性。
后方法理论认为语言教学已经从“方法时代”转向“后方法时代”。以往的教学法是专家们由上而下建立起来的理论模式，不能适应复杂多变的、特定的教学环境；实际上也根本不可能找到放之四海而皆准、解决一切问题的所谓最佳的教学方法。后方法理论不是不要方法，而是要求教师针对自己的教学实际，自主地运用、开发适用的教学方法。这样，教师就不仅是教学理论和教学方法的实践者、消费者，也是教学理论和教学方法的研究者、探索者，要把自己的教学经验理论化，从宏观上掌握教学理论和教学法发展的趋势。
除了这两个理论外，对我们具有较大启发意义的还有美国提出的《21世纪外语学习标准》和欧洲提出的《欧洲语言共同参考框架》。美国的外语学习“5C”标准，包括运用目的语进行交际、体认多元文化、贯连其他学科、比较语言和文化特性、运用于国内外多元文化社区等五个目标和语言沟通、理解诠释、表达演示等三种交际模式，已成为美国外语教学和教材编写的“宪章”，也为国际第二语言教学界广为接受。欧洲的《欧洲语言共同参考框架》详细列举了外语学习者具备有效的言语行为所必须掌握的知识、能力和文化因素，就外语教学目标、教学内容和教学方法做了明确的描述，为外语水平规定了详细的等级标准。这些对我们的汉语教学都有很高的参考价值。
2.3 把握好新教学理念的“度”，不走极端
人们常说，真理再往前跨越半步也许就成了谬误。一些本来很好的新教学理念，如果强调过度，甚至推向极端，就可能走向反面。这样的例子在第二语言教学史上也屡见不鲜。
2.3.1 学生与教师
“以学生为中心”是针对以往存在过的由教师主宰一切、包办一切，只管教而不管学生的学，让学生死读书、读死书的教学状况而提出的革命性的口号，目的是为了强调学习的主体是学生，要实现成功而有效的教学，必须激发起学生主动学习的精神，必须提倡启发式地教、创造性地学。这是正确的解读。但如果把它理解为应由学生来决定一切，包括教学内容、教学方法、教学进度，让学生牵着教师的鼻子走，教师完全放弃“传道、授业、解惑”的使命，在一旁仅消极地充当“被咨询者”，这就有点过了“度”。毕竟教师比学生懂得多一点，懂得早一点，是给学生引路的；学生既来跟老师学习，就不同于个人自学，就要发挥教师的指导作用。所以我们中国人在“以学生为中心”或“以学生为主体”的后面，觉得还要再加一句“以教师为主导”才比较全面。
在“以学生为中心”的原则下，有的理论或教学法提出，教师纠正学生的偏误会打击学生的积极性；学生不能受到一点压力，不能有一点焦虑；课堂上不能有反复的操练，教学内容必须像听相声那么有趣，让学生轻轻松松、快快乐乐地学习，等等。这些要求都没有错，有的也确实是针对旧教学法的弊端提出的。但把它强调过度，或只强调这一面，就会出现另一方面的问题了：学生真的就脆弱到听不得教师对他错误的指正？有哪一个人的新知识和能力不是通过反复的“尝试—改正”的模式而获得的？世界上有哪门知识、专业或技术是在没有一点压力和焦虑的情况下，快快乐乐、轻而易举地掌握的？学芭蕾舞、学声乐、学演奏、学打球、学武术，哪样不需要反复操练、勤学苦练，甚至包括机械性的操练？唯独学语言就能是个例外？
2.3.2 “用”与“学”
“用中学”是针对语言是一种能力，学习语言是为了运用而提出的。能力确实只有在运用中学，边用边学才能学会，学了以后也才能用。但学习一种第二语言，毕竟不同于学游泳或学骑自行车，因为语言同时又是知识，语言包含着文化。在用中学语言，不能只强调“用”而忽视了“学”。从长远来看，现在的“学”固然是为了将来的“用”；但就学习阶段而言，现在的“用”却是为了当前更好地“学”，是为现在的“学”服务的。课堂上的“用”和课堂上的“交际”一样，虽然要求逼真，但怎么也难以达到生活中真实的“用”或“交际”的程度；课堂上的“用”也是有限的，不可能让你试遍未来可能“用”到的所有情况。因此，课堂上每解决一个问题，完成一项任务，不仅是让学生就事论事地学会解决该问题、完成该任务，重要的还是学生从中“学（领悟）”到了什么。“用中学”的中心词还是“学”，而“学”的关键则是是否掌握了语言的规律和语言使用的规律，能举一反三解决类似的新问题。
2.3.3 成人与语法
成人第二语言学习虽然也有“不经意”习得的部分，但大多数教师和学者们都认为，与儿童早期“无意识”习得母语不同，主要还是以理解为基础、注重掌握语言规律的认知活动。成人在目的语的学习时间上、接触目的语的机会上都受到很大的限制，一般说来只能用较短的时间、速成的方式先学一些急用的、不那么复杂的、规范的句子，获得目的语的概貌，留待以后再逐步地加以丰富。这是一个由整体到局部、由粗到细的过程。怎样才能做到短期速成呢？幸亏我们的前辈学者能从一种语言的无限的话语中归纳出有限的主要规则（语法）来，让人们通过学习这些有限的主要规则，举一反三，在较短的时间里就能掌握该语言的主要表达方式，而不需要一句一句地“学遍”可能产生的“所有”言语。这本是人类学习方法的一大进步，排斥或不重视语法教学，实在是令人难以理解的。
也正因为成人采用的是（通过一定的大纲和教材）人为的、设计好的、有选择的学习，这就跟儿童的自然的习得不一样。用来学习的语言材料，当然必须是真实的、自然的，但同时又必须有典型性、规范性，有利于学习目的语的主要表达方式，有利于迅速获得目的语的概貌。否则，再自然、再真实的语言（比如，买公共汽车票时，乘客常用的口语“两个颐和园”），也不宜在初始阶段就学。也就是说，开始学习的阶段，对语言的真实性和自然性的强调也得有个“度”。
对时新的教学理论，需要有正确的解读，需要多点辩证法，更需要有自己的思考。不过，应当承认当前我们的主要问题还是对第二语言教学的一般规律研究不够，对西方第二语言教学新的研究成果了解不多，需要更多地强调研究西方语言教学法特别是英语教学法的新发展，以获得借鉴。
三、研究和探索汉语教学的特殊规律
上述第二语言教学的一般规律，体现了第二语言教学的共性，对我们汉语教学同样有指导意义。但我们还必须看到汉语教学的特殊性。汉语本身的特点使得汉语教学具有与其他很多第二语言教学不同的特殊规律。
汉语一直被认为是世界上最难学的外语之一，美国国防语言学院把汉语列为对美国学生最难学的第四类语言。原因在于，属于汉藏语系的汉语与绝大多数学习者的母语，不论是印欧语系的还是阿尔泰语系的，甚至包括目前人数最多的学习者的母语——日语和韩国语等语言的谱系关系，都相距很远。以英语为母语的学习者为例，与同属于印欧语系的“亲属语言”相比，汉语对他们来说是一门“真正的外语” （Walton，1989）。美国和澳大利亚的学者们研究认为，达到同样的水平，学汉语所需的时间是学习德、意、西、葡语等“亲属语言”的三倍多。应该说“汉语难”是客观存在。作为一名对外汉语教师，我们需要正视“汉语难”的现实，客观地、科学地分析汉语难在哪里，以及如何化解它。
3.1 汉语作为第二语言的特点和“汉语难”
任何一种语言作为母语来习得，无所谓难易的问题；但作为第二语言来学习，由于两种语言谱系关系的远近和目的语本身的特点，确实存在容易学和难学的情况。特别是初学阶段由于受到母语的迁移作用，目的语和母语之间的差异就成了学习过程中的难点。一般说来，差异越大，学习这种语言的难度就越高。
