Job Discussion Forums

fluffyhamster · Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 6:11 pm Post subject:

I'll aver that the canonization of the term alignment infers a word salad cataclysm of unholy lycanthropy in THE cranial biblios, but that commenting to the veracity of *an other's* collocations is podiatry OF comparison under the lowest common liturgical.

Now that we've cleared that up (thanks to my perfectly clear phrasing) we can now deal with the meat of the matter.

I was just leafing though books that provide things called "grammar explanations in L2" ( Rolling Eyes

), and it's only down at the level of say Murphy's Essential/Basic that the learner is really spared much terminology and the focus more on just examples, simple differences in verb phrase structuring (e.g. positive versus negative forms (i.e. canonical versus non-canonical clauses)) etc. Once you start hitting the intermediate level upwards though the reference books start getting "harder". Don't believe me? Take a look in common ELT grammars like Swan or even the COBUILD English Grammar (which legend has it is easier) and you'll see that what that nice Anglo-Link lady croons is a smooth straightforward conniption-free picnic in comparison. So again, she is in a way true to the company name in arguably providing a link of sorts "between the levels". (Uh oh, I can sense a "skill in, indeed need for, explaining grammar?" discussion surfacing here though).

BTW I think we're all aware that grammar explanations in and of themselves or "alone" (only minimally-contextualized) do not maketh a full English breakfast communicative lesson, and are ultimately supplementary to a balanced, well-designed diet of green eggs and ham and course of study. Not that intelligent students can't extrapolate from nice succinct explanations (I'm not sure that the clip quite qualifies as that though).

fluffyhamster · Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 6:21 pm Post subject:

fluffyhamster · Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 7:47 pm Post subject:

CANDLES · Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 9:42 pm Post subject:

could I please retract my previous thread? REQUEST..

would it be possible to retract my previous thread?

can I ...............?

should I retract.........?

might I have the possibility to.......?

Very Happy

fluffyhamster · Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 9:58 pm Post subject:

F-...

CANDLES · Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 10:04 pm Post subject:

Is there a MODAL VERB beginning with F ? Rolling Eyes

fluffyhamster · Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 10:10 pm Post subject:

Oh I thought you were trying to save the critical posters a bit of work by posting a fragment of a potential presentation or lesson plan for them. Sorry for the low grade I awarded to it. Laughing

Although to be totally honest I'm not sure what the point of your post really was at all! Cool

CANDLES · Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 10:13 pm Post subject:

Thanks for the grade...that actually sums up my ' lesson plans'! Hate them! Evil or Very Mad

scot47 · Joined: 10 Jan 2003 Posts: 15343

Lesson plans ?

hahahahahaha

Best one I saw was our mature colleague with a PhD in French Literature. He wrote out in longhand the text of his entire lesson. Needless to say Teacher Talking Time was 99.73%

He did the job for years, but soon gave up on 20-page lesson plans.

sunrader · Joined: 12 Dec 2005 Posts: 101

buravirgil · Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2015 5:41 am Post subject:

sunrader · Joined: 12 Dec 2005 Posts: 101

buravirgil · Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2015 6:06 am Post subject:

http://microsyntax.sites.yale.edu/multiple-modals

sunrader · Joined: 12 Dec 2005 Posts: 101

buravirgil · Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2015 6:20 am Post subject:

From the link:

Multiple modals most commonly have might or may as their first modal (Di Paolo 1989), though this is not always the case; examples like could might have been observed with might or may second, and other examples like should oughta contain neither might nor may. The most prevalent multiple modals are might could, might can, and might would (Mishoe and Montgomery 1994).