Job Discussion Forums

[JL]

Hi Markle.
When it comes to my neat little スィ trick for the "si/ci" sound (as in "sit"), that was just one tool of many in my teacher's toolbox. But before I proceed to allay any fears that I might be "limiting (the learning of English through the) spectrum of another language" I first want to contest the notion that I was "needless(ly) delaying the inevitable." This little one-off technique pretty efficiently wipes out endless struggling over the "sh" phoneme, by introducing a new way for students to conceptualize it. Whether with kids or adults, they're always trying to work off their シ sound as their base. Some can make the leap to "si". But because we're dealing with Japanese, a frustratingly large amount don't. I used to have a few other tricks like that, but the スィ one was my main shtick or gimmick.

Now, I must be clear that, along with many (all?) native English speakers who've taught in Japan, I too, am appalled at the lengths at which some Japanese teachers of English will go, to keep Japanese students seemingly quarantined from actually speaking, thinking and experiencing English on their own. I taught in both language schools, and high schools. I firmly agree that English should be taught in English. The first language school I worked for flat-out banned Japanese in the classrooom, with the lone exception of teaching young children with zero previous study of English. That is how I was 'brought up' to teach English, and that, by in large, is how I still think today. But there is a time and place for everything. The little technique I mentioned (スィ), is one I developed in a kid's classroom. Especially with adults (but kids too), my rule of thumb is to never be too preoccupied with trying to make their pronunciation perfect; just correct the most egregious errors. In general, when a student is trying to speak in English, don't get in their way.

For an example of how I do not teach pronunciation, and why I strongly believe that speaking Japanese, as well as using kana, should be kept to the barest of minimums in the classroom, please see this following article which was in the Japan Times about a month ago. I think the author may be engaging in just a little bit of hyperbole. But then again, maybe she isn't!

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/fl20090124cz.html

[Apsara]

I have also used the "su+small i" katakana combination (usually when I try to write on this forum in Japanese it doesn't work, don't know why) to teach the difference between shi and si, and it works. A private student who wasn't getting it and kept mispronouncing "city" etc. totally got it when I showed her the katakana, and hasn't made that mistake since.

[JL]

[gaijinalways]

I would suggest that it would depend on the student (for pronunciation) as to whether the use of Katakana would be helpful or not.. Sometimes you have to use the hammer approach (The you enjoy speaking the English?) to cure 'problems' that occur in your students' speech. But it depends on your approach, and whether you have students willing to correct other students' speech (which can help in trimming errors).

JL posted

[elkarlo]

Aspara: thanks for using me as an exapmle
Anyhow yes as a Midland accent person, I do say mon and man almost the same way. I also say surprise as suprise, I drop one 'r'. I know I do some more things, but I can't think of any right this second.

Here is a question; Why can most people understand the AMerican midland accent, and the Queen's sccent, but everything else is really hard to understand for many people?

[Apsara]

[gaijinalways]

Aspara posted

[seklarwia]

[Apsara]

[elkarlo]

[JL]

Well this thread has taken a fun twist! Mostly subjective points being made; not a whole lot to argue about. I will throw in my own subjective observations, though. And one objective fact.

The latter first: what is considered the "standard American accent", is the West Coast accent. This is due to the overwhelming influence of Hollywood. Until the 1950's, early 1960's, most television pioneers were crossover performers from the days of radio. And radio was largely a New York-based industry. So a lot of T.V. entertainers from yesteryear spoke with New York accents. This was true for motion pictures too, but to markedly lesser extent. If you watch any older U.S. t.v. re-runs, or older movies, too, the predominant accent spoken is a New York accent. But after the entertainment industry became firmly ensconced in California, naturally many character actors, as well as up and coming lead actors, spoke with a California /West Coast accent. Furthermore, actors drawn to Hollywood from other regions, learned to homogenize their own accents with that of the predominant local Californians.

So what the world today knows as an American accent, is largely a Californian accent. Even local newscasters in different news markets around the nation, learn to speak with a "neutral" accent, which is the Californian accent. And due to television and movies, some folks complain that regional accents are becoming homogenized as well, among younger generations growing up in different locales.

As for distinuishing between Australians and New Zealanders, there was a time that I could do it. I don't think I can any longer, though. I'm not in contact with any on a daily basis. But to generalize, Australians have a bit more of a nasal quality to their speech, while Kiwis are a bit more clipped in theirs. As for Londoners, I certainly don't know the variations spoken within the metropolis, but I was first taught -and can hear for myself- that the typical Londoner speaks with a working man's accent, a statement which may raise some eyebrows over there. But I'm an American, and don't hold any notions, either way, as to whether that's a good thing, or not.

Of the Aussies acting with American accents, Nicole Kidman does it the best. Russell Crowes is probably the worst. But give him time. Mel Gibson's accent used to slip from time to time too, but then I stopped noticing it. So clearly, he improved (though he was American born, anyway). I guess I'd have to include Sam Neill in the accomplished category as well. Because I didn't know until half way through his career, that he was Australian.

As for the difference in American accents, they are for real, ladies. It's just that, as I explained above, more and more Americans are speaking with the homogenized, standard American accent. Most Americans that you (or I) bump into, no longer have an accent, or at least a strong one. But trust me, plenty still do. My friend from Asheville, North Carolina doesn't sound one bit like my father, a New Yorker, did. Or like the northern Minnesotans I was working for last week, did. Or, then again, like a kid who grew up in East L.A., does.

"Plenty of North Americans have told me they can't even distinguish a British accent from an Australian or Kiwi one, and you expect us to distinguish a Boston accent from a Midwestern one? "

Fair enough!

[seklarwia]

[JL]

Seklarwia,
Yes, I fully appreciate that a non-American probably can't distinguish between most of the various American accents. To be very honest, a lot of Americans probably can't distinguish between the finer differences either, if they're not from that part of the country. I certainly don't claim to know them all.

"*Eyebrows raised* With all the ethnic based, status based, location based and even education based accents, I'm unsure of what you would call a working man's accent."

Ha Ha! A "working man's accent?" That's your Londoners accent! Been told by enough non-Londoners. Now don't let your eyebrows fly off your head on account of lil ol' me. I'm just an airhead Californian living in Las Vegas.

[seklarwia]

[JL]