37.3227, Reviews: The Fabrication of Traditional Language Teaching: Barbara Schmenk (2026)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-37-3227. Wed Oct 07 2026. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 37.3227, Reviews: The Fabrication of Traditional Language Teaching: Barbara Schmenk (2026)

Moderator: Steven Moran (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Managing Editor: Valeriia Vyshnevetska
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Daniel Swanson
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Editor for this issue: Valeriia Vyshnevetska <valeriia at linguistlist.org>

================================================================


Date: 07-Oct-2026
From: Alisha Reaves [areaves at towson.edu]
Subject: Applied Linguistics, General Linguistics: Barbara Schmenk (2026)


Book announced at https://linguistlist.org/issues/37-1532

Title: The Fabrication of Traditional Language Teaching
Publication Year: 2026

Publisher: Bloomsbury Publishing
           http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/
Book URL:
https://www.bloomsbury.com/fabrication-of-traditional-language-teaching-9781350563254/

Author(s): Barbara Schmenk

Reviewer: Alisha Reaves

SUMMARY
The monograph “The Fabrication of Traditional Language Teaching”
provides an in-depth analysis of the treatment of “tradition” and
“traditional” as a term and a concept both within the context of
language teaching, and in western society in general. Across six
well-researched chapters, Barbara Schmenk deftly breaks down the
concept of tradition and its systematic neglect as a subject worthy of
study in its own right.
Schmenk’s stated aim in examining tradition in this way is to “trace
how traditional language teaching has been, and continues to be,
fabricated and how this fabrication affects and impedes our
understanding of tradition and of language teaching and scholarship”
(p. 3). This fabrication is a result of a variety of converging forces
and misunderstandings with regards to the role of tradition in society
and an “othering” of “things traditional”, as she calls it, in favor
of innovation and progress promoted by western modernist ideals.
Chapter 1 begins with a comprehensive discussion of the communicative
turn in language teaching and its near constant juxtaposition with
“traditional language teaching”. With a nod to the Age of AI, Schmenk
opens this chapter with her query to ChatGPT: “What is traditional
language teaching?” She then describes the AI output as a list that
many language teachers would find familiar and has probably appeared
in many methodology textbooks. This output emphasizes the explicit
teaching of grammar and teacher-centered approaches. Throughout this
chapter, Schmenk underscores that scholar after scholar has fallen
back upon this list approach when describing traditional language
teaching (TLT), when in her view, the actual goal achieved is to
portray the newer approach as superior to its predecessors.
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) is examined extensively,
emphasizing the rhetoric of the binary that has formed between it and
traditional language teaching. In reviewing the emergence of CLT,
Schmenk draws attention to the lack of a consistent framework for TLT
and how it has thus far only been conceptualized in contrast to CLT.
In Chapter 2, Schmenk pursues a rhetorical analysis of narratives
surrounding traditional language teaching in the twenty-first century.
She identifies several types of narratives that have framed the
conversation around TLT including what she calls “narratives of
failure”, which include critiques of both CLT and TLT, “success
stories”, in which CLT is portrayed as the natural successor to TLT,
and a third category of “open-ended” stories which emphasize that
while theoretical discussions of pedagogical approaches have changed
over time, actual teaching practice in the classroom has budged very
little. Schmenk argues that despite the varying perspectives shared in
these narratives, all of them continue to reinforce the arbitrary
binary that has been formed between communicative language teaching
and traditional language teaching, without any systematic
interrogation of traditional language teaching on its own.
While the first two chapters consider traditional language teaching
with respect to communicative language teaching, in Chapter 3, Schmenk
moves beyond this binary, analyzing approaches that have addressed TLT
outside of the CLT/TLT dichotomy. Specifically, Schmenk examines
post-CLT approaches such as the multilingual turn and translanguaging
and the effect of the digitization of contemporary society. She also
takes a strong look at the past, specifically approaches to language
teaching by late nineteenth century German scholars, and
audiolingualism in the mid-twentieth century. From this review,
Schmenk concludes that the communicative approach is not as innovative
and contemporary as is generally thought, finding that the 19th
century German scholars supported methodologies that were remarkably
similar to modern day CLT. This finding is important as it pokes holes
