Drilling V's Lexical approach

There are many teaching practices some more heavily relying on grammar and drilling I believe in a balance of many of these methods excluding more outdated ones are key to learning language but the last method I think influences my practice is the lexical approach because by learning key phrases the students feel accomplished and able to say a range of things they get used to the feel of the language the formation and structures of sentences they recognised the patterns in different phrases are the same and start to acknowledge language writing and speaking rules. I think the basic grammar begins to come more naturally this way translating grammar from one language to another doesn’t always work as the structure of a sentence often changes language to language and a literal translation word for word would not be correct. If lesson are heavily grammar based you run the risk of alienating, boring or confusing students and their level of engagement suffers. Ultimately a good mix of many teaching methods will be best to provide an educating, interesting and engaging learning experience.

Can you explain, or give an example, of what you mean by the lexical approach?

in simple terms it means forget the grammar charts and memorising endless tenses and just go for learning vocabulary in the belief system that words+words=sentences. It ties in nicely with full immersion based learning.

For example if someone asked me in broken English "Where shop near" meaning to ask "where is the nearest shop?" I would understand enough so it is a good enough basis to start learning a language and get corrected along the way and grow it is the way babies learn their first languages we often dumb down what we say to a baby the grammar comes later on.

I just aant to add my kids started school knowing their numbers colours and shapes how to say hello how are you say how they felt happy sad tired tired hungry thirsty and how to ask to use the toilet question words who what where when how and do you want to play now one year on they can conjugate any sentence naturally from past present to future and from I to he she they we etc 

I think that we learn most of our grammar by exposure and use, just like every other aspect of language learning. So I understand members of this fairly popular movement today who say we should avoid learning grammar explicitly. If we learn it mostly through other activities, why put ourselves through grammar torture, right? 

But for those of us who study grammar, if you look at the entire time we devote to it compared to the total time to learn a language, it's very small (less than 5%). Is it worth it? Imo, yes it is. I learn best when I approach things from multiple angles. Being exposed to grammar, using it all the time, and explicitly learning it, are a really good combination. It's called synergy. Cut out any one of those things, and my effectivity decreases. 

That being said, everyone has their favorite learning styles, and I sure don't want to discourage anyone from using a method that works well for them. Good luck to us all!

Good luck to us all indeed! 

agreed leo i think a good mixture is needed but i wonder if my kids (younger learners ) have a better capability to naturally absorb the grammar structure as they go ?

While I have absolutely no training in early childhood education my gut tells me that kids must surely have the better capacity for learning languages. 'm sure I've read as much too. It occurs to me that perhaps our knowledge of our native language and its structures and rules can almost act like a barrier to learning. What I mean by that is that we may sometimes try to make the new language conform to our notion of proper grammar, etc. Like a child trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole!  

Obviously children are better and absorb information and you are right it has been tested and proven but i was really referring to actual manner in which they are better. It intrigues me .I remember ready a study once one children under the age of 8 who spoke more than one language some who had learnt in school some who had moved during the 8 years and some who were brought up in bilingually in households where more than one language was frequently spoken. Most of the childrens brains where active in a region we typically use when we access stored memories and things we have learnt... the bilingual children were using a part of their brain associated woith close memeories like our immediate family and important things we do on a daily basis tie our shoes clean teeth that sort of thing. The part of the brain associated with instincts and what i was really wondering (marvelling) about is at what age do we have the ability to learn a language in a more natural instinctive manner and when do we lose it and start filing everything new we learn as useful/useless information!

Ah! I get you. That's really interesting.

I'm sure children are much more capable of developing native-like pronunciation. I'm also sure that adults are capable of learning languages much faster than children. But do children "glean" grammar better than adults? It's a good question, and one that has been debated a lot. I haven't heard a definitive answer, but I'm also curious.