|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rxk22
Joined: 19 May 2010
Posts: 1629
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:23 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Mr_Monkey wrote: |
One could also argue that a great many of the native speaking teachers in Japan also do a great deal of harm to their learners.
Being a native speaker does not, indeed can not, guarantee that one is a competent teacher of one's L1. Given that Japan does not require such demonstrations of basic competence in its native speaking foreign teachers as a validated introductory teaching qualification (however imperfect that may be), it is no stretch of the imagination to assert that there are hundreds, if not thousands of incompetent native speaking teachers of English in the country with no idea of either appropriate methodology or the sensitivity, knowledge and experience to grow into the job.
Gaijin in suits, arguably, do just as much damage.
Yes, one should expect someone teaching a language to be competent in it (a definition of competence is worth discussing here), but your choice of 'the' as an example of a grammatical mistake propagated by poor language skills of JTEs isn't a very good one: one would think that with all the thousands of native-speaking teachers around that the mistake would be rectified, but, mysteriously (if NESTs really are better at teaching English), it still abounds. That suggests that there's something else going on here.
There's no evidence to support the hypothesis that native speakers make better teachers of their language. Indeed, the most competent speakers of English I've ever taught have been European, and have been taught in their secondary education systems by L2-speaking teachers.
There's nothing intrinsically wrong with Japanese teaching English to Japanese. |
True indeed, but I do not think that most NS make basic mistakes, on a regular basis. As many should know, is that practice makes habits, and bad habits take longer to fix.
I am not saying that they need Native speakers. I shouldn't have said that. They need teachers who know the language to teach it. Not teachers who kinda know English, and then pass on their bad habit.
I think people who've learned a second language as an adult make the best teachers, btw. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rxk22
Joined: 19 May 2010
Posts: 1629
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fluffyhamster wrote: |
What would really help IMHO would be improving the quality of the English textbooks used in Japanese schools - they could/should:
-be more descriptive and less prescriptive
-be more representative of spoken as opposed to written English
-be richer, provide more input, practice etc
-where necessary provide more succinct and functional explanations in Japanese of English grammar and usage etc than most JTEs are capable of formulating
If they did all that, then there would be less need for JTEs to frantically make up for an inadequate book's faults, and also less need for AETs to help (help complicate?) the learning process.
Regarding the learning (or if you prefer, the acquisition) of items such as articles, yes, there are limits to what teaching can achieve, but no serious teacher will ever really stop looking for better ways to teach them (regardless of what SLA theories may say); bad teachers however (and this certainly includes the linguistically-incompetent of the non-natives!) probably won't be able to discern any real consistencies in (others') usage, let alone a solid approach and way through pedagogically (and to be genuinely solid I believe that pedagogy has to be built on firm linguistic ground - firm in not only the textbook but also the teacher's head/competence).
So it's not so much a question of native versus non-native teacher being the best ('There can be only one!'), but more a matter of supporting the teacher(s - when they must do "team teaching") to the max, so that they can be the best teacher(s) possible. Japan hasn't really supported even its JTEs properly, let alone (=nor then) its AETs (and how could it when the JTEs are still in the picture - and let's not forget, like the other posters have mentioned, that the bar to becoming an AET is not set at all high!), but at least Japan has done more (or at least tried to do more, muddy and flawed though the reasoning often may have seemed) than the UK say in financing and developing FL education, certainly at the state school level! |
Well most books are pretty bad. I think that most books for learning Japanese are pretty bad, for almost the same reasons.
