Untitled

saxelmwifo enis swavlebis sakiTxebi:
problemebi da gamowvevebi
Issues of State Language Teaching;
Problems and Challenges
Khatuna Beridze
NGO Translation Development Center, Batumi, Georgia
Preconditions of Teaching GLL Students
ABSTRACT
Teaching of Georgian, as a State Language and introduction of the advanced Western methodologies of
language teaching are viewed as two interrelated phenomena. One of the significant approaches of the
Western European methods of the language teaching is the politics of language teaching, which is strictly
based on the preliminary in-depth research outcomes;
The language teaching policy is elaborated as a result of the summed up data and their synthesis; The traditional
Western approaches of language teaching incorporate the structural, the functional and interactional
views of the language; Hence, the methodology is constructed and on the premises of each view
(Richards, J.C. y T.S. Rodgers 1987, pp. 14-30).
Against this background, for the progressive teaching of Georgian as a state language it is of absolute urgency
to develop critical analysis and modern style of criticism specifically for the Georgian, as well to
focus literary norms of the modern Georgian.
The goal of the paper is to analyze the headstart conditions of policy formations for teaching Georgian as
a second language. It addresses two urgent problems: critical analysis of language teaching and the role of
translated fiction, as part of the national culture in the education of the GLL or bilingual students. Both are
considered to be intertwined in the process of the policy formation for teaching GSL. Teaching of Georgian,
as a second Language and introduction of the advanced Western methodologies of the second language teaching
are viewed as two interrelated phenomena, however, the paper argues, that adoption of the Western experience
should be based on the preliminary adaptation analysis. The paper highlights several recommendations
for successful implementation of the policies of second language teaching.
The Preconditions of starting new educational programs for the GLL students’ segment is classified into
(a) dearth of the language/literature/translation criticism; (b) dearth of efficiency and Western experience in
teaching the state language to the Georgian language learners whose first language is not Georgian.
The scholars of Georgian have yet to concentrate on the literary norms of the modern Georgia, with the
view on one hand of the linguistic changes which Georgian suffered through the Russification regime, and on
the other hand, the threats to the language as posed to the globalized world. The linguistic portrait of the
Georgian world is the conceptual phenomenon coded with the national essence, that is to be communicated to
the non-Georgian citizens of our homeland. The deficiency of criticism is reflected on the outcomes of the
research project carried out by the Department of the National Assessment in 2009 which intended to pinpoint
the problems of teaching Georgian. Regrettably, Adjara indexed the worst outcomes among the five most vulnerable
regions in Georgia (Tsereteli, 2009 www.ganatleba.org). Therefore, it should not come as a surprise,
that non-Georgian public schools in the regions which are densely populated with the ethnic minorities do not
meet the standards established by the newly issued Law of National Education. Regrettably, unless purified,
modern Georgian is contaminated enough to bring about miscommunication of the national concept. We have
to gauge the channels which transfer contaminated Georgian through literature, translation, mass media, internet
etc.
One of the significant approaches of the Western methods of the language teaching is the politics of language
teaching, which is strictly based on the preliminary in-depth research and testing outcomes; Furthermore,
analytical approaches to the politics of teaching needs technical analysis (e.g. matrix of assigned teaching
hours) as well as critical analysis of the Western experience and development and institutionalization of
the language criticism.
305