ENGLISH GRAMMAR AS A SYSTEM OF MEANING: RETHINKING PEDAGOGICAL APPROACHES IN UZBEKISTAN
Keywords:
English grammar, communicative competence, Uzbek learners, language pedagogy, form-meaning-useAbstract
While English grammar instruction in many schools remains tethered to rigid rules and isolated forms, such approaches often fail to bridge the gap toward authentic communication. This article contends that grammar is best taught as a dynamic system for making meaning, rather than a static collection of mechanical structures.
By integrating modern linguistic theories—specifically Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and the form-meaning-use framework—the paper examines the specific pedagogical hurdles within the Uzbek educational landscape. Beyond identifying these challenges, the study offers research-driven strategies aimed at shifting the classroom focus toward contextualized learning. Ultimately, the goal is to demonstrate how teaching grammar in context not only builds communicative competence but also fosters greater learner autonomy and confidence.
Downloads
References
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.
Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 83–107.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269–293). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003). Teaching language: From grammar to grammaring. Boston: Heinle.
Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot et al. (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158.
