Education of the republic of uzbekistan termez state university foreign philology faculty the department of foreign language and literature

The subject matter of this course work is that the role of strategies for teaching speaking in a foreign language at primary school through interactive methods
The object of this course work is devoted to study the role of enhancing teaching speaking in a foreign language at primary school through interactive methods The actuality of the course work is determined by the necessity strategies for teaching speaking in a foreign language at primary school .
Course paper is about that debate encourages different types of responses, helps Pupils to develop convincing arguments, and allows teachers and pupils to learn from one another. In order to have good discussions teachers need to define problems that have multiple solutions or methods of solution. These types of problems are best in simulating discussion, creativity and risk taking. When teachers are trying to encourage a meaningful discussion it is crucial that they give their pupils plenty of time to respond and think about what they want to say. Teachers should avoid yes/no questions and short answered question if they want to have a quality discussion. Open-ended higher level thinking questions are the best choice to get students thinking and communicating their ideas. The teacher should stay involved in the discussion to correct wrong information but should be careful when pointing out mistakes. It is very important to create and maintain an environment where students feel comfortable in participating. This also encourages students to back up what they believe and it allows teachers to really get a good idea of what kind of conceptual knowledge students have about certain topics, especially in high school classes.


MAIN PART
1 Types of mood:Indicative mood
. Indicative Mood: expresses an assertion, denial, or question:
Little Rock is the capital of Arkansas. Ostriches cannot fly. Have you finished your homework?
The indicative and the imperative moods are fairly common. You use the indicative mood in most statements and questions.
He walks every day after lunch.
Does he believe in the benefits of exercise?
You use the imperative in requests and commands. Imperative statements have an understood subject of “you” and therefore take second‐person verbs.
Sit down. ([ You] sit down.)
Please take a number. ([ You] please take a number.)
Subjunctive Mood
Verb tenses in the indicative mood are used in special kinds of statements. The most common use of the subjunctive mood is in contrary‐to‐fact or hypothetical statements. In your own writing, you must decide which statements should be in the subjunctive mood. If something is likely to happen, use the indicative. If something is hypothetical, or contrary to fact, use the subjunctiveIn linguistics, intonation is variation in pitch used to indicate the speaker's attitudes and emotions, to highlight or focus an expression, to signal the illocutionary act performed by a sentence, or to regulate the flow of discourse. For example, the English question "Does Maria speak Spanish or French?" is interpreted as a yes-or-no question when it is uttered with a single rising intonation contour, but is interpreted as an alternative question when uttered with a rising contour on "Spanish" and a falling contour on "French". Although intonation is primarily a matter of pitch variation, its effects almost always work hand-in-hand with other prosodic features. Intonation is distinct from tone, the phenomenon where pitch is used to distinguish words (as in Mandarin) or to mark grammatical features (as in Kinyarwanda). The first approach is a system-structural or phonological one. It is known that according to traditional phonology the system of intonation differential features description is constructed on the principle of a binary opposition of intonation units (for example, if we take traditional intonation constructions worked out by E.A. Bryzgunova (1978, p. 18-33). Applying this approach we artificially cognitively abstract from so called “excessive” intonological information of both linguistic and extralinguistic view. The strict opposition, stratification of differential and integral features being realized within the framework of one intonation unit (in other terminology it is called as intoneme, intonation construction) which was characteristic for the initial development of phonology and intonology is considered to be quite relative now (Crystal, 1991). It can be clearly confirmed by experiments with computer-aided simulation of the speech units as a result of which “it remains unclear what features are phonemic and which of them are excessive from the view of classical phonematics, but essential phonetically because they introduce this realization of a speech unit in the orphoepic standard of the national linguistic system” (Rumyantsev, 1990, p. 15). Any differential feature in the real speech in a vivid certain language is realized within the frame of a pronouncing standard with a definite communicative-pragmatic task, a modal expressive-emotional ²sense, and a stylistic culturological belonging of the phrase. For example, Crystal and Davy (1973) described the declamatory style of intonation as possessing the following phonostylistic characteristics: loudness varied according to the size of the audience and to the emotional setting; pauses are long especially between the passages, prolonged emphatic pauses are used to underline the emphasis; rhythm is properly organized; common use of low and high falls in final and initial intonation groups and on semantic centres. 