“汉语难”首先体现在语言的结构方面。特别是以语序和虚词作为主要的语法手段、词类和句法成分不一一对应、常用“意合法”组织句子的汉语，对于习惯于以词的形态变化为母语语法手段的众多的学习者来说，感到很难把握。他们在学习同样是以词的形态变化为特征的“亲属语言”时，母语有关性、数、格、时、态、体变化的知识，能对他们学习目的语产生“正迁移”（至少提个醒）的作用；而对学习汉语则可能产生“负迁移”的作用。一个典型的例子就是学了助词“了”以后，他们很容易把它理解为过去时的标志而加以泛化。在词汇方面，跟我们有较紧密的文化联系的周边国家和民族的语言中，可能会有一些发音相同或接近的词汇，给他们的汉语学习带来一些“便利”。但对世界大多数国家的汉语学习者来说，要通过汉语中的“外来词”来减轻词汇学习的负担，机会是不多的。即使能碰到也未必能提供帮助。比如，英语为母语的学习者，就很难把“啤酒”和“beer”联系起来。
汉语特殊的书写系统——汉字，已被公认为学习汉语的最大难点。其实汉字的结构还是有规律可循的。掌握数百个常用汉字后，通过部件组合、形声结构等有关知识，再学习新汉字就容易多了。比汉字更难的是汉语声调的掌握。汉语每个音节（汉字）都有自己的声调，而声调与音节的关系可以说毫无理据性，完全凭记忆。达到汉语中级水平如果要求掌握五千词，就得记住约一万左右的声调（还不算变调），这绝不是一项很轻松的学习任务。即使是以汉语为母语者，我们碰到不会念声调的词语，查一遍字典也未必能记住。
除了汉语结构方面的特点、难点外，“汉语难”还表现在由于东西方习俗、文化的较大差异，对理解和使用汉语所造成的困难。西方学习者在学习汉语结构的同时，还需要学习他们所不熟悉的大量的汉语语用规则和社会文化规范，这也成为掌握和运用汉语“难”的一个方面。
对于具有这些特点和难点的目的语，显然不能和学习“亲属语言”同等对待。学亲属语言，可以重意义而轻形式；学汉语，忽视结构的教学则可能带来灾难性的后果。主要以教授“亲属语言”为基础的西方第二语言教学理论和教学方法，可能非常适用于西方语言的教学，但不一定完全符合汉语教学的规律，不能全盘照搬。汉语教学主要只能由中国和世界各国从事汉语教学和研究的教师和学者们，在了解世界第二语言教学的一般规律的基础上，从汉语的特点出发，在实践中探讨汉语教学的特殊规律，研究汉语教学的特殊方法，解决汉语教学中的特殊问题，自己探索一条教这一“真正外语”的路子。
3.2 汉语教学法的争论和汉语教学的现状
正因为汉语存在上述特点，对汉语教学该采用何种方法，海内外一直有着不同的看法。以海外汉语教学的重镇美国为例，围绕如何教汉语的问题，至少从上世纪80年代初的 “proficiency movement”开始，就一直存在着争论。而争论的核心，就是重“功能”还是重“结构”。美国作为世界英语教学的研究基地和许多第二语言新教学理论和新教学法的策源地，一些中文教师和研究者主张汉语教学应该走西方语言教学的路子，完全采用交际法和任务法。代表人物就是俄亥俄州立大学的吴伟克教授和夏威夷大学的任友梅教授等。任友梅在上世纪90年代初编写了一套供中学用的交际法汉语教材《汉语交际》 （耶鲁大学远东出版社1994年出版），最近又主编了任务法汉语教材《环球汉语》 （华语教学出版社2012年出版），竭力推介交际法和任务法。她在《二十一世纪初美国国内的汉语教材漫谈》一文中，曾批评美国的中文教学界“更倾向于保守”，“固守词汇语法原则”，只是“为了好看，撒胡椒面一样地加点功能性练习，算是对第二语言习得的新成果有个交代”。她主张用任务式教学法取代传统的课程内容，因为她认为“纯粹的形式练习不能获得运用这些形式的能力，形式只有在任务式练习中学得最快”。以普林斯顿大学的周质平教授为代表的另一派则主张以听说为主的操练法，他在《美国汉语教学的隐忧》一文中所列举的“隐忧”，恰恰主要是指强调语言功能教学和强调运用多媒体科技手段等。他认为80年代的“proficiency”“是一场噩梦”，“人人都教饭店菜单、火车时刻表、报纸广告”，其结果是“很多学生在这场噩梦中学了一口极不proficient的中文”。他认为在师资培训中，不讲如何教语音，也不讲如何教语法，而只是讲一些关于“student-centered”“classroom activities”之类的高谈阔论，“这样的师资培训是误导教师，这样的课堂活动是摧残学生”。他把这一切都归因于“中文教学努力迎合西方外语教学法”，是“洋理论”对中文教学的“冲击”。在具体教学法上，他强调首先必须让学生掌握句子结构，“首先要说对”，“不能用流利代替正确性”。他认为语言结构的教学必须以操练为主。
两派观点针锋相对，其实质也还是汉语教学界的“功能派”与“结构派”之争。 其实，在第二语言教学的历史上，“结构”与“功能”之争一直存在，不仅限于汉语教学。在西方语言教学中，有重语言形式和重语言意义两种不同的教学途径。前者是以语法翻译法和听说法为代表的传统的结构主义教学法，后者是以交际法和任务型教学法为代表的作为当前西方语言教学法主流的功能主义教学法。两种不同教学途径的教学理念一直针锋相对。这一争论似乎也延伸到功能主义教学法内部：主张以功能为纲、不强调语法教学和语言正确性的交际法，近年来也对已有的理念进行反思、争议和调整。正如J. C. Richards 所指出的，这种调整表现为一是教学重点回归语法，二是语言表达的流畅性与正确性并提。作为交际法新发展的任务型教学法，放弃了交际法的一些极端化做法，在以内容为中心的前提下，比较关注语言形式的教学。我国英语教学界的同行们在引进任务型教学法时也提出“防止过分追求任务的‘热闹’，而忽视基本语言知识和语言技能的掌握”。
而俄罗斯的第二语言教学又与欧美的教学理念不一样，自成一派。在前苏联自觉实践法的影响下，俄罗斯汉语教学特别重视语言学理论的指导，强调首先要理解语法，然后通过大量的实践来掌握语言。在教材中对目的语和母语的语法要做十分详尽的分析与比较。
总的来看，汉语教学法的现状是怎样的呢？经过调查了解，我们发现，到目前为止，即使在交际法、任务法的策源地和中心——欧美国家，这两种方法在各西方语言的教学中已取得无可争议、几乎“一统天下”的地位时，纯的、经典的交际法和任务法在成人、专业性汉语教学方面，至今似未成为主流；这里的汉语教学实际走着一条与西方其他第二语言教学不完全一致的路子：强调以掌握结构为基础，重视语法的讲解和句式的操练；同时也汲取了交际法、任务法的一些新元素，呈综合化的趋势。我们所知道的美国著名的明德模式、普林斯顿北京班、哈佛北京书院、哥伦比亚北京暑期中文项目等，汉语教学的路子无不如此。将这一结论用于世界其他各地的成人汉语教学，相信也不会失之武断。但在少年儿童的汉语教学中，以任务、活动、游戏为特征的汉语教学，显示了很大的优越性，正迅速地发展。
四、“结构—功能—文化相结合”的综合法
借鉴第二语言教学的一般规律，研究汉语教学的特殊规律，都是为了进一步阐明我们的“结构—功能—文化相结合”的教学理念，完善我们的“结构—功能—文化相结合”的综合法。
4.1 对教学法理念和方法的思考
现代语言教学一百多年历史上，第二语言教学出现过数十种教学法，流派纷呈，百花竞放，各领风骚十几年、几十年，为提高我们对第二语言教学规律的认识和提高教学效率做出了贡献。但同时也要看到，教学法流派之争常常是强调一点，不及其余；有时甚至标新立异，推向极端；或者在两个极端之间跳来跳去（如听说法主张对学生严纠错而交际法则不纠错的两种极端做法）。