in the argument that the development of CLT was an innovation of the
modern era and more importantly that TLT is a relic of the past.
Schmenk argues instead that “traditional” has become a straw man
intended to polarize and contrast with the latest “innovation” in
language teaching pedagogy.
Chapter 4 reflects upon the few analyses of traditional language
teaching in its own right. The stated goal of the chapter is to
highlight the disjointed nature in which “traditional” is used in
language teaching discourse. Schmenk focuses on four works: Fotos
(2005), Jin and Cortazzi (2011), Musumeci (1997), and Richards (2006).
These four accounts highlight contradictory understandings of
traditional language teaching, which Schmenk emphasizes seems to be a
moving target without an agreed upon frame of reference. She describes
how traditional language teaching is conceptualized in one of three
ways: through methodization (associating it with a particular method
such as grammar-translation), periodization (associating it with a
particular point in time, situating TLT as before the approach being
supported), and culturalization (framing TLT or CLT as tied to or
incompatible with a particular cultural context). The discussion of
culturalization in particular leads to an examination of accounts of
the failure of CLT in Asia, where TLT tends to dominate. Schmenk
argues that CLT is often treated as culturally neutral, when it was in
fact born out of anglophone western teaching traditions, and as a
result may conflict with non-western traditions of education. The
false neutrality of CLT, reinforces the othering of TLT, despite
obvious cultural mismatches when it is attempted outside of its
original cultural context.
In Chapter 5, Schmenk looks beyond language teaching to understand the
conceptualization of “tradition” and “traditional” in the broader
scope of the humanities. She traces theories of “tradition” through
western philosophical movements and works by Karl Marx, John Stuart
Mill, Immanuel Kant, Max Weber and others. The common theme is that
tradition has been consistently pitted against the rationality,
modernity, and individuality valued in western society. Even outside
of language teaching, “tradition” is othered and something to be left
behind. Schmenk goes even deeper, connecting western perspectives of
tradition with coloniality and the denigration of non-Western cultures
that were treated as inferior to rational, modern, western ways of
being and knowing. She argues that references to “traditional
societies” in analyses of tradition largely deal with inventions and
fabrications that reflect and reinforce colonial policies that dismiss
tradition as primitive. In a return to the context of language
teaching, Schmenk claims that the use of traditional is not neutral
and instead reinforces the modernist and colonial perspectives
examined earlier in the chapter. The traditional/communicative binary
is an anglo-euro-centric perspective and the continued othering of
traditional language teaching is rooted in colonial practices.
Chapter 6 is titled “Reclaiming Tradition”. Here, Schmenk presents a
way forward. She argues that tradition persists because it serves a
purpose in society, and this purpose needs to be understood rather
than simply dismissed in favor of innovation. Tradition should neither
be automatically adopted, nor automatically rejected. The chapter
neither endorses nor rejects traditional language teaching but instead
argues for a sincere and systematic study of traditional approaches in
the same way that newer methodologies have been studied. As an
example, Schmenk argues that traditional educational practices from
indigenous cultures could be investigated systematically in their
appropriate context rather than immediately moving towards innovation,
especially as it concerns contexts of language revitalization. She
encourages listening and engaging with those who value tradition in
their lives and attempting to understand the role it plays in language
education. Ultimately, Schmenk finds value in the study of tradition
as a concept in its own right; and that it should not be so quickly
dismissed or ignored by applied linguists or others.
EVALUATION
Schmenk’s stated goal in this work was to provide a systematic
examination of traditional language teaching and the concept of
tradition. It is a fair assessment to say that Schmenk accomplishes
this goal. Chapter by chapter, she demonstrates how “tradition” in
language teaching has been taken for granted and neglected as a
subject worthy of scholarly inquiry. Schmenk’s review is thorough to
the point of excess at times. The first two chapters successfully make
the argument of the “othering” of traditional language teaching and
“things traditional” in general. The following chapters repeat these
points with additional sources beyond what some may find necessary to
be convincing.
One of the surprising aspects of the book is Schmenk’s presentation of
the ways in which the reflexive othering of tradition is grounded in
western colonial perspectives. Applied linguistics has generally been