In my eikaiwa we have textbooks, that were made by Japanese only. They are full of awkward grammar, spelling errors, and they jump between Brit and American English(either one is fine, but choose one, and stick to it.), and the teaching of out dated slang. Not too mention that they are hard to teach from, and are really not helpful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GambateBingBangBOOM
Joined: 04 Nov 2003
Posts: 2021
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mr_Monkey wrote: |
| TokyoLiz wrote: |
| Trained, experienced NESTwith multi-cultural or other cultural experience, who speak the students' first language are likely to be far better teachers. |
Indemonstrable at best. At worst, this just continues the native-speakerism that dominates ELT, despite no evidence to support such a position. |
But wouldn't you agree that in the current given situation, where native English ALTs are a requirement, that the above described English L1 teacher is more likely to be better than other English L1 teachers (ones without training, experience or Japanese language skills)? Because right now the situation is usually that the English L1 teacher has EITHER Japanese language ability OR actual training- and experience using it in a multi-cultural environment (i.e. teaching immigrant ESL classes in New York City, or Toronto or somewhere like that- somewhere where you need to teach English in English, and cannot just fall back on the students L1 because if you have 10 students, you very likely have almost that number of L1s in the room, too).
| rxk22 wrote: |
In my eikaiwa we have textbooks, that were made by Japanese only. They are full of awkward grammar, spelling errors, and they jump between Brit and American English(either one is fine, but choose one, and stick to it.), and the teaching of out dated slang. Not too mention that they are hard to teach from, and are really not helpful. |
Why should they do that? They're teaching a version of INTERNATIONAL English. Not US English (which varies considerably from place to place) or British English (which varies drastically between place to place within England alone, let alone the other countries on the island of Britain).
(if you're going to say "Brit", you should keep the register by describing American as "Yank".) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 3292
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
GBBB, I don't think anyone was arguing that the NEST that Liz described didn't sound reasonably good - the issue was more whether such a more qualified NEST would be better absolutely than any NNEST.
I believe that a NEST like Liz describes is logically the best choice (at least initially - whether they turn out to be a fully satisfactory teacher once in the job is another question entirely though). I mean, how many people would actively seek out non-native speakers for say private tuition; furthermore, bilingualism obviously "cuts both ways" i.e. isn't the sole preserve of NNESTs, and one would assume that students would ultimately prefer (if or whenever forced to actively consider and make the choice - for example, when taking those private lessons I just mentioned) to hear flawless target L2 than flawless instructional L1.
[The ideal "best NEST" in Japan should IMHO:
-be a graduate in Japanese or similar, or be clearly and demonstrably capable of knuckling down to studying the language and preferably sooner rather than later passing ever-higher levels of the JLPT
-if not a graduate in Japanese then ideally be a qualified school teacher rather than a plain vanilla graduate
-in addition to the above, have completed at least a CELTA or equivalent TEFLy cert, in order to be better able to understand the demands of (communicative) FLT
-be prepared (encouraged? Allowed even?) to eventually pursue Japanese public school teacher licences (assuming that any foreign state school teaching licences already held are not recognized as equivalent to Japanese ones), provided of course that the hopefuls have developed the requisite Japanese language skills to do so! But I'm a bit hazy on this last area (as if you couldn't tell!) and could therefore be talking completely out of my hat here].
As for which if any specific variety of English to favo(u)r, the practical everyday differences aren't too many, most can be viewed as simple matters of fact (e.g. favour versus favor, boot versus trunk), and the pronunciation will effectively be whatever is on the CDs and/or as spoken by the teacher(s). In those instances (esp. syntax, grammar) where students could definitely become confused and "stressed" however (e.g. the apparent pecularity of the British use of indicative rather than subjunctive verb forms in mandative verb constructions - just something off the top of my head, cos I posted about it a few months ago), it would probably be best to try to establish which form would be most logical or consistent or least problematic or whatever, in terms of processing and production for the learners themselves (some trial and error could be needed!) and in the context of "the" language as an averaged-out whole. (I guess in this case I'd probably decide to teach the "American" subjunctive forms in mandative constructions!).