2. According to the facts mentioned above, it is necessary to distinguish the second aspect – a normative one. The priority of this approach development is worth giving to Rumyantsev (1999) who in the 1980s showed for the first time how tightly phonetics is connected with phonology and that in this process of communication the phonetic features can be not less, but much more important than phonological ones. Unfortunately, the narrow understanding of a phrase intonation, considering its components (speech melody, duration, intensity, rhythm and timbre) only according to the frequency of the main tone (i.e. to speech melody) and to the direction of the tone movement is a typical mistake in modern practice of the Russian language teaching. While working over the intonation in the class, we often abstract the first, phonological aspect of intonation, giving unreasonably much attention to it and considering it as the only important feature in teaching foreign language intonation. In this case we forget that intonation features are bifunctional by their nature: “they form this or that intonation (communicative, modal, emotional, and stylistic) and simultaneously provide its phonetic normative acceptability in this language” (Rumyantsev, 1990, p. 51). All these facts speak about the complicated character of differential and integral features interaction, about the wide spectrum of different inflections and variants in passing from one intonation unit to another. 3. The third aspect of intonation is a typological one. According to Zubkova (1997) the significance of intonation parameters is changed depending on the language type and the position of the language on the scale of lexicality/grammaticality. The basic parameter of intonation – speech melody – in particular, the direction of its movement in grammar types of languages is used to express different grammar meanings: for intonation formalization of the utterances, for their communicative types distinction, for the actual articulation expression. In the languages of lexical types such as Chinese, Vietnamese, Yoruba this parameter is used at the level of the word prosodic organization, and it forms the general tonal contour and identifies lexical meanings. The rest prosodic components – intensity, duration – in the languages of grammar type are mainly connected with the word and considered to be a means of its prosodic organization. In the languages of lexical type these components are associated with a sentence-utterance as a means of motive or estimation expression. For example, in Russian a general question and a statement are differentiated due to the opposition of rising (rising-falling) and general falling intonation; in Swahili, Arabian and Cicongo – the opposition of rising-falling, rising with falling or twice rising-falling intonation in comparison with general falling intonation in the statement. Basically, this differential feature determines other non-leading features: general frequency range of a phrase, localization of frequency maximum, frequency level (register). In tonal languages, however, the functional correlation of leading and non-leading frequency characteristics is quite different. The direction of movement for the main tone frequency is not differential in the process of a general question and statement intonation distinction; it means that the phonological status of intonation feature is really changed in terms of the language type and its place at the scale of lexicality/grammaticality. So, for the intonation of general question in such a tonal language as Yoruba, without formal parameters of interrogativeness the same general direction of tone movement as that for a statement is inherent. In accordance with the data of audit analysis, the general questions and statements are identified in Yoruba and Hausa with the height of frequency level and localization of frequency maximum, but not with the direction of tone movement. Thus, we can see that phonological status of feature in the intonation structure can vary depending on the language type: the leading differential feature in one language becomes an integral one in another language and vice versa. Intonation is a multi-layer phenomenon, the unity of universal, typological and national-specific features. In the specification of intonation as a multi-layer phenomenon we base on a hierarchic organization of the language as a form in conception of Humbolt-Zubkova (1999). In the context of intonation investigation in this direction the conception of Nikolaeva (1979, p.219-225) who distinguishes three layers in intonation – the universal layer, the layer of word prosody, and the special layer of the language itself, and the conception of Cheremisina (1999) which includes the prosody of a word, the layer of individual intonation characterizing a person and the layer of stylistic features of intonation. We assume that any intonation contour having a symbolic form of the language manifests the unity of universal, group (genetic, areal and typological ones) and national-specific features of the language.³