slow to acknowledge the Eurocentric methodology and perspectives that
dominate the field. Recent work in critical applied linguistics (Anya,
2021; Flores and Rosa, 2022, etc.) has been calling for more inclusive
and representative approaches to language teaching. And while Schmenk
does not advocate for one perspective or another, stating plainly that
modern applied linguistics is Eurocentric and may not be applicable in
other cultural contexts is an important step for theoretical work
outside of the growing critical research tradition.
It’s important to make clear that this book is not for
teacher-practitioners looking for new pedagogies or practical tools to
take directly into the classroom. It is not so much a pedagogical
manual as it is a theoretical examination of the field of language
pedagogy.  Teacher-scholars who are interested in the future of the
field, especially as it pertains to the future development of
methodological approaches and the investigation of existing approaches
would do well to read this text. Many in the field of applied
linguistics and second language teaching would benefit from the
reflection it provokes on accepted practices and the field’s
unquestioned focus on innovation and progress. It may also pair well
with approaches that emphasize the importance of indigenous
epistemologies.
This book is unique in its extensive analysis of tradition from a
theoretical perspective, as Schmenk noted is glaringly lacking in the
field of applied linguistics. It suggests several new avenues of
research in the application of traditional language teaching
pedagogies and a more reflective rather than impulsive approach to
language teaching. New and innovative is not always better, and
Schmenk’s work forces us to slow down and critically consider why
innovation has been prioritized in contrast to tradition, seemingly at
any cost.
REFERENCES
Anya, U. (2021). Critical Race Pedagogy for More Effective and
Inclusive World Language Teaching, Applied Linguistics, Volume 42,6,
1055–1069. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amab068
Flores, N. and Rosa, J. (2023). Undoing Competence: Coloniality,
Homogeneity, and the   Overrepresentation of Whiteness in Applied
Linguistics. Language Learning, 73:  268-295.
https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12528
Fotos, S. (2005). “Traditional and Grammar Translation Methods for
Second Language      Teaching.” In E. Hinkel (ed.), Handbook of
Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning: Vol. I, pp. 653-70.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawence Erlbaum Associates.
Jin, L., and M. Cortazzi. (2011). “Re-evaluating Traditional
Approaches to Second Language      Teaching and Learning.” In E.
Hinkel (ed.), Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and
Learning, Vol. II, pp. 558-75. New York: Routledge.
Musumeci, D. (1997). Breaking Tradition: An Exploration of the
Historical Relationship  between Theory and Practice in Second
Language Teaching. New York: McGraw       Hill.
Ricards, J.C. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Today.
Cambridge: Cambridge       University Press.
ABOUT THE REVIEWER
Dr. Reaves is an Associate Professor of French & Linguistics at Towson
University in Towson, MD, where she teaches courses in linguistics,
French language and culture, and French linguistics. Her research
concentrates primarily on the second language acquisition of French
with further interests in French sociolinguistics and French language
pedagogy. She has published in The French Review and her book
‘Discourse Markers in Second Language French’ was published with
Routledge in March 2023.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

********************** LINGUIST List Support ***********************
Please consider donating to the Linguist List, a U.S. 501(c)(3) not for profit organization:

https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=87C2AXTVC4PP8

LINGUIST List is supported by the following publishers:

Australian Linguistics Society https://als.asn.au/Home

Bloomsbury Publishing http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/

Cambridge University Press http://www.cambridge.org/linguistics

Cascadilla Press http://www.cascadilla.com/

De Gruyter Brill https://www.degruyterbrill.com/?changeLang=en

Edinburgh University Press http://www.edinburghuniversitypress.com

European Language Resources Association (ELRA) http://www.elra.info

John Benjamins http://www.benjamins.com/

Language Science Press http://langsci-press.org

MDPI Languages https://www.mdpi.com/journal/languages

MIT Press http://mitpress.mit.edu/

Multilingual Matters http://www.multilingual-matters.com/

Narr Francke Attempto Verlag GmbH + Co. KG http://www.narr.de/

Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics / Landelijke (LOT) http://www.lotpublications.nl/

Peter Lang AG http://www.peterlang.com

SIL International Publications http://www.sil.org/resources/publications

University of Toronto Press http://www.utpjournals.com/


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-37-3227
----------------------------------------------------------