"Bonus" (couldn't resist!  ): The following threads might be of interest to those who've not yet had the pleasure of being bored by 'em. 
http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic.php?p=354228#354228 ('English made (too) easy?')
http://forums.eslcafe.com/teacher/viewtopic.php?t=5455 ('Gere in the Twilight Zone')
http://forums.eslcafe.com/teacher/viewtopic.php?p=16163#16163 ('Participle problem')
http://forums.eslcafe.com/teacher/viewtopic.php?t=9781 (Survey: 'Native speakers working with SL learners wanted')
http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic.php?t=47915 ('Who benefits?')
http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic.php?t=52360 ('Abolish the JET Programme')
http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic.php?t=45318 ('Non-native speakers and the CELTA')
Last edited by fluffyhamster on Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:29 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GambateBingBangBOOM
Joined: 04 Nov 2003
Posts: 2021
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fluffyhamster wrote: |
| GBBB, I don't think anyone was arguing that the NEST that Liz described sounded good - the issue was surely whether such a NEST would be better than a NNEST. |
Yes, I realize that. But that's a debate that's carried on all over the world (and it's sort of a pointless debate because there is a requirement of both in this country- so it's essentially like the recurring debates over which martial art is best- without mentioning the body type of the person learning- seen at places like big daikon). The difference is that in most countries, you have to pass a language exam essentially proving that you are fluent in the target language before the country will certify you to teach it- and that's something that Japan doesn't have. Teachers who have majored in English linguistics have learned to translate text, and teachers who have majored in English literature may have never read more than a paragraph or so of each book in English- they read translations. There are pluses and minuses to each (NEST ad NNEST), and so in fact the current system of having both has the potential to be very, very strong by making use of the strengths of each and minimizing/ negating the weaknesses. But that's if each is treated equally, and each understands where the other is coming from. And that's where it's falling apart- often on both sides.
At the university level, I think students should be at a high enough level that they don't actually need to hire NNESTs. There aren't a whole lot of university foreign language teachers in Canada who aren't native speakers of the language that they teach, with degrees from a country in which the language is used- and not all of them have even awesome English ability or anything. In fact, there aren't even a whole lot of French Canadians teaching French as a Second Language in universities in Anglo-Canada- they tend to hire people from France.
| Quote: |
I believe that a NEST like Liz describes is logically the best choice (at least initially - whether they turn out to be a fully satisfactory teacher once in the job is another question entirely though). I mean, how many people would actively seek out non-native speakers for say private tuition; furthermore, bilingualism obviously "cuts both ways" i.e. isn't the sole preserve of NNESTs, and one would assume that students would ultimately prefer (if or whenever forced to actively consider and make the choice - for example, when taking those private lessons I just mentioned) to hear flawless target L2 than flawless instructional L1. |
good point. Except that I think most Japanese students would rather hear flawless L1 instruction than target language.
| Quote: |
The ideal "best NEST" in Japan should IMHO:
-be a graduate in Japanese or similar, or be clearly and demonstrably capable of knuckling down to studying the language and preferably sooner rather than later passing ever-higher levels of the JLPT
-if not a graduate in Japanese then ideally be a qualified school teacher rather than a plain vanilla graduate
-in addition to the above, have completed at least a CELTA or equivalent TEFLy cert, in order to be better able to understand the demands of (communicative) FLT
-be prepared (encouraged? Allowed even?) to eventually pursue Japanese public school teacher licences (assuming that any foreign state school teaching licences already held are not recognized as equivalent to Japanese ones), provided of course that the hopefuls have developed the requisite Japanese language skills to do so! But I'm a bit hazy on this last area (as if you couldn't tell!) and could therefore be talking completely out of my hat here]. |
I think people should hold English language specific teaching qualifications- as in university or college ones, not little private language school or private course provider ones. And I think a prior background in a more closely related major (Communications, English lit or Linguistics) would likely be more beneficial than Japanese language (people who major in Japanese language tend to be used to do exactly what the JTE does- translates individual sentences). But I DO think people need to be showing up with at least basic Japanese and learn it better upon arrival (there should be more access to JSL classes- the situation is abysmal for a country looking at increasing immigration in order to keep it going). I don't really think a CELTA is really sufficient (unless the person also has a high command of Japanese).
