Why the current approach to teaching New Testament Greek *actually* doesn't work
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 08. 2024
- The grammar-translate method is the standard approach to teaching Biblical Greek and Hebrew. But what is its history, and how do scholars in the field of second language acquisition view it today?
In a recent video from Biblical Mastery Academy, Darryl Burling argues that there is no problem with the grammar-translation method itself, only how it is implemented today. In this video, Biblingo’s Kevin Grasso responds.
Original Video: • Why the current approa...
Kevin I am entirely on your side and it is about time somebody took up this idea. After studying Greek for three years I feel I have to go back and learn it anew. Yes I can translate very well but my confidence in the language itself has grown worse. Here some simple tests: Say something in Greek (or Hebrew) that makes sense. Answer questions in that language. Read aloud in the language something you have not read before and explain it afterwards.
The GTM is not about learning a language, it is about decoding and that is something entirely different. My native language, English, now becomes the fundamental basis for how to decode. All nuance of the original language then becomes lost and we have a "this means this" type of scenario.
Me: studied Greek GTM for number of years; re-studied Greek with reading approaches, dialogues; Polis, etc. Have taught Greek for a half dozen semesters.
I think there is no real argument against the view to know a language is to be able to use it: thinking, reading, writing, speaking. These remain the goals of high proficiency in one's own mother tongue. I agree that GT is not the way.
However, the challenge with the ancient sources you cite, and with Richards and Rogers, is that they are speaking of disanalogous contexts: of immersion into a second language, or (in the case of Quint. and many ancient authors) of *learning your native languages. I was raised in a home with two tri-lingual* parents (English-French-Spanish; Spanish-Italian-English-Russian* *pretty good); we spoke Eng. and Span. I had Spanish grammar lessons as a kid; hated them. I learned my spanish by listening at home, and, especially, by extended family vacations in Spanish speaking countries.
But I cannot do this with classical or post-classical Greek. Modern Greek is not the same despite what Caragounis and others want to say. And let's be honest--*most* advocates and practitioners of living language approaches cannot model the language adequately--either wrt. to pronunciation (which arguably matters as much for ancient Greek as it does for some Asian languages), nor do they have the robust abilities that a native teacher would have. *Maybe* some very few do. I suspect they are likely to be modern Greek speakers with an excellent knowledge of the ancient language and even then, modern Gk speakers spurn reconstructed pronunciation as a rule; which is a problem.
So where are we left? There is a reason why very competent teachers of prose composition stick to actual Greek examples. There's a reason why people like the great and powerful Zuntz constructed all his διαλόγοι on real ancient Greek.
There's much ado about the alternative to strict GT being the use of, frankly, untutored anglicisms in poorly "spoken" Greek where students still mightily struggle to read unadapted prose and poetry with fluency after some time anyway. The proof will always be in the unaided reading of a variety of real ancient texts. Reading aloud with ease and fluidity and understanding as you go.
By my lights, a CI/reading-focused program (using adapted real Gk as much as possible--so Athenaze/RG/Logos/Rouse will have to be used w. caution) with composition as a major target skill, and reading all texts and compositions aloud, together with basic, real gk διαλόγοι is a far superior method of getting fluent in the language (using it) than is the very slow progressions of spoken imperatives ἔλθε ὧδε. . . χαῖρε, ὦ φίλε, πῶς ἔχεις; καλῶς ἔχω. . . χαίρετε μαθηταί. . . etc.
But imagine a 3-4 yr program that began with a CI reading program; the teacher used very basic dialgoues from actual Gk to welcome students, and do basic interaction; all students learned accentuation and prose composition (say, Dickey), and all students read aloud all Gk from as early as possible. In addition, some basic dialogues from Zuntz could be used.
This would coincide with language theory and grammar (as the best reading programs like Italian Athenaze do), and the turn to good composition books like Dickey will entail basically working through a reference grammar front to back. Grammar can be taught all the way, because it is and remains a highly respectable discipline in itself that attracts students. Linguistics as well, and this remains a great benefit to 2LA with a special focus on grammar.
This is like learning a classical instrument, actually. Theory and practice are undertaken simultaneously, not in step-wise fashion of practice and then theory. In fact, this remains the best analogy for ancient language learning.
Absolutely spot on. The results speak for themselves-deafeningly.
I'm so glad there is someone in the biblical language learning (acquiring) community who is defending and teaching the Comprehensible Input method.
"Music theory will help you a little, if you already know how to play the violin!" Perfect!
Great video! You nailed every point. I would have preferred that you say "GT is the *least effective* method, etc." My professors at university learned through traditional GT methods (or maybe you could say despite traditional GT methods!) and their Greek and Latin was killer.
