So you are teaching with your text and in year one the kids “learn” first how to say “I like” in Spanish– me gusta– and then how to conjugate regular present-tense verbs. And suddenly they are saying *yo gusto no trabajo. Then in Level 2 you “teach” them the past tense, like “she ran” is corrió. And suddenly they are saying *los lunes corrió a la escuela. These are a lot like how kids pick up L1: they acquire Daddy went to the store and then later say Daddy goed yesterday.
This is “rule overgeneralisation:” a new “rule” shows up and suddenly it gets applied everywhere, inappropriately.
Kids pull out of this very quickly, mostly because of the masses of input they get from L1 parents and other adults. But what can we do about this in the language classroom?
So some random notes:
1. Avoiding conscious learning is the first key. If you have to consciously learn AND remember AND apply “rules” in real time– ie during oral production– you will naturally default to the most recently-learned rule. So all that hard work on the present tense seems to go out the window when the passé composé gets introduced. This is not cos kids are dumb, lazy etc, but it is a brain-structure and bandwidth problem: you have a limited amount of conscious brainpower, and forcing it to “learn” and then remember and apply “grammar rules” (and the brain, as Bill VanPatten reminds us, doesn’t even actually use what we teachers call “grammar rules” in the first place) is too much. Too many mental balls to juggle. TPRS or AIM-style stories, Movietalk, Picturetalk, novels etc– i.e. interesting comprehensible input– will take care of a bunch of this.
2. Unsequenced or “unsheltered” grammar is second. Blaine Ray and Susan Gross pioneered using “unsheltered” grammar– using all verb tenses, pronouns, verb #s etc — from Day 1. If the input is “modeling” L2 in all its diversity, the brain won’t default to conscious or recently-“learned” rules. Yes, beginners can cope with sentences like El chico quería un mono que bailara (the boy wanted a monkey who might dance) easily. There you have inperfect, subordinate clause and past subjunctive all in one sentence.
This way, the brain has “everything” coming in at once, and it is getting the “mental spaces” for the different “rules” built, ground up, from Day 1. The kids won’t substitute trabajaba for trabajó because they have been hearing and reading them– mixed together, naturally– from the beginning.
(There is, btw, another argument for the use of unsheltered grammar: frequency. A glance at any word frequency list shows us that the 250 most-used words (i.e. what Level 1 of any language class should teach) includes verbs in five tenses and the subjunctive mood. And it’s not like Mexican moms or French dads delay speaking the subjunctive (or whatever) till their kids are ten years old!)
3. Avoiding “grammar practice” is the third key. The problems any output activity where we “practice” grammar are numerous:
- How do we expect people to do what they are trying to learn to do? Are we not putting the cart before the horse here?
- If we acquire languages via input, what good does output do? “Little or nothing” is Steve Krashen and Bill VanPatten’s answer.
- This will inevitably be accompanied by tons of English or other L1 discussion. Even the eager beavers will be saying “is it the thingy, the subtunction? Is that like you put an -a on it? No wait that’s an -e. OMG this Snapchat. Shut up I don’t like her, OK it’s *ella trabajió.“
- It’s boring. Generating sentences such as “the girl wants her cousin to cook” or “I want my friend to run” is not fun. I’ve tried everything–everything– and believe me, I can get kids to listen to a fun story that has [whatever grammar] in it, but I cannot get 90% of kids to “practice grammar” or “practice speaking” in any meaningful way.
4. Remember that “errors” do not exist, from the learner’s point of view. If somebody “screws up” in writing or speech, they quite simply have not acquired what they need to produce the language properly. They are being asked to do something they quite literally cannot do. There’s an entire Tea With BVP devoted to this question. So, rule overgeneralisation– like any error– has more to do with what teachers want than how “good” students are.
5. We have to remember that acquisition is non-linear. We can minimise problems such as rule overgeneralisation, but we can’t get rid of them. Check out this mama bear and her cub going rock climbing.
They test pawholds. They back down. They try the sequence differently. They don’t get there in one fast line.
Teachers are mama bear and students the cubs, if you will. They’ll do the moves…when they are ready.
Finally, we need to up the input. Students only acquire via input. Yes, it may seem like they are learning from doing worksheets, or using the subjunctive chart above, or practicing dialogues. But such “learning” is incidental, and as we see from research, much less effective than lots of good input. If you keep hearing “j’allais à l’école hier” or “yo gusto hamburguesas,” the students need to hear (and read) more je suis allé and me gustan las hamburguesas. In the long run, that’s the only thing that is going to work.