The purpose of this paper is to express a reaction to a recent article in this journal by Juan Estarellas. In his discussion, Prof. Estarellas describes a case study on the teaching of Spanish pronuniation and sound-letter correspondence, and at the same time he identifies the audio-lingual approach as the primary source of student problems in these two areas.' The presence of pronunciation and spelling problems among beginning students of Spanish is readily acknowledged, and the gains recorded among the students on Professor Estarellas' experiment offer a persuasive argument in favor of early and intensive phonological and sound-letter training. However, the assertion that students in (presumably any and all) audiolingual Spanish programs are weak in these two areas, because the audio-lingual approach is inherently deficient is its provisions for such work, is open to serious question. A concern for accuracy and objectivity requires a critical examination of this allegation. If one were to look no further than Prof. Estarellas' several citations of audio-lingual adherents,2 it might appear that the method indeed ignores a careful approach to sound discrimination and sound-letter correspondence. It should be noted, however, that these citations date from the early to mid-sixties and do not necessarily represent current thought among many audio-lingual spokesmen. Further, it is just as important to consider the extent to which methodological principles are reflected in teaching materials (textbooks, etc.) and in the actual practices of classroom teachers as it is to quote the selected pronouncements of leading methodologists, however eminent they are. The position of this article, then, is that the audiolingual approach does in fact provide for careful training of the sort endorsed by Prof. Estarellas, that it (through text materials and other means) has so provided from the early years of the 1960's, that the audio-lingual principle of emphasizing language in meaningful units is in no way incompatible with either the means or the ends advocated by Prof. Estarellas, and that foreign language teachers almost never fit neatly into a single methodological niche. Consequently, the problems observed in a single school cannot be safely attributed to a teaching method alone. One of the best-known and most widely used audio-lingual Spanish textbooks in American secondary schools includes Spelling-Writing and Reading Drills in its first edition (1961), which deal with sound-letter instruction at the word-and phrase-level, with emphasis on the most troublesome points of native language interference.3 In addition, there are numerous pronunciation drills which focus on the most crucial potential problems encountered by American students, and which, the authors point out, reflect the findings of recent linguistic research.' The second edition (1969) of the same textbook furnishes in its teacher's edition even more extensive exercises for pronunciation and spelling. Pronunciation exercises are an integral part of each unit and include aural discrimination drills (Spanish vs. English, Spanish vs. Spanish) and repetition drills on both isolated words and complete sentences.5 Sound-letter correspondence is treated, too, beginning with the second unit.6 Although the exercises in both editions of this popular audio-lingual textbook undoubtedly differ in some respects from those developed by Prof. Estarellas, it should be clear that SHOP-TALK 99
Read full abstract