以上述对待结构与功能的关系为例，第二语言教学法史上常常把两者对立起来：结构主义教学法只重视语言结构教学，不注重培养语言运用能力；功能主义教学法（特别是交际法）重视了语言功能，又不重视语言结构的教学，不要求语言表达的准确性，两者均难以适应作为“真正外语”的汉语的教学。
解决这个问题，也许需要求助于中国文化，运用中国式的思维方法——充分考虑到各方面的因素，不走极端，找一个平衡点。
我们认为，结构主义教学法有其长处：它强调通过规则来掌握语言的结构，通过反复操练达到熟练反应的程度。教学安排中，每课学几个句式和语法点非常清楚，符合成年人的学习习惯和规律，尤其适合学习那些在语言结构上与母语差别较大的目的语。这些长处没有必要把它扔掉。但其缺点是掌握结构以后没能强调很好地运用到交际之中，结构的学习也就失去了目的性和意义。功能主义教学法强调运用，这正是语言学习的根本目的。它重视语言和情境的真实性和实用性，也是非常必要的。但它又过于忽视作为运用前提的语言结构的学习，这就难以达到正确运用的目的。特别是像汉语这样对大多数学习者有着比较陌生的语法、文化和难学的声调、汉字的语言，不通过一定的准备和训练，包括语言结构的操练，就能轻而易举地运用，是不太现实的。按照中国人的思路，我们可以在结构与功能之间找一个平衡点，把两者结合起来，发挥各自的优势，既保留了我们的传统结构法的长处，又汲取了西方功能法的优点。而且，今天时代又要求把文化作为第二语言学习的主要目标之一结合到教学中，这就需要进一步加强文化的教学。
大部分中国大陆学者主张：恰当地处理结构、功能和文化的关系，并使三者很好地结合起来。结构、功能和文化是对外汉语教学的三个主要内容，而三者的完美结合，不要以结构来拒绝功能，也不要因功能而放弃结构，同时还要重视文化的体现，这就是我们所主张的教学理念和教学法。
4.2 对外汉语教学法的探索之路
“结构—功能—文化相结合”的综合法，是以北京语言大学为代表的中国对外汉语教学界半个多世纪以来在汉语教学法探索的道路上逐渐形成的。
六十多年来，我国对外汉语教学大体上经历了三个时期：从上世纪50年代到70年代的结构法时期；80年代到90年代的结构与功能相结合时期；90年代末到新世纪，进入“结构—功能—文化相结合”时期。
对外汉语教学从一开始就注意研究汉语的特点和汉语教学的特殊规律性，既没有自我封闭，拒绝了解和借鉴西方教学法，也没有盲目跟随，全盘照搬，而是较好地做到从汉语的特点出发，创造性地汲取西方第二语言教学的研究成果，摈弃其不利于汉语学习的做法，逐渐形成适合汉语特点和教学规律的一套理论和方法。像50年代对外汉语教学受语法翻译法影响较大，以语法为纲，但我们并未引导学生死钻语法知识，而是强调通过大量练习在实践中掌握语法规则，并逐步减少对母语翻译的依赖。60年代、70年代受到直接法、听说法很大的影响，句型操练成为主要教学手段，但我们在强调“练”的同时仍注意对语法规则的总结。80年代，功能法传入我国，我们汲取了它的优点，引进了功能的教学，但没有抛弃自己的传统——适合汉语特点的结构教学，在继承我们特别擅长的汉语结构教学传统的基础上，提出了“结构与功能相结合”。80年代发表了不少论述“两结合”的文章。在90年代的“文化热”中，我们借鉴了西方有关语言文化的理论，就文化问题展开过热烈的讨论，90年代末、新世纪初进入“三结合”时期。
“结构—功能—文化相结合”的综合法，一方面汲取了交际法、任务法的主要优点：强调培养交际能力的目标；强调调动学习者的主动性；强调教学内容的真实性和实用性； 强调课堂的活动和互动，包括最高的任务式的活动。同时，从汉语教学的特点出发，又继承了语法翻译法和听说法的主要优点：强调以语言结构的教学为基础；强调认知和掌握语言规律的重要性；强调（特别是基础阶段）必要的操练以获得
正确性。
4.3 结构、功能、文化的界定和三者的关系
语言的“结构”，指语言的形式，或者说语音、词汇、句子、语段等的构成规则，特别是语法规则。语言的“功能”，指用语言做事，即语言在一定的情境中所能完成的交际任务。而将交际任务按内容归类，就形成了话题。因此，我们所说的“功能”部分，还包括情境和话题。语言中的“文化”，首先指正确、得体地运用语言所必须遵守的目的语国家的风俗习惯、语用规则和社会文化规范等（常用“语言的文化因素”表示）；也指语言所反映的目的语国家的基本国情和一般社会文化知识。（至于系统的历史、文学、哲学、政治、经济等文化知识，不在语言教学的范围之内。）
如何来处理结构、功能、文化三者的关系？结构是形式，是基础；功能是目的，是导向；文化是内容，是条件。在这“三结合”中，结构是正确地运用语言的基础，功能是有效地运用语言的目的，文化是得体地运用语言的条件。处理三者的关系，既是“结合”，就需要水乳交融、互相渗透；又因为三者各有自己的大纲，就应该体现“兼顾”的原则，这就需要巧妙地安排与平衡。而三者在教学中的分量，又是随着不同的学习者、不同的学习目的和不同的学习阶段而灵活变化的。简单说来，越是初级阶段，学习结构的比重越大；越到高级阶段，文化的比重越大。
4.3.1 结构是基础
这是结构—功能—文化相结合的综合法与功能主义教学法最大的区别。
（1）不掌握一定的语言结构，谈不上语言的运用。通过语言结构的学习，可以在较短的时间内了解或掌握某语言的基本表达方式和它的概貌。
（2）有限的语言规则可以生成无限的话语，任何一种语言的基本规则都是可以归纳的，人们对语言结构的研究已取得了较多的成果。
（3）语言习得是一种认知活动，是内化语言规则系统的过程。人类特别是成人，有逻辑思维的能力，在学习过程中不可能不对复杂的语言现象进行分析、综合、归纳的理性思考。
（4）从语言类型学考虑，汉语的结构有更多的特殊性，与大多数学习者的母语距离较远，难于掌握，更需要重视结构的教与学。
如何科学地安排结构（主要指语言点）的教学？
首先，结构的安排要结合功能的需要；要突出难，要照顾到语法点之间的依存关系；要采用螺旋式编排，有规律地重现；教学过程要体现精讲多练，尽可能结合情境，突出操练。
特别重要的是，要根据学习者的特点、学习目的和学习程度的不同，分别采用显性或隐性的方式进行结构教学。对成年人、专业学习者、较高水平的学习者，可以采用演绎法或归纳法，显性地进行语言结构的教学，让学习者在大量实践的基础上，有意识地掌握语言结构规则；对儿童、非专业学习者，教师、教材对每课结构教学的重点（作为暗线），要心中有数；而课堂教学则避免对规则显性地讲解或操练，主要通过大量的活动让学习者获得正确使用语言的能力。
4.3.2 功能是导向
学会语言结构是为了交际和运用，掌握功能才是习得第二语言的根本目的和方向。 离开了功能，结构的学习没有意义；结构也只有在功能所要求和提供的情境、内容中才能掌握。
如何安排话题和功能的教学？
首先从学习者的需要出发，并参照有关教学大纲的规定，确定话题和功能；同时也要兼顾语言点难易，取得两者的平衡；每课话题要相对集中，强调符合学习者的需要；对功能项目同样也要做螺旋式安排。
4.3.3 文化是条件
结构是语言的形式，文化则是语言的内容；文化同时制约语言的运用，是正确、得体地运用语言的必备条件。了解目的语国家的文化，增强多元文化的观念，又是第二语言学习的重要目的。
