The need to teach and learn foreign languages has always existed but the methods used have changed considerably, especially over the last two or three decades.

In today’s world, it is becoming increasingly more important to be able to communicate in other languages, especially English (although recently there has been a growing demand for Spanish). The way people learn languages differs according to their requirements: scientists are probably more interested in being able to read written articles, whereas an air-traffic controller has to be able to speak and understand English. Therefore, courses have to be tailored to suit the demands of students.

Early teaching methods came from Latin or French, which were important languages in the western world. Naturally, this changed dramatically from the fifteenth or sixteenth centuries, when the English and Spanish empires began to expand. In the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, and especially as a result of the ever-increasing dominance of the United States as a world force – politically, economically and socially – the learning of English has become essential.

It goes without saying that many methods, approaches and techniques have been developed. If we examine language teaching from a historical perspective, we find that for many centuries the dominant method was what has always been referred to as ‘Grammar/Translation’. As its name suggests, the main emphasis was on grammar and translation. This approach was commonly used for the teaching of classical languages like Latin or Greek and was based primarily on the written language. Students were expected to master grammatical rules and memorise long lists of vocabulary. Exercises consisted mainly of translations and reading comprehensions, with little attempt to deal with the more communicative aspects of the language. By concentrating more on the form of the language rather than on its functions, this approach does little to satisfy the interests and needs of language students nowadays, although it may be stimulating from a purely intellectual point of view.

Many different approaches or methods were devised to try somehow to deal with students’ needs and interests. Each method is normally based on one particular view of learning, many concentrating on communicative fluency instead of formal accuracy. We can examine some of these ideas now in more detail.

The so-called ‘Direct Method’ (often referred to as the ‘Natural Method’) attempts to involve the learner in developing speaking and listening skills in realistic everyday situations. As the learners’ mother tongue is not used, they are encouraged to think in the foreign language instead of translating into or out of it. More emphasis is placed upon good pronunciation and there is a complete avoidance of grammatical rules.

The problem with this method is that it is extremely difficult at times to create natural learning situations in the artificial environment of a language classroom. As a result, many teachers have adapted the approach in some ways and do allow a certain amount of L1 (mother-tongue) explanation.

Another method became popular during the Second World War. Used to give intensive training to American soldiers, it concentrated on speaking and listening, especially accurate pronunciation. Known as the Audio-Lingual method, it attempts – in a relatively short time-span – to introduce common structural patterns in dialogues, and uses a good deal of imitation and drilling. This means that the method is not particularly popular today, as learners normally require to use the language more creatively.

Since the 1960s, many new approaches to foreign language learning have been devised. Considered as ‘Humanistic Approaches’, their aim is to make language learning as natural as possible, thus motivating learners. Most of these methods consider the student to be the important figure in the learning process; indeed, many methods talk about a ‘student-centred’ approach, meaning that students have more control over how and what they learn.

Some of these humanistic approaches have been more successful than others, very often depending on the age or level of the students and the environment in which the learning process takes place.

One such approach is Suggestopedia, which proposes that the unused potential of the brain can be exploited through the power of suggestion. Much of the material is presented in the learners’ mother tongue and then translated into the foreign language, with no attention being paid to grammatical errors.

In the Silent Way, learners are encouraged to develop their own ways of using the language elements introduced. The amount of actual teaching is kept to a minimum, apart from the presentation of vocabulary and structures using sets of coloured rods.

The teacher’s role in Community Language Learning is much more that of a counsellor or adviser than an actual teacher. Students use their own language and seek translations from the teacher.

The idea that it is easier to receive language than produce it is the basic principle of the method known as Delayed Oral Practice.

A useful method for young learners is what is known as Total Physical Response. Here, learners have to carry out actions following simple commands.

Whatever the merits of these humanistic approaches, it was still felt that there was a need to concentrate more on language functions instead of on the form. The belief was – and still is – that learners need to be able to communicate in the foreign language, and that the best way of achieving competence is if they can select the appropriate constructions for use in everyday situations.

The Communicative Approach, as it became known, paid more attention to these functions. From the 1970s, course contents started to be organised in terms of a notional or functional syllabus. It was considered necessary to deal with notions like the linguistic expression of time, duration, frequency, quantity or location, whilst at the same time introducing the major communicative functions, such as persuasion, emotional expression and so on.

Most modern day foreign language teaching throughout the world has tended to adopt some kind of communicative methodology. Text books generally introduce notions and functions at the same time, although some teachers do find it difficult at times to interrelate these two concepts. For this reason, many teachers have adapted the communicative approach to suit the needs of their students, more often than not following the principles of presentation, practice and production.

Grammar does have a place in language learning, but it should always be seen as a means to an end and not as an end in itself. Grammar is necessary in order to use language correctly as, if we do not follow the guidelines, language may well lose its meaning, and people may not understand what we are trying to communicate. That is why, although it may seem boring, we cannot ignore its study.

Therefore, a sensible methodological approach must be one which takes into account both grammar and vocabulary input as well as communicative output. There should be less emphasis placed on the form of the language and more on the functions. As much as possible, classes should be student-based, with importance being given to the development of our students’ self-study and self-learning techniques and the use of communication strategies.