Skip to main content

Sentence combining drills

A standard way to introduce or practise a grammatical structure is by means of sentence combining drills. Look at the example below, taken from frenchteacher.net, which focuses on the meaning and form of present participles in French. Strictly speaking, in this case the exercise is about combining two clauses, not sentences. The exercise is a typical audiolingual one in style, based on the idea that by repeating the structure  numerous times you are helping students to internalise it. “Internalise” in this context means embed it in long term memory, automatise,  or help it to be “acquired”, ready to be used spontaneously in the future. Now, it’s very unlikely that an exercise of this type would achieve the aim of automatisation on its own, but by bringing the form and meaning to the attention of the learner, it should, in combination with comprehensible input featuring the structure’s use, along with other activities, more or less communicative, help students use the structure in a spontaneous or more rehearsed way in the future. It’s the type of exercise you may not choose to do with every class, since it requires a reasonable degree of prior knowledge and analysis.

There has been some research on sentence combining, both for L1 and L2 learning, but clear evidence for its success is hard to find when general proficiency or spontaneous talk is the focus. But that is not a reason to reject it as a technique. To quote that favourite saying “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”.

The drill below could be done orally, in writing (or both) and prompts and responses could be translated. Students could be asked to make up their own. Drills like this are, of course, just one possible ingredient in the diet of comprehensible input.

I wonder if you use exercises like these. Do they help? Do students appreciate their usefulness? Or do you think they are dull and doomed to fail to meet their objective?

 

Exemples

 

En arrivant = on arriving/by arriving/while arriving

 

Je jouais au football quand je me suis fait mal au genou.

 

>  Je me suis fait mal en jouant au football.

 

Je regardais la télé et parlais à ma femme.

 

    >   Je parlais à ma femme en regardant la télé.

 

 

1. Je faisais du ski quand je suis tombé.
2. J’entrais dans le salon quand j’ai vu ma mère.
3. Je regardais la télé quand j’ai réalisé que j’avais des devoirs à faire.
4. Je mangeais un caramel quand j’ai eu mal aux dents.
5. II allait au collège quand il a eu un accident de la route.
6. Il promenait le chien quand il a vu son vieil ami Paul.
7. Il préparait un repas quand il s’est coupé le doigt.
8. Elle jouait au rugby quand elle s’est fait mal au dos.
9. Elle mangeait son repas et écoutait la radio.
10. On a fini le dîner, puis on est sorti en ville.
11. Quand nous sommes arrivés à la gare, nous avons acheté un billet.
12. Je suis allé en ligne et j’ai cherché un DVD.
13. Tu as fait une recherche sur Google et tu as trouvé une solution.
14. Ils parlaient de la politique et ils ont eu une grande dispute.
15. Il a cherché dans le dictionnaire et il a trouvé la traduction.
16. On regardait un film au ciné et on mangeait du popcorn.
17. Je me promenais en ville quand j’ai rencontré un autre vieil ami.
18. Elle faisait du cheval quand elle est tombée.
19. Il attendait le train et lisait sa tablette.
20. Il a pris beaucoup de notes et a réussi à l’examen.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).

La retraite à 60 ans

Suite à mon post récent sur les acquis sociaux..... L'âge légal de la retraite est une chose. Je voudrais bien savoir à quel âge les gens prennent leur retraite en pratique - l'âge réel de la retraite, si vous voulez. J'ai entendu prétendre qu'il y a peu de différence à cet égard entre la France et le Royaume-Uni. Manifestation à Marseille en 2008 pour le maintien de la retraite à 60 ans © AFP/Michel Gangne Six Français sur dix sont d’accord avec le PS qui défend la retraite à 60 ans (BVA) Cécile Quéguiner Plus de la moitié des Français jugent que le gouvernement a " tort de vouloir aller vite dans la réforme " et estiment que le PS a " raison de défendre l’âge légal de départ en retraite à 60 ans ". Résultat d’un sondage BVA/Absoluce pour Les Échos et France Info , paru ce matin. Une majorité de Français (58%) estiment que la position du Parti socialiste , qui défend le maintien de l’âge légal de départ à la retraite à 60 ans,