如何安排文化点的教学？
初级阶段（主要通过课文对话）以介绍紧密结合语言运用的语言文化因素为主；中高级阶段（主要通过课文）逐步介绍基本国情和一般社会文化知识。教材内容应重点介绍目的语文化，适当对比母语文化。课文内容、情境设置应尽可能反映目的语国情文化。辅之以每课后用媒介语介绍的文化专题。
文化教学重要的是要研究如何提高呈现技巧，让学习者乐于接受。至少要做到两点：了解学生对什么感兴趣；不要使用宣传的口吻。
4.4 “结构—功能—文化相结合”应体现的十大元素
在后方法时代，方法可以自行选择，比具体的教学方法更为重要的是指导语言教学的原则。总结我们自己的经验，参照世界第二语言教学发展的新趋势，我们提出下列十大元素，希望能概括国内外提出的最为重要的教学原则：
交际 主体 文化 互动 认知
情感 策略 环境 评价 技术
4.5 “结构—功能—文化相结合”课堂教学的一种模式
不同的教学流派有不同的课堂教学模式，各有其特色。但我们认为，就学生的课堂学习而论，“展示、操练、表达”模式，还是比较全面、务实、靠谱。在此基础上，我们吸收功能主义教学法的一些创新做法，提出下列课堂或教材的教学设计的建议：
（1）根据学生的需求，提出明确的学习目标，引起学习的兴趣；
（2）热身，激活学生原有的知识，温故而知新，导入新课；
（3）展示新课内容，包括处理课文、生词及对语言点和文化点的适当讲解；
（4）对新语言点进行操练（不排除机械性操练），达到熟练掌握语言结构的程度；
（5）结合本课功能和话题进行有情境的、有意义的双人或小组活动，并根据因材施教的原则，提供拓展性学习；
（6）综合运用所学知识和所获能力，以小组形式进行接近生活实际的交际性、任务型活动；
（7）自我测评，总结学习收获。
“结构—功能—文化相结合”是根据我们长期的教学实践总结出来的汉语教学的理念，也是大多数对外汉语教师和学者所主张的或实际上在使用的具有中国特色的汉语教学法，它体现了汉语的特点和汉语教学规律，也符合第二语言教学发展的总趋势。这一理念和方法，已为越来越多的海外汉语教学工作者所赞同。
但“结构—功能—文化相结合”又绝不是汉语教学唯一的方法。教学和学习理论的研究是无止境的，社会对第二语言教学的要求是在不断发展的，学习者的特点和需求更是多种多样的。因此，汉语教学理念和方法的探索总是有无限的空间，我们期待进行不同教学法的探索，包括把交际法、任务法更多地引入到汉语教学中来。
但无论如何探索，都必须从汉语教学的特点出发。
参考文献
[1] 欧洲理事会文化合作教育委员会（刘骏等译）. 欧洲语言共同参考框架：学习、教学、评估[Z]. 北京：外语教学与研究出版社，2008.
[2] 任友梅. 杨双扬译. 二十一世纪初美国国内的汉语教材漫谈[J]. 国外汉语教学动态，2003（3）：32-39.
[3] 中国对外汉语教学学会汉语水平等级标准研究小组. 汉语水平等级标准和等级大纲（试行）[Z]. 北京：北京语言学院出版社，1988.
[4] 周质平. 美国汉语教学的隐忧[J]. 国外汉语教学动态， 2004（1）：41-44.
[5] ACTFL. Standards for foreign language learning in the 21st century （《21世纪外语学习标准》）[S]. Lawrence, KS: Allen Press, 1999.
[6] BROWN H D. Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to language pedagogy[M]. White Plains, NY: Longman, 2001.
[7] RICHARDS J C. Communicative language teaching today[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
[8] WALTON A R. Chinese language instruction in the United States: some reflections on the state of the art[J]. JCLTA, 1989 (24.2): 1-42.
[9] WILLIAMS M, BURDEN R L. Psychology for language teachers[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
A Rethink of the Chinese Teaching Philosophy in the Coordinated Structure-Function-Culture Approach
LIU Xun
Abstract
The formation and perfection of the philosophy and methodology of teaching Chinese as a second language (CSL) should follow the general laws of worldwide second language education, and more importantly, should be based on a deep probe into the characteristics of the Chinese language and the special laws pertinent to Chinese teaching and learning. Practice and experience over the past three decades prove that the teaching concept and integrated approach based on the “coordination of structure, function and culture” widely agreed upon among CSL teachers and scholars in China is suitable for Chinese teaching and conforms to the overall trend of development of second language education. An enhanced research on this concept and approach can help find a way to dispel the misconception that Chinese is difficult to learn, enhance the efficiency of Chinese teaching and learning, and also contribute to the worldwide research on the theory and methodology of second language teaching.
