What Some "Method Pushers" Forget

I've noticed that some people who are trying to make a bit of money from their "methods" downplay grammar. Oooh grammar-sooo evil, lol.
It's like grammar is the new sugar-bad for your health and teeth except in the tiniest quantities. While you think about that, I'll run out and get a piece of cake, no, just kidding.

Grammar is not the new sugar. It's just a tool or a way to describe structures in the language. What I noticed (are you ready for the big surprise?) is that these method pushers STUDIED at least two languages FORMALLY at some time before they got on the "No Grammar" bandwagon.

Got that? They are pushing some sort of natural learning, but they had the advantage of formal training in the past.

I don't like to study grammar. I'm not fond of reading grammar for fun, but I have a fair number of reference grammars, verb books, etc. in the languages that I seriously want to "own". If I can't figure something out, I don't have to look in a tiny, inadequate grammar book.

I'm all for getting what I can in a fun way by listening, through games, through songs, through movies, but let's be honest fellow polyglots, most of us DID get some formal training in school. That counts for something.

Many people who have never learned languages are clueless. They think only "gifted" people can learn, or they hope for the perfect teacher who will teach them painlessly. I absolutely believe that some polyglots can learn without being hit on the head with a grammar book, but newbies need more help. Let's not assume that everyone can learn like we learn now.

Think about it. Comments?

The sugar comparison is a shitty one. Because people actually like sugar and have to hold themselves back. PEople don't like grammar and are glad not to have to do it. Sugar = good, but bad for you. Grammar = bad, but good for you.

I agree. I studied German grammar formally and, once I had grasped cases, adjective endings and other 'rules', I was certainly able to produce sentences that were much nearer to being correct than before I had grasped these concepts. I'm not saying I produced particularly idiomatic or native sounding German, that did only come later from living in Germany and hearing what was around me. But it did give me a grounding which enabled me to write, for the most part, correct basic German sentences. By this I mean I was able to build a correct German sentence without the need ever to have heard that sentence before. And yes, native German speakers judged them to be correct.

But then, maybe this applies more to a language like German, than to one like English. German seems to be much more made up of 'building blocks' of grammatical concepts, so that if you learn these concepts, you can't go far wrong in terms of producing a sentence that is structurally correct, even if it's not that idiomatic.

I don't mind grammar at all, I think it's interesting. Yes, it can be hard to memorise case tables, adjectival endings and the like, but I don't really think there's an easy way round it if you actually want to be able to manipulate the language and use it effectively.

I think it's interesting as well, especially coming from a morphologically weak language like English. It kind of opens your eyes to concepts that exist in the heads of the majority of the world's population (albeit often subconsciously), that don't in yours.

Well, I mean they don't exist in the head of a monolingual native English speaker, unless they study a morphologically more complex language.