| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
fat_chris
Joined: 10 Sep 2003
Posts: 3198
Location: Beijing
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 3:40 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Sashadroogie wrote: |
| The fact you are checking up on areas you are unclear on is commendable. I cannot stand teachers who just pooh pooh student questions with rubbish like 'you don't need to know grammar/ English has no grammar/ it's old-fashioned 19th century structure/ or whatever line of nonsense they sputter to defend the indefensible. |
Comrade Sasha,
SECONDED! I also cannot stand such blathering nonsense from teachers. When I hear that, I set them up with a two-week trip to the local re-education camp.
| Sashadroogie wrote: |
| You are not in the wrong job. Grammar IS confusing sometimes. But there is also a hidden beauty underlying its logic and function, and that for me is one of the chief joys of being a teacher - getting paid for research that is for myself as much as the students, and unlocking the secrets of the language, and reducing the confusion. Magical! |
Again, agreed. I appreciate grammar.
| Sashadroogie wrote: |
| Grammar, glamour, grimoire! |
Rather!
Warm regards,
fat_chris |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
That's the spirit fat_chris! Have to force some people to be free, and force them to love what is best for them.
But just two weeks? Don't you think they need to be shown more love on your part? How about two years? Nothing as lovely as the sight of a chain-gang hard at work breaking sentences in clauses, and parsing for principal parts. What joy it brings to all who behold! And to those who are sentenced!!
Yes, there is no doubt. Two years of sentences much better than just a two-week stint.
Think about this most carefully, comrade. The fate of the world may hang on it... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grahamb
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Posts: 1945
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 12:33 pm Post subject: Animal Farm |
|
|
Two years good, four years better!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 12:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hang on.... an idea.... forming... slowly in my mind..... I've got it!!!!!!
A FIVE YEAR PLAN!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grahamb
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Posts: 1945
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 12:45 pm Post subject: A five-year sentence |
|
|
| Communist planning = oxymoron. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| You have been added to the deportation list for anti-Soviet sentiment. Hope you like the cold. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnslat
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 13859
Location: Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Sasha,
That's cold. 
Regards,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grahamb
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Posts: 1945
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 4:31 pm Post subject: Thought crime |
|
|
Doubleplusbad!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hey! On the bright side, it's a steppe up from a crappy TEFL job! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grahamb
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Posts: 1945
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 4:55 pm Post subject: One small steppe for a man... |
|
|
| That wouldn't be difficult! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nothing is difficult for those with Socialist ardour!!! We conquered space, after all! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grahamb
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Posts: 1945
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 6:40 pm Post subject: To boldly go... |
|
|
| Wrong again! Mr Chekov was played by an American actor, Walter Koenig. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wrong? Я? Not possible!
Please stop swallowing that Piggie propaganda uncritically. Starship Enterprise? Not likely in this reality : ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grahamb
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Posts: 1945
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 7:57 pm Post subject: Illogical, Captain! |
|
|
| Mind you, Mr Spock's human parent may have come from somewhere east of the Urals! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 3292
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| neverheardofem wrote: |
| I'm not terribly confident at teaching grammar and I don't particularly like it. I'm qualified and have a few years experience so I can't blame it on being a newbie! I enjoy other aspects of teaching ESL, but when it comes to the more advanced grammar - I just get confused. I sometimes get questions I cannot answer, and have to check and come back to them later. Then I feel I have let the students down and they think I'm an idiot! I know all the structures and terminology but it doesn't seem to matter when I'm put on the spot! I am wondering if I am in the right job! Can anyone empathise or offer advice? |
| Quote: |
| Anyway, both the class and myself ended up quite confused with the third and mixed conditionals. It was a gap fill and a student 'helpfully' pointed out that they second conditional could be used to fill the gaps and the sentence would still be correct - so how were they to know which conditional to use! Both also worked in the context. I do plan grammar classes and clearly explain the structure of the board with examples. However, I don't always plan on how I will deal with anticipated difficulties or exceptions. This would probably help - especially when I am teaching a level I'm not used to. I might start bringing my Swan to class in case of emergency too! |
I hope you don't mind me starting by saying you obviously DON'T 'know all the structures' if you are having problems with their meanings and usage (perhaps you should post some of the examples from the lesson concerned?). I can empathize though - formal education, especially in ELT, doesn't cover everything, and some things only come into sharper focus through actual experience. The main problem though is that the purpose and indeed the very nature of grammar (of the sort that most ELT uses, at any rate) isn't made very clear, and even what is made clear in ELT usually starts from but then continues with quite traditional terminology, as if long usage confers some sort of psychological amenability or plausibility (yet all it really confers is an "agreed-upon" in-groupyness, something of a membership to the card-carrying grammarian's guild). The flip side is that using (or yourself inventing) new terminology rather limits it and its utility to those you can explain it to (and if need be translate it for e.g. "Lewis introduces the functionally much clearer term 'retrospective', which is the 'perfect' in other grammars").
What then can one do? Books like Lewis's (nice to see him getting more of a mention now), which aim to reduce a potential excess of sometimes hazy or misleading rules down to just a few core distinctions (principally, 'remote' versus 'non-remote'), will help in this particular instance, but there is unfortunately more to grammar than just the verb phrase.
Grammar is essentially about processes of modification or expansion, that is, about how complex rather than simple messages are often needed, and how they might be constructed or at least analyzed. It is better to go with the 'building' analogy, and two-way communicative processes, as analysis can often resemble the dissection of a complete but dead whole rather than appreciating a living incremental process unfolding before one's eyes. (Brazil's A Grammar of Speech is worth a look for this sort of stuff). Conversely, it can be about reducing things right down, but this should usually be less of a problem hopefully!
Perhaps also consider some Systemic-Functional, and even Cognitive, grammar. Dependency grammar could also be of interest. But for a good immediately ELTy grammar that builds from words to phrases to more complex messages, I don't think the Collins COBUILD English Grammar can be beaten, and it really helps that it provides plenty of examples (at least two for each point). I'll post some excerpts from it and a few other grammar-usage books soon on another thread, so you can see how it compares to Swan.
Last edited by fluffyhamster on Sat Jan 24, 2015 2:22 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