Keywords
coordination of structure; function and culture; teaching philosophy; teaching methodology
作者简介
刘珣，北京语言大学教授，北京语言大学出版社汉语教材总编审。主要研究方向为对外汉语教育学科理论、教学理论、教师发展理论和教材编写理论。
（通信地址：100083 北京市海淀区学院路15号 北京语言大学出版社）
翻译文本 - English英语 Rethinking the Chinese Teaching Philosophy of "Integration of Structure, Function and Culture"
Xun Liu
Beijing Language and Culture University
Abstract
The formation and perfection of philosophy and pedagogy of teaching Chinese as a second language require us to follow the general rules of second language teaching, most importantly to have in-depth research of the characteristic of Chinese language as well as special rules of teaching Chinese as a second language (TCSL). Thirty years of experiences have shown that our teaching philosophy and pedagogy of "Integration of Structure, Function and Culture" has been accepted by the majority of our TCSL teachers and scholars. This synthesis method fits Chinese well, and is also in line with the development trend of world’s second language teaching. Strengthening research of this philosophy and method can not only resolve the mystery of "Chinese is difficult to learn" and improve the efficiency of TCSL but also contribute to the development of theories and pedagogy of second language teaching in the world.
Keywords: Integration of Structure, Function and Culture, teaching philosophy, pedagogy
1. Introduction
Teaching Chinese as a foreign language has more than 60 years of history in New China. It has also been about nine years since we entered the new period of accelerating the spread of Chinese to the world. In this age when communicative and task-based approaches are in their heyday, we have our own answers to the question "what is your teaching philosophy and pedagogy for teaching Chinese as a second language?"
The research of TCSL started as early as in the 1980s. In the "Chinese Proficiency Standards and Grade Outline (Trial)" published in 1988, the Chinese Society of Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language Proficiency Level and Standard Research Team mentioned explicitly the teaching principles of Integration of Structure, Function and Culture. For the past three decades, TCSL has been developing towards the Integration of Structure, Function and Culture with its own distinctive characteristics based on learning from traditions and a variety of teaching methods. In the 90s there was a heat discussion about TCSL in the academia. Papers published during that period have started to use "consensus of teaching methods" and "dominant teaching system" to refer to this TCSL method. More importantly, in the actual classroom, most of our schools and teachers have also been practicing under this philosophy. The past decade has seen the large-scale development of TCSL at home and abroad, the emergence of large number of undergraduate and graduate program for TCSL, and dozens of courses for training new teachers and volunteers each year. However few research results have been seen on this dominant pedagogy system we have been advocating; some young colleagues perhaps have never heard about it. We believe the research of TCSL theories and practice is important and urgent, and has big impact on teacher training and discipline construction, therefore we need a specialized, comprehensive and systematic introduction to this method.
In this article I want to readdress this issue based on my thinking throughout these years as well as my personal experience in compiling the textbooks such as "New Practical Chinese Reader". I hope to hear advice and suggestions from those who are also interested in the research of TCSL theories and methods.
2. General rules of second language teaching
Being part of the second language teaching TCSL should share the general theories of second language teaching and also in line with the world's second language teaching development. Especially the experience and research in TESOL which leads the second language teaching is very worthy of our attention and learning. In principle the general rules of the second language teaching should also apply to foreign language teaching.
2.1 New Concepts in Second Language teaching
Second language teaching experts have raised a lot of new ideas during these years. The most important and suitable for Chinese language teaching are listed as follows:
Develop communicative ability: The ultimate goal of learning a second language is to be able to communicate with speakers who speak that language. Therefore we need to develop the learner's overall ability, especially cross-cultural communication skills, rather than just master the language knowledge.
Emphasize interactive use: Language is a learnt ability which can only be acquired through practice. Only through speaking can one learns to speak and only through practice can one learn the language.
Emphasize cognitive rules: Language is closely related to thought: the two have mutual influence upon each other. Language learning is a cognitive and intellectual activity. Especially for adult learners who have better logical thinking ability, we should emphasize the mastery of language rules through understanding.
Experience different cultures: only through understanding of the target culture can one learns the target language well; through contrast of cultures one can have a better understanding of one's mother language as well as other cultures.
Student-centered teaching: Language learning depends largely on the learners themselves, especially their motives, attitudes and learning strategies.
2.2 New theories in second language teaching and its implication for TCSL
New teaching Western scholars have put forward many teaching theories, among which we think the social constructivism and post-method pedagogy are the two theories worthy our attention.
Social constructivism emphasizes that knowledge is not acquired through external indoctrination, rather it is constructed by the learners themselves based on their past experiences as well as active processing of input information. Only the knowledge that has been constructed this way can be internalized by the learner. The individual construction of knowledge must resort to the external environment; it occurs in the learner's interaction with others (through cooperation, consultation, adjustment and correction) and is the result of social interaction. Social constructivism view of learning highlights the main role of the learner, emphasizing the importance of learners' activities, cognition and emotions.
Post-method theory claims that language teaching has shifted from "methods era" to "post-method era." The past teaching methods are usually theoretical models built by the experts in a top-down manner which have become unsuitable for complex and specific teaching environment. In fact it is impossible to find the so-called "best pedagogy" that suits all needs.
Post-method theory doesn't abandon methods, instead it encourages teachers to develop their own teaching methods based on their actual situation. This way teachers become not only the practisor and consumer, but also researchers of teaching methods and theories. They will need to theorize their teaching experiences and follow the trend in the development of teaching theories and methods.
In addition to these two theories, the National Standards for Foreign Language Education of the United States and the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEF) by the Council of Europe also make important reference for us. The National Standards for Foreign Language Education of the United States lists five standards known as 5Cs which are: Communication (Communicate in Languages Other Than English), Cultures (Gain Knowledge and Understanding of Other Cultures), Connections (Connect with Other Disciplines and Acquire Information), Comparisons (Develop Insight into the Nature of Language and Culture) and Communities (Participate in Multilingual Communities at Home & Around the World), and three communication modes: Interpersonal, Interpretive, and Presentational. It has become the "Charter" for foreign language teaching and material development in US and has also been widely accepted by the international second language teaching community. The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEF) gives detailed requirement of knowledge, ability and cultural that a successful learner must possess, explicit description of the goals, content and methods of foreign language teaching, as well as detailed standards for language proficiency levels. Both standards have important reference value for us.
2.3 Find good balance between different approaches
It is often said that truth might become a fallacy even pushed half step further. Good new teaching philosophy might turn into bad if being emphasized too much. Such examples are not uncommon in the history of second language teaching.
2.3.1 Students and Teachers
“Student-centered" teaching was proposed to change the situation that teachers decide everything and care about only their teaching instead of students who then just receive knowledge passively. This movement emphasizes that the leading role in study is the student; in order to teach successfully and effectively teachers must stimulate the students to take initiative in learning; advocate teach inspiringly, and learn creatively. However if one thinks that such method leaves everything for students to decide, including teaching content, method and progress, and the teachers just give up their mission of teaching assume and assume the role of "consultant" passively. Then he/she goes to the extreme. After all, teachers have more knowledge and training that enable them to guide the students in a professional way which is different from students' self-study. Therefore for our Chinese teaching we probably should add "teachers-led" to "student-centered" to make it more comprehensive.
Under the "student-centered" principle, some suggest that teachers' correction of students' errors will blow their enthusiasm; students shouldn't have any pressure or worries; no drills should appear in the class, teaching should be as fun as crosstalk, students should learn in a relax and happy atmosphere, etc. These requirements are not wrong, and some are proposed to challenge the shortcomings in the old teaching methods. However if stressed too excessively then we will have other problem. We want to ask, are students really that vulnerable to lose confidence after being corrected? How can one acquire new knowledge and ability without going through "trial-correction" repeatedly? What knowledge and skills can be learnt without undergoing some pressure and worries? Learning whichever skill, be it ballet, vocal music, play musical instrument, play balls, martial arts, requires one to practice repeatedly and mechanically. Why language alone should be an exception?