I just started learning Greek at BMA where Darryl is the founder. I have always wanted to learn to read the NT in Greek and I always find it interesting no matter what topic I take up, there is always debate and controversy. What method do I use to learn? What pronunciation do I use? I guess that’s how we grow. Having said that, I think the majority of people, pastors, going to seminary are not interested in learning Greek or Hebrew. They do it because it’s required and just want to get it over with. Pastors today who have gone to seminary and now are in ministry are happy with using tools like logos. I don’t see many pastors running back to remedial classes in any of the pedagogical methods. It’s generally people like me, who want to read the Bible in the original languages. So I don’t think it is solely on method it’s the lowered expectation on pastors and those in ministry that is causing this issue. I am using both methods because I have the time and I am enjoying both methods. Two cents from a less than novice. Cheers!
A fantastic response. - Jason Hare
I would love to see you two have a friendly conversation with each other.
Darryl seems like a smart guy with passion for Biblical Languages, this leads me to the conclusion that he will come around eventually. :)
So glad to see a response video like this. Subbed.
Might I add that GTM resources have to be bilingual? Don’t have a greek grammar in your language? Tough. Guess you have to learn english first.
It seems that GTM has its proper purpose in language learning similar to the purpose of learning English grammar for learning English. It is true that you can learn to read, write, listen and speak English even without learning grammar, but learning the formal aspects of the language help build on what you have learned. This is all the more true for NT Greek which is no longer a living language where similar conditions for learning it no longer persists. In addition, one indeed learns a living language like English through contact in conversation and use, but this only pertains to everyday colloquial use of the language. Written documents which contain language distant from the present requires different approach that considers the diachronic aspects of meaning and grammar.
I appreciate this video. Thank you.
I have much love for _everyone_ who is working hard to raise biblical language skills. But yes, this particular video does need a strong response, because a strong response is what will be needed if we hope to resurrect the language skills for the next generation.
On the topic itself, In my opinion, there is a false dichotomy being set up here. The optimum path for an educated adult, is almost certainly to do both. To learn the language as a "natural language", supported/scaffolded by "grammar education" along the way. (I suspect letting "natural language" lead ahead is better though, because it allows the grammar questions naturally rise out of real language).
This is insightful. I agree that there is a risk of setting up a false dichotomy. For my part, I'm not against the CI approach at all. We do benefit from both an explanation with input, and I'm always looking at how I can improve what we do at Biblical Mastery Academy. Unfortunately, there are only so many resources, and we all work within the paradigm of our training, which is why we need to be pushed along by each other. I'm open to working with Biblingo (I think Kevin and the team are great), but I don't know how that would look. 😀
This is my personal example... (1) I did three years of Greek in Bible college. After that, I did nothing for learning to speak, hear, or write Greek. In subsequent years, I read the NT and parts of the LXX in Greek pretty regularly, but I never felt that I had a real grasp (facility) with the language. In the past five years, I went through Athenaze (Ἀθήναζε) that teaches Greek through stories rather than through grammar (essentially). I spent time practicing reading aloud, recording things for myself, trying to get beyond translating. Only then did it start to work for me, but I still feel stunted in my Greek learning. (2) As far as Hebrew is concerned, I did two years of grammar and translation in Bible college. After that, I went to a synagogue to listen to people reciting the text aloud, memorized prayers from the Jewish siddur and passages from the Bible in Hebrew, and started to study modern spoken Hebrew on my own. My ability with Hebrew grew and grew, and whereas I feel stunted and hindered in Greek, my ability with Hebrew took off, and I learned it as a heart language. If I had done the same thing with Greek, I think I would feel much more confidence and stability in my understanding of the language.
You ongoing method for Greek, doing CI and such, is good and adequate! Keep in mind, that Greek is a much harder language to master than Hb, especially if your standard is feeling "at home" in a wide array of texts.
This is an excellent description of how most GTM programs in colleges do not equip students to read the New Testament. Instead, the student can comment on a Grammer feature (imperfect tense means the action is an ongoing process). Such students are dependent on tools like logos or interlinear Bibles. It would seem that GTM gets things backwards. Students should focus on acquiring vocab and reading simple sentences which gradually increase in difficulty. Then, after reading is possible, then reference Grammar to better understand the meaning.
First I would ask have you actually looked at Darryl's program, talked to him, or seen the results of all the students in Biblical Mastery Academy?
I say this as someone that has had to learn Arabic and some Russian for my prior Job in the military. I have a masters in Biblical Studies and went through Mounce in that program. I've also attempted to learn in with the method you present. So I have used both methods and I currently am almost finished with Darryl's beginning Greek in small steps program. I learned and had way more confidence in the language in the first month of his program then I did after my entire masters and anything I've tried since program.
Also, beginning Greek is just the launchpad, there are reading courses after beginning Greek and we all work towards the milestones book by book and eventually the goal is to be able to read and translate the entirety of the New Testament basically on the fly. I think the testament to what Darryl is doing is the fruit. There are a lot of people in the program who are able to read many books of the New Testament. Due to the nature of us trying to become fluent with the language in order to read it without using tools . The grammar translate works great when done well and we aren't chugging from a firehose which is why his small steps program is so good to get started It also helps us to really understand what the language is doing so that we can properly exegete which is what we want.
