Difference Between Audiolingual and Community Language Teaching

Read Summary

The methods of Audiolingualism and Communicative Language Teaching differ in their approach to second language learning. Audiolingualism focuses on structuralism and behaviorism, while Communicative Language Teaching emphasizes communication and cognitive comprehension. In Audiolingualism, form and structure are prioritized over meaning, and memorization of structural-based dialogs is required. In contrast, CLT prioritizes meanings and uses dialogs centered around communicative functions that do not need to be memorized. Contextualization is a fundamental premise in CLT, while in ALM, language items are not necessarily contextualized. Pronunciation is also approached differently, with ALM seeking native-speaker-like pronunciation and CLT seeking comprehensible pronunciation. Native language use is forbidden in ALM, while it is accepted in CLT when beneficial to the students. Additionally, reading and writing are deferred in ALM until speech is mastered, while in CLT, they can begin on the first day. Overall, CLT is a response to and improvement upon the Audiolingual method, based on modern research and more useful for language learners.

Table of Content

Differences Between Aduiolingualism and communicative Language Teaching

1) Introduction
2) Main Differences
3) Conclusion

Audiolingualism and communicative Language Teaching are methods of second language learning based on different approaches, design, and procedure. These methods were used in different eras. In 1950 Audiolingualism replaced Grammar Translation Method. In Audiolingualism theory of language and language learning is structuralism and behaviourism respectively.

This method was rejected by British linguists in 1960s. In 1970 Communicative Language Teaching repalced Audiolingual method. Theory of language in CLT was communication and theory of learning was communication principles or skill learning based on cognition, comprehension, thinking and memory aspects. Audiolingual method focus on structure and form more than meanings, while in CLT meanings are paramount. In CLT dialogs are used centre around communicative functions and are not normally memorized, While AL method demand memorization of structural based dialogs. In ALM language items are not necessarily contextualize, while in CLT contextualization is a basic premise. In CLT effective communication is sought, on the other hand in ALM mastery is sought. In ALM drilling is central technique, while in CLT drilling may occur, but peripherally.

In CLT comprehensible pronunciation is sought, while in ALM native-speaker like pronunciation is sought. In ALM the use of student’s native language is forbidden, while in CLT judicious use of native language is accepted where students need or benefit from it, while in ALM translation is forbidden at early level. In ALM reading and writing are deferred till speech is master, while in CLT reading and writing can start from first day. In CLT teacher helps learners in any way that motivates them to work in the language, while in ALM teacher controls the learners and prevents them from doing anything that conflicts with the theory.

Audiolingual and communicative Language Teaching are very contrastive methods. CLT method is response Audiolingual method, and its approach is based on modern research and it is much useful then ALM.

Cite this page

Difference Between Audiolingual and Community Language Teaching. (2016, Apr 26). Retrieved from


Remember! This essay was written by a student

You can get a custom paper by one of our expert writers

Order custom paper Without paying upfront