2.3.2 "Use" and "Learn"
"Learn in use" is proposed based on the idea that language is an ability and the goal of learning a language is to use it. It is true that ability can only be gained in application; one can only learn while applying what s/he learns into real life problems. But learning a second language, after all, is different from learning to swim or learn to ride a bike, because language is also knowledge at the same time and is the carrier of culture. "Learn in use" shouldn't only emphasize "use" while ignoring "learn". In the long run, "learning" now is for better "use" in the future. But for current purpose of learning "use" is for better "learn". "Use" in the classroom, no matter how real the situation can be simulated, can't replace the real life situation. Due to such limitation "use" in classroom should encourage students to "learn" from the problems and tasks by thinking about how to apply the knowledge to their real lives. The focus of "learn in use" should be "learn". The key of learning is to master the rules of language and language use, and to be able to solve similar problems using the same principles.
2.3.3 Adult and Grammar
Although adults can also acquire a second language in an unconscious way, the majority of teachers and scholars think that adults are different from children who can acquire their mother tongue "effortlessly"; their learning is more a cognitive activity based on understanding and mastery of language rules. Adults usually don't have enough time for studying a second language, and few chances to be exposed to the target language. Usually they learn the general picture of a language and some survival sentences with simple and regular patterns within a short time, then gradually fill up the gaps later. This is a process going from whole to parts, and from coarse to fine. How can one crash a language within short term? Thanks to our senior scholars who have generalized grammar rules, we are able to learn a language through learning these rules without learning every sentence in the language. This is a big progress of human learning. Therefore it is really difficult to understand if one wants to exclude or ignore teaching of these grammar rules.
Adult's learning is differentiated from children's due to the deliberate intervention of particular guidelines and teaching materials. Language materials should be as real and natural as possible, and should be standard and typical at the same time for learners to learn key expressions and general picture in the target language. Otherwise, no matter how natural and real the language is (for example, when buying bus tickets, passengers usually say "two Summer Place" ) it is not suitable for adult beginners. In other words, we should have a good balance of "being real and natural" and "being typical and standard" in the beginning stage.
To learn new teaching theories we need to have correct interpretation, some dialectics and our own thinking. However, we should admit our current problem lies in our lack of research in second language teaching, especially new results in second language teaching in the western world. We should therefore put more emphasis on research of second language teaching in the western world, especially TESOL.
3. Research of special rules in TCSL
The general rules of second language teaching stated above reflects the common properties of second language teaching, which can be a guidance for TCSL. But we must also notice the special properties of Chinese language which requires special rules for TCSL.
Chinese has long been considered as one of the most difficult foreign languages to learn in the world. The Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center (DLIFLC) in USA lists Chinese as the fourth type of languages that are most difficult to learn. The reason is that phylogenetically the Sino-Tibetan language family that Chinese belongs to is very far from Indo-European and Altaic families where most learners’ mother languages come from. For English-speaking learners, compared with other "relative language" in the Indo-European family, Chinese is a "real foreign language" to them (Walton, 1989). Scholars in US and Australia think that to reach the same level three more amount of time is needed for Chinese than for other "relative" languages such as German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, etc. All these facts reflect the reality that "Chinese is difficult". As a foreign language teacher, we need to face this reality and find solutions for this problem through scientific methods.
3.1 Characteristics of Chinese as a Second Language
Any language, if learnt as a mother tongue, has no issue of being difficult or easy. However if learnt as a second language it can become difficult to learn. Especially in the beginning stage, due to the influence of mother tongue, the differences between the target and mother languages become the difficulties. In general, the greater the difference, the more difficult the learning becomes.
The first difficulty of learning Chinese as a second language lies in the language structure. Especially aspects like word order and particles are main grammatical devices, parts of speech don't correspond to syntactic constituents, sentences are organized not under structural constraints but more of the convenience to express meaning are particularly difficult for most learners who are accustomed to their mother languages which mainly use morphological changes as the grammatical device. If they learn those "relative languages" which are also characterized by morphological changes, their knowledge of sex, number, case, tense and aspect of their mother language can be applied to the target language, which is termed "positive transfer". However in the case of Chinese, there might be a "negative transfer". A typical example is the study of the particle "了" (le): most learners usually generalize it as the marker of past tense which is not exactly what the function of this particle is. As for vocabulary in languages which have close cultural connection with China there can be found some words share same or similar pronunciation, which provide some convenience for learners from those countries. But for most Chinese leaners the chances are few for them to lighten the burden of vocabulary study through Chinese loanwords. Even if there are such words it will not necessarily be of much help. For example, learners whose mother tongue is English find it difficult to associate "beer" with "啤(pi)酒(jiu)" ('beer' in Chinese).
It is widely considered that the biggest difficult in learning Chinese as a second language is its special writing system: Chinese characters. However there are rules to follow in learning Chinese characters. After mastering about one hundred of commonly used characters, learning new characters will become easier through combining different sound and meaning parts. Even more difficult are the tones. Every syllable in Chinese (which is also a character) has its own tone, the relationship between tone and syllable has no rule to follow so one has to memorize all the combinations. To reach the intermediate level one has to master five thousand words which have about a million tones (not including tone sandi), which is not an easy task to accomplish. Even for us whose mother tongue is Chinese we will find it difficult to remember the tone of a new word after looking them up once in the dictionary.
Besides difficulties in language structures, the huge differences in customs and cultures have also pose difficulty for the learners. While learning the language itself they have to learn Chinese pragmatic rules and socio-cultural norms as well.
From the above analysis we can see that the learners can not learn Chinese in the same way as they learn the "relative languages". While learning "relative languages" one can put more emphasis on meaning than structure; however ignoring teaching of structure in TCSL may have disastrous consequences. Second language teaching theories and methods developed in the western countries might fit the western countries where the second languages are mainly those relative languages from the same language family. However they don't necessary fit TCSL. The research of TCSL should be conducted by our TCSL teachers and scholars at home and abroad based on study of general rules of world second language teaching and characteristics of Chinese language. We should discover the distinctive rules for TCSL in practice and develop our own special methods.