The Japanese education system is designed to produce people able to take direction from above them. In all Confucian education systems (and that includes Japan), the teacher is a role model (they can never, ever be 'wrong' -obviously not really a likely situation for anybody- and that's art of why Japanese teachers do their job in the way they do- to reduce the chance of ever being discovered being 'wrong'). That's why although it has been legal for foreigners to get Japanese teaching licences fro years, the reality is that very few have them, and even fewer are being hired as equals to Japanese people.
| Quote: |
As for which if any specific variety of English to favo(u)r, the practical everyday differences aren't too many, most can be viewed as simple matters of fact (e.g. favour versus favor, boot versus trunk), and the pronunciation will effectively be whatever is on the CDs and/or as spoken by the teacher(s). In those instances (esp. syntax, grammar) where students could definitely become confused and "stressed" however (e.g. the apparent pecularity of the British use of indicative rather than subjunctive verb forms in mandative verb constructions - just something off the top of my head, cos I posted about it a few months ago), it would probably be best to try to establish which form would be most logical or consistent or least problematic or whatever, in terms of processing and production for the learners themselves (some trial and error could be needed!) and in the context of "the" language as an averaged-out whole. (I guess in this case I'd probably decide to teach the "American" subjunctive forms in mandative constructions!). |
Except for testing of archaic rules that are often not even in common use, I think the way the Asian countries go about it is fine. Its an international version of English which chooses one spelling system and then chooses language parts from whichever major variety will likely be easiest to learn/ acquire for learners. If they chose one and one only, and all other countries did that, then they could run into problems when communicating with countries which use the other (like if Japan used only US mid-western - spoken TV accent and needed to communicate with Malaysia if Malaysia used only RP English). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bread
Joined: 24 May 2009
Posts: 318
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 11:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rxk22 wrote: |
| True indeed, but I do not think that most NS make basic mistakes, on a regular basis. I am not saying that they need Native speakers. |
You have a simple comma error in a sentence stating that native speakers don't make basic mistakes on a regular basis. Just think about that for a second. And in the next sentence you capitalized "native" for god knows what reason. You are not in a position to be criticizing people's English. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rxk22
Joined: 19 May 2010
Posts: 1629
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GambateBingBangBOOM wrote: |
| Mr_Monkey wrote: |
| TokyoLiz wrote: |
| Trained, experienced NESTwith multi-cultural or other cultural experience, who speak the students' first language are likely to be far better teachers. |
Indemonstrable at best. At worst, this just continues the native-speakerism that dominates ELT, despite no evidence to support such a position. |
But wouldn't you agree that in the current given situation, where native English ALTs are a requirement, that the above described English L1 teacher is more likely to be better than other English L1 teachers (ones without training, experience or Japanese language skills)? Because right now the situation is usually that the English L1 teacher has EITHER Japanese language ability OR actual training- and experience using it in a multi-cultural environment (i.e. teaching immigrant ESL classes in New York City, or Toronto or somewhere like that- somewhere where you need to teach English in English, and cannot just fall back on the students L1 because if you have 10 students, you very likely have almost that number of L1s in the room, too).
| rxk22 wrote: |
In my eikaiwa we have textbooks, that were made by Japanese only. They are full of awkward grammar, spelling errors, and they jump between Brit and American English(either one is fine, but choose one, and stick to it.), and the teaching of out dated slang. Not too mention that they are hard to teach from, and are really not helpful. |
Why should they do that? They're teaching a version of INTERNATIONAL English. Not US English (which varies considerably from place to place) or British English (which varies drastically between place to place within England alone, let alone the other countries on the island of Britain).
(if you're going to say "Brit", you should keep the register by describing American as "Yank".) |
Ok, well Yank and Birt English are mostly interchangeable, but there are some things that add complexity. For instance we teach 'cot' as a baby bed. I asked many a Birt, Ozzie, and Kiwi, and not a person actually says cot, they know what it means, but they don't use it. So why teach something that would confuse an American, yet is not that widely used in other Eng speaking countries?
I think it's on account of the Japanese who write the books, just pulling random crap outa the dictionary. Which really doesn't help. Also doesn't help that I've met teacher who teach outdated slang like "my bad".
It's just a giant mess, especially when you have people who don't understand the basics of the language making the teaching materials, and being the teachers.