The immersion training is great if you can be exactly as stated, immersed in it daily for hours with people who can speak with you. That's why they were able to do that back then. The majority of us will not have that type of access unless we go to Greece. So in love as someone who has learned languages and seen the success of many in Darryl's Biblical mastery academy. I have to staunchly disagree with your video.
Wonderful thoughts, thanks!
Thank you, this is very educating
Wonderful demolition job :)
I love both of you guys. However, I think you are correct. I think people get stuck in the "old" ways that they think are older than they actually are.
This happens in theology too. People cling to relatively new theological beliefs (on the scale of church history) and think as though thats what christians have always believed.
I thought Darryl was slowly shifting towards a more natural language approach. When he started his channel, his only goal was to help people read the New Testament fluently. Later, I noticed he began emphasizing the goal to understand secondary biblical literature, such as commentaries and journal articles. This made me think he might have realized that GT wasn't the best method for achieving reading fluency. When I saw the title of this video, I hoped he had finally decided to change his approach. Disappointed to see him double down and inconsistently blame learners for not being properly educated in grammar before coming to Greek but then say that modern textbooks do a good job of teaching it.
I'm sorry I dissappointed you, that certainly wasn't my intention. I'm certainly not blaming learners for not being properly educated. The blame lies elsewhere - perhaps with secular philosophical educators who have moved away from classical education and thus have eliminated the opportunity for people to learn grammar as they learn languages. I tried in my video to be gracious to those who have invested years writing grammars that have been used by the Lord to serve his church. However, I do believe we need to do better with our grammars. I am not against the GT method, obviously, nor am I against CLI. I think there is room to use both together. For my part, I'm working on constantly improving what we do, and hope to expand our offerings in the future.
I feel like both methods here are wrong. You propose the communicative method, and Daryl is proposing Grammer translation. Neither will give you the ability to read any higher level texts like the Iliad. Comprehensible input is the only way to learn ancient Greek. Reading with a reader's edition and listening is how I learned to read Homer.
What would you say is the most adequate way to learn the language, and most of all, retain it?
I have learnt Japanese in one year studying in Japan. In that language course teachers made us learn each lesson text by heart. They insisted on it. At the end of each lesson every student had to recite the whole lesson by heart. So with 12 students in the class everybody got to hear the lesson 11 times and had to recite it once himself. This ensured that even lesser able students were kept on board. After only 3 months we were rather fluent in the language. It was eye opening. So given that seminarists are expected to know the bible well make it a habit to learn whole bible parts by heart in Latin or Greek or even Hebrew.
nobody speaks ancient Hebrew or greek to each other so how will this work?I do agree what your saying makes the most sense,so what is the best method dog you have a video on this?
what is gtm?I'm confused recently started learn Hebrew and greek
As much as I enjoyed your video, your cadence makes it very hard to focus on what you're saying. Your words are too spaced apart and each word ends very harshly.
Scientific study I love learning Grammer to learn a language works for me I'm an advocate
Preach!
Grammar translation does an enormous amount of harm. Especially for people training for ministry. It turns people off language learning.
Imagine someone who has learnt French, German and Latin. And you mention the word pluperfect or preposition and so on. Such a student shrugs and goes on merrily.
OK now imagine someone with little formal education or no foreign language training. Mention the same words to them? Panic and despair.
In a normal class those who can't feel stupid and ashamed. In Christian circles people will relate this to the gift of tongues. They have it. I just don't have it - I was never given the gift and that's that (I mean they express this in words and language so probably DO have the gift of language). Either way. 1. i'm stupid and bad or 2. I don't have this gift. These messages rest in the minds of the student and do a lot of harm.
Those who have it - you're a weird linguist, but then you have this "gift".
Why do grammar translation?
1. A university course has to be hard and discriminating between passing and failing students (but we want all students to enjoy reading).
2. The course needs to be examined. It's easier to 'examine' knowledge of grammar translation, harder to 'examine' being able to read - though not impossible.
3. What does the teacher do? In a modern language they create communicative situations. The Greek teacher isn't able to do this or can't see the relevance. Maybe their accent isn't good (I mean who cares). The emotional load of learning and the diversity of students means that a language teacher is a knower of the students, a coach, a friend, a therapist and a helper in despair.
Grammar should be very, very light and only if the student finds it helpful.
PS I have learned French, German and Latin and I cannot tolerate grammar expect sparingly in languages I am learning. I am self learning. have grammar text books and instruction. I can't do it. I know what a verb is, what a subordinating conjunction, subjunctive, dative and genitive. And I cannot tolerate grammar based learning. It doesn't go into my head. I can't tolerate it. If you love grammar and like it, buy all the books and knock yourself out. But it's not me and not 90% of language students. It doesn't damage my self esteem because I'm good at languages and know GTM doesn't work. I worry about the student with a good heart who maybe feels insecure academically and takes away horrible self messages that damage them for years.
Teachers are responsible for the learning and the well being of those who study with them. A great vision of a teacher. A bricklayer studies with them. Their education level is low. They get to love reading the New Testament in Greek with no complexes whatever. That is my vision.
Ouch! Love this!