3.2 Argument and status quo in TCSL
Because of the characteristics of Chinese stated above, there have been different views toward which method to adopt for TCSL at home and abroad. Take US as an example, argument in TCSL pedagogy has never ended ever since the "proficiency movement" started in early 1980s. The core question in the argument is whether to put emphasis on "function" or "structure". Since US is the world's research base and hotbeds for second language teaching theories and pedagogy, TCSL teachers and scholars in US argue that TCSL should also adopt communicative and task-based approaches just like second language teaching in western countries. Representative scholars who hold this view are Professor Weike Wu from the Ohio State University and Professor Youmei Ren from the University of Hawaii. As an advocate for these two approaches, Professor Ren compiled a series of Chinese textbooks titled "Chinese Communication" (published by the Yale University Far East in 1994) based on communicative approach. Recently she led the compilation of "Global Chinese" (published by Chinese Teaching Society in 2012) based on task-based approach. In the article "Overview of Chinese Textbooks in the United States in early 2000", she criticized TCSL community in US as being "more conservative", "stick to the lexical grammar", and "in order to look good, they add some functional exercises to show their knowledge of new results in second language teaching, just like sprinkling black pepper to the noodle". She advocates to replace traditional curriculum with task-based approach, arguing "language rules can not be learnt through simply grammar exercises; they can only be acquired through task-based learning". Professor Zhiping Zhou from Princeton University is the representative of another school who advocate drills centered on listening and speaking. In "Hidden Worries about TCSL in US" the "worries" he listed are nothing but those emphasis on functional language teaching and multi-media teaching techniques. He thinks the "proficiency movement" in 80s is a nightmare: "every teacher is teaching menu, train schedule, ads in newspaper" and the result was "many students learnt non-proficient Chinese in this nightmare". He thinks in teacher training if the teachers are not taught to how to teach pronunciation and grammar, but instead only listen to empty talks on "student-centered" and "classroom activities", then "such teacher training is misleading the teachers and such classroom activities are destroying students". He attributed all these problems to "TCSL tries to cater to the western second language teaching pedagogy", which is an impact caused by invasion of foreign theories. Regarding TCSL pedagogy Professor Zhou emphasizes that teachers should teach the sentence structures first, "first of all we need to have CORRECT sentences", "we can not replace accuracy with proficiency". He believes drills are the main part in the teaching of language structures.
The essential question in these arguments still lies in the opposition between "function school" and "structure school". In fact, in the history of second language teaching, such opposition has always existed, and is not limited to Chinese language teaching. In Western language teaching there are two different ways of teaching with emphasis on structure and meaning. The first is the traditional structuralist approach with grammar translation method and listening and speaking method as representatives; the other is the functionalist approach with communicative and task-based methods as representatives and has become the mainstream teaching method in western countries. These two teaching principles have always been in argument. Such opposition has also been seen within the functionalist approach school. The communicative approach advocates who propose to put emphasis on function instead of grammar and language accuracy have been reflecting and making adjustment throughout these years. As JC Richards pointed out, one of the adjustments is the teaching emphasis has returned to grammar while the other is that equal emphasis is put on both fluency and accuracy. As the new development of communicative approach the task-based approach abandon some extreme practices in the communicative approach by putting more emphasis on grammar while centering on the content. Our TESOL colleagues, when bringing in task-based approach, has also proposed "not to ignore the basic language knowledge and skills and lost in excessive pursuit of task-based activities".
Different from Europe and US, Russia has developed its own second language teaching philosophy. Under the influence of consciously practice method from former Russia, TCSL in Russia pay special attention to linguistic theory, emphasizing to understand the grammar first, then master the language through a lot of practice. The textbooks should give detailed analysis and comparison of the syntax in both mother and target language.
In overall, what’s the current situation of TCSL? Our research tells us that even in Europe and US, the birthplace and hotbed of the communicative and task-based approaches which are in the dominant position in second language teaching in these countries, these two approaches have not become mainstream in TCSL for adults and special purposes. Instead a different approach integrating emphasis on structure, explanation of grammar and sentence patterns, as well as new elements from the two approaches has been developed. Such a trend has been seen in the famous American Matilda mode, Princeton Beijing School, Harvard Beijing College, Columbia Beijing Summer Chinese projects, etc. We believe such an approach can also be used for adult TCSL in other countries. However in TCSL for children, the approach integrating tasks, activities, and games have shown a lot of advantages and is rapidly developing.
4. Integration of Structure, Function and Culture
Study of general rules of second language teaching and special rules of TCSL which we introduced above provide background and foundation for our teaching philosophy of Integration of Structure, Function and Culture.
4.1 Reflection on the teaching philosophy and methods
Dozens of second language teaching pedagogies have been seen in the one hundred years’ history of modern language teaching and have contributed to our understanding of second language teaching and TCSL in different ways. The argument between different schools usually emphasize one point while ignoring others. Some usually go to the extreme or swing between two extremes (like the strict error correction advocated by the listening and speaking approach versus no correction by the communicative approach).
Take the opposition between functionalist and structuralist as an example: structuralist approach emphasizes only language structures while ignoring the ability to use language; functionalist approach (especially communicative approach) emphasizes functions while ignoring structures and accuracy. Both of these can not be used for TCSL directly.
To solve this problem, we may need to resort to Chinese culture and use our Chinese way of thinking to take full consideration of various factors and to find a balance among them instead of going to extremes.
We think the structuralist approach pedagogy has its advantages that we can use: it emphasizes learning structures through rules, and achieve proficiency through drills. In curriculum clear instruction on teaching sentence patterns and grammar points in each class. It fits the learning habits and rules of adults learns, especially for learning those languages which have big difference from the target language. But it also has its disadvantages with few task-based activities for learners to practice the structures and grammar learnt. On the other hand, functionalist approach doesn’t put much emphasis on learning structures instead it tries to make language and learning environment as real and practical as possible to encourage learners to use the language. But it will not fit TCSL because Chinese tones, characters, grammar and culture can not be easily acquired without enough drills and practice. The best solution for us is to integrate these two approaches, keep the good parts of our traditional structuralist approach while absorbing the strengths of functionalist approach. At the same time, we will need to strengthen the teaching of culture since it has been formulated as one of the goals of TCSL.
Most Chinese mainland scholars advocate to integrate structure, function and culture. These three will make the main content of TCSL philosophy and pedagogy which will be based on the perfect balance between these three aspects.
4.2 Path to Integration of Structure, Function and Culture
Integration of Structure, Function and Culture has come into being during the past century through the joint efforts of Chinese TCSL community represented by Beijing Language and Culture University.
In the past sixty years, TCSL in China has gone through three stages: the structuralist approach period from the 1950s to the 1970s; integration of structuralist approach and functionalist approach period from the 1980s to 1990s; and Integration of Structure, Function and Culture period from late 1990s till now.
From the very beginning the TCSL has paid attention to the characteristics of Chinese and special rules of TCSL. Being neither self-enclosed nor blindly following we have developed our own teaching theories and methods through learning from the western theories and based on our own practice. For example, in the 1950s translation method had a big influence on TCSL. We didn’t teach students to focus on the grammar only, but to emphasize learning grammatical rules through large amount of practice and reducing dependence on translation of mother language. In the 60s and 70s under the influence of direct method and listening and speaking method pattern drill became the main method. However we still emphasize grammar learning while doing drills. In the 80s when functionalist approach was popular we developed our own method integrating both structuralist approach and functionalist approach and published many papers on this topic. The 90s saw the wave of cultural learning. We had heated discussion on this topic and learnt relevant theories from the West. By the end of 90s we entered the Integration of Structure, Function and Culture period.
This approach integrates the advantages of communicative method and task-based method: emphasis on cultivating communication ability, stimulating learners’ initiative, authenticity and practicality of teaching content, classroom activities and interactions. Meanwhile it inherits strengths of translation method and speaking and listening method: emphasis on teaching language structures, cognition and language rules, and necessary drills (especially in the beginning stage).
4.3 Definition of structure, function, culture and their relationships
"Structure" refers the form of the language, or the rules for making sound, words, sentences and paragraphs, especially grammar rules. “Function” refers to the communicative tasks language can accomplish in certain situations. These tasks can be further categorized into topics. "Culture" refers to using language in a correct and suitable way that follow the customs, socio-cultural norms and pragmatic rules (usually termed “cultural elements of language”), the basic condition of that country and general socio-cultural knowledge (not including cultural knowledge taught in history, literature, philosophy, politics and economy).
