English immersion method

[Bercutt]

I'd like to discuss with you the following issues:

1. Is it easier for foreign learners to study English through their native language explanations of English pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary?
2. Do you support the method of intuitive English immersion for teaching and learning English?
3. Do you think a foreign language (English) should be learned the same way as a native language is acquired by a pre-school child? Are there substantial differences in this regard?

Below I've prepared just a draft of my thoughts on those issues. I want to develop my draft into a good article. Can you express your thoughts on those issues?

CAN A FOREIGN LANGUAGE (ENGLISH) BE LEARNED EFFECTIVELY THE SAME WAY AS A NATIVE LANGUAGE IS ACQUIRED?

Foreign learners especially adults need to learn English in realistic communicative oral and written exercises (that is to practise with real life content).
Some English language courses, schools and teachers advocate the "natural" or intuitive immersion method of learning English. This method excludes the use of a native language in learning English, and concentrates on listening to English conversations and texts and later speaking in English, but grammar is dealt with superficially through brief explanations of grammar points that occur in listening material.
There is no adequate grammar practice in exercises with communicative content to develop solid grammar skills to reduce grammatical mistakes by learners. Grammar is the weak point with this method. Followers of this method claim that pre-school children learn to speak their mother tongue this natural way through constant listening to their native speech and speaking practice, without learning grammar rules and without practising grammar exercises. By that logic a foreign language can be learned even by adults effectively the same way as a mother tongue by little kids. I do not share this view because there are substantial differences between learning a foreign language and native language acquisition, and between kids' and adults' learning processes. It's worth noting that little kids learning to speak their mother tongue are exposed to hearing only their native speech constantly every day and do not hear any foreign language and there is no other language interference as they think in their mother tongue only.
It takes them several years even under ideal conditions to speak their native everyday language fluently although their advanced grammar and vocabulary knowledge may be limited.
At school children still have to learn the grammar of their native language to master it proficiently.

Learning a foreign language, especially by adults is a totally different matter. Everyday listening and speaking in a foreign language by adults living in their native countries are quite limited at best and often absent for some periods of time, and they think in their native language and there is a native language interference in learning a foreign language (in terms of pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary). A person can think only in the language that a person knows best.
I believe without knowledge of grammar rules and adequate grammar practice in exercises with communicative content it is impossible to speak, understand and write in a foreign language correctly. Therefore learning a foreign language must include adequate grammar learning as well.
In my view it is easier for foreign learners to study English through their native language explanations of English pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary.

[Квас]

Much of what you've written sounds sensible, even though I don't understand the dilemma: why not combine elements of immersion and of grammar training in the same course? (It seems to me this is how it often happens in practice.) Yet this reasoning can hardly constitute a good article. There are lots of such discussion on the forum, but they can be rated at best as scholastic disputes if not as idle talk, so far as there are no facts. If there have been no special research with experimental groups, control groups and the like, then at least statistics would help. More figures!

[Квас]

If you care for a learner's opinion,

1. Is it easier for foreign learners to study English through their native language explanations of English pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary?

It depends. To my mind, native language should not be rejected altogether, but the more advanced is the level, the more profitable it is to stay within the scope of English. At least, constant switching between languages is somewhat distracting.

2. Do you support the method of intuitive English immersion for teaching and learning English?

Yes and no. Perhaps if immersions alter with emersions. To tell the truth, I don't know. (They say there have been successful efforts of teaching Latin only thought Latin, but personally I wouldn't dare to try it. I speak about Latin because I'm interested in it, whereas your topics are of general interest.)

One should only bear in mind that the language exists in the form of speech.

3. Do you think a foreign language (English) should be learned the same way as a native language is acquired by a pre-school child? Are there substantial differences in this regard?

By no means. Adults and little children considerably differ with respect to the psychology.