How to deal with the relationship between structure, function, and culture? We say structure is about form and is the foundation; function is the goal and direction; cultural is the content and condition. The integration should balance the three well but also pay attention to their different outlines. The ratio of these three should be adjusted according to the different learners, goals and learning stages. Simply put, in the beginning stage more content should be on learning of structures while in more advanced stage greater proportion should be given to culture.
4.3.1 Structure is the foundation
The biggest difference between our Integration of Structure, Function and Culture and functionalist approach is that we take structure as the foundation because we think:
(1) Without mastery of language structures, one can not know how to use the language. Through learning language structures learners can know and grasp the basic expressions of a language and its general picture within a short period of time.
(2) Limited language rules can generate infinite sentences. The basic rules of any language can be generalized. There have been many achievements in the research of language structures.
(3) Language acquisition is a cognitive activity, and is a process that the learners internalize linguistic rules. Compared with children adults have more logical thinking ability and tend to do rational thinking such as analysis, synthesis and induction in learning languages.
(4) Research in linguistic typology shows Chinese has more special structures compared with other languages therefore we should put more emphasis on teaching structures.
How do we scientifically arranged teaching of structures (mainly refers to the grammar points)?
First, the arrangement should meet the needs of function teaching, highlight the difficulties, and take care of the dependencies between grammar points. The arrangement should be spiral, allowing for regular reappearance of grammar points. There should be succinct explanation combined with plenty drills in certain situations.
It is particularly important to adopt different approaches according to the characteristics of learners, learning objectives and language proficiency. For learners like adults, professional learners, and those at higher levels, deductive or inductive methods should be used to teach language structures explicitly so that they can learn the structures consciously through a lot of practice. For children, non-professional learners, teachers don’t need to mention the structures explicitly, instead more focus should be placed on designing activities that enable learners to obtain ability to use language in an implicit way.
4.3.2 Function is the direction
The goal of learning a language is for communication and use in real life therefore mastering the functions is the ultimate goal in second language learning. Without function structure is nothing; while structures can be better learnt in the simulated situations and contents that require certain functions.
How to arrange teaching of topics and functions?
First, topics and functions should be determined based on the needs of learners and the requirements in the syllabus. In the meantime attention should be paid to the difficulty level of the grammar points. In each class topics should be centered to cater the learners’ needs. Also spiral arrangement should be used for function items.
4.3.3 Culture is condition
Structure is the form of language while culture is the content of language. Culture is the prerequisite for using language correctly and appropriately. It is also an important goal for learners to know the culture of different countries, and develop the concept of multiculturalism.
How to arrange teaching of culture?
The initial stage (mainly through text dialogue) should introduce mainly the cultural elements closely related to the use of language. In the intermediate and advanced stages (mainly through text) basic country conditions and general socio-cultural knowledge can be introduced. Teaching materials should focus on the target culture with appropriate comparison with one’s native culture. Text content and situations should reflect the culture of the target language as much as possible, complemented by after-class cultural topics presented by the media language.
Research of culture teaching should focus on how to improve presentation skills that can be accepted happily by the leaners. At least two things should be kept in mind: to understand what students are interested in; and do not use propaganda tone.
4.4 Ten elements in Integration of Structure, Function and Culture
In the era of post-method we can choose whatever method we like. What’s more important than teaching methods is the guiding principles of teaching. Based on our own experiences, also referring to the new trends in the world's second language teaching development, we propose the following ten elements that summarize the most important TCSL teaching principle raised at home and abroad:
Communicative Student-centered Culture Interaction Cognition
Emotions Strategies Environment Assessment Technology
4.5 Integration of Structure, Function and Culture as a model of classroom teaching
Different pedagogy schools have different classroom teaching models, each with its own characteristics. We think that as far as the student's classroom learning is concerned, the model "demonstration, drills, express" is quite comprehensive, pragmatic and reliable. On this basis, we absorb some of the innovative practices in functionalist approach and propose the following suggestions on classroom and textbook design:
(1) List clear learning objectives according to the needs of students and arouse their interest in learning;
(2) Do warm-up and activate students' prior knowledge before introducing new content;
(3) Demonstrate new lesson content including explanation of texts, new words, language points and cultural points;
(4) Do drills of new grammar points to help students master the structures;
(5) Let students work in teams of two or more to do activities designed for certain situations and topics;
(6) Let students work in teams to do communicative and task-based activities that enable them to use what they learn in an integrated way;
(7) Let students do self-evaluation and summary what they learn.
Integration of Structure, Function and Culture is developed based on our teaching practice during the past half century. It is a TCSL pedagogy that reflects the special characteristics of Chinese language and TCSL as well, and fits the general trend of second language teaching. Most TCSL teachers and scholars at home have adopted this pedagogy, and more are joining in them each day.
Though Integration of Structure, Function and Culture has been proven to be a successful TCSL pedagogy, we should be aware that it is not the only one. There is more to explore about teaching and learning theories; society’s requirement for second language teaching is constantly developing; types and needs of learners are changing too. Therefore, there is always room for us to explore more about TCSL ideas and methods. We look forward to more research about different teaching methods, including introducing more communicative method and task-based method into TCSL.
No matter what research we conduct we need to bear in our mind the special characteristics of TCSL.
Reference
[1] 欧洲理事会文化合作教育委员会（刘骏等译）. 欧洲语言共同参考框架：学习、教学、评估[Z]. 北京：外语教学与研究出版社，2008.
[2] 任友梅. 杨双扬译. 二十一世纪初美国国内的汉语教材漫谈[J]. 国外汉语教学动态，2003（3）：32-39.
[3] 中国对外汉语教学学会汉语水平等级标准研究小组. 汉语水平等级标准和等级大纲（试行）[Z]. 北京：北京语言学院出版社，1988.
[4] 周质平. 美国汉语教学的隐忧[J]. 国外汉语教学动态， 2004（1）：41-44.
[5] ACTFL. Standards for foreign language learning in the 21st century （《21世纪外语学习标准》）[S]. Lawrence, KS: Allen Press, 1999.
[6] BROWN H D. Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to language pedagogy[M]. White Plains, NY: Longman, 2001.
[7] RICHARDS J C. Communicative language teaching today[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
[8] WALTON A R. Chinese language instruction in the United States: some reflections on the state of the art[J]. JCLTA, 1989 (24.2): 1-42.
[9] WILLIAMS M, BURDEN R L. Psychology for language teachers[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Adobe Acrobat, Adobe Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Frontpage, MateCat, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Office Pro, Microsoft Word, self-developed NLP tools, Trados Studio
Following are the highlights about my training and experience in translation so far:
1) more than 15 years' experience in translation/interpretation between Chinese and English;
2) PhD in linguistics, MS in computational linguistics, BA in English and BS in Computer Science;
3) professional training and rich work and research experience in translation, TESOL, linguistics and computational linguistics/NLP;
4) deep understanding of working mechanisms of both Chinese and English;
5) highly-skilled use of NLP and CAT tools to facilitate translation;
6) always passionate about developing new theories/tools to discover more about languages and use the tools/theories to develop better applications;
翻译样本