Last edited by rxk22 on Sun Aug 29, 2010 1:45 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rxk22
Joined: 19 May 2010
Posts: 1629
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 1:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bread wrote: |
| rxk22 wrote: |
| True indeed, but I do not think that most NS make basic mistakes, on a regular basis. I am not saying that they need Native speakers. |
You have a simple comma error in a sentence stating that native speakers don't make basic mistakes on a regular basis. Just think about that for a second. And in the next sentence you capitalized "native" for god knows what reason. You are not in a position to be criticizing people's English. |
It's the internet , get over it. I'm not writing letters to foreign dignitaries here. Get over it.
MOD EDIT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 3292
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OK, so it can perhaps be argued that Rxk22 isn't in much of a position to be criticizing anyone's English, but I am, right?
But no, wait, I left out a negative at the start of a previous version of my last post, which is what GBBB quoted ('GBBB, I don't think anyone was arguing that the NEST that Liz described sounded good' - which should of course have read 'didn't sound good', as per the correction that I must've submitted as GBBB was quoting from the older version). Damn, this thing called English is tricky! 
| GBBB wrote: |
| good point. Except that I think most Japanese students would rather hear flawless L1 instruction than target language. |
LOL! But seriously, the more serious of the actually paying students probably would prefer the flawless L2 deal.
| Quote: |
| Except for testing of archaic rules that are often not even in common use, I think the way the Asian countries go about it is fine. Its an international version of English which chooses one spelling system and then chooses language parts from whichever major variety will likely be easiest to learn/acquire for learners. If they chose one and one only, and all other countries did that, then they could run into problems when communicating with countries which use the other (like if Japan used only US mid-western - spoken TV accent and needed to communicate with Malaysia if Malaysia used only RP English). |
I'm not sure how much you've taught with JTEs, but there is often a tendency amongst them to be very dogmatic about things that are probably not attested much if at all in any variety of English*. But then, you did also point out a facet of Confucian cultures: that 'the teacher is a role model who can never ever be "wrong"'.
Hmm, in British unis there seems a reasonable mix of NSs and NNSs in foreign language departments, but in schools I rather suspect that the government increasingly finds it easier (and cheaper) to hire NSs, especially for "exotic" languages like Chinese, but perhaps that is only fair seeing as there probably wouldn't have ever in the UK then been the money (like there is - increasingly "has been"? - with JET) [not made available at least, anyway!] with which to bring in those NSs as assistants to top-dog NNS teachers. So the UK might be in some respects the complete reverse of Japan - NSs being top of the pile, which perhaps ultimately says something about western versus eastern attitudes to language learning if not social integration too - with little or no money being available for assistants (mere ~ , which would probably be held to be a bit unfair, or even discriminatory). But seeing as foreign languages haven't been compulsory secondary school subjects for about five years now in the UK, there probably aren't that many secondary language teachers of either type (NS "versus" NNS) being hired much nowadays anyway!
*For example, I was told that 'Get on the X line' (=train line), apparently perfectly equivalent to simply expressing the same proposition with the verb 'take' instead, is 'American English', which the JTE explained was why I as a Brit was unfamilar with it, but whaddya know, American informants later told me that they found the 'get' phrasing didn't sit well with them either. http://forums.eslcafe.com/teacher/viewtopic.php?t=3432 So there is basically "a" situation being played out all over Japan I guess where JTEs are making 'their "English"' up as they go along. Now that's not to say that whatever piece of any resulting "idio(t)lect" is going to be so very inappropriate or just plain wrong, but I sure hope these people don't ever advise e.g. air traffic controllers or doctors about "serviceable enough" usage (at least, not without consulting dedicated corpora of international medical or ATC English usage first!).
Last edited by fluffyhamster on Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:34 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GambateBingBangBOOM
Joined: 04 Nov 2003
Posts: 2021
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fluffyhamster wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Except for testing of archaic rules that are often not even in common use, I think the way the Asian countries go about it is fine. Its an international version of English which chooses one spelling system and then chooses language parts from whichever major variety will likely be easiest to learn/acquire for learners. If they chose one and one only, and all other countries did that, then they could run into problems when communicating with countries which use the other (like if Japan used only US mid-western - spoken TV accent and needed to communicate with Malaysia if Malaysia used only RP English). |
I'm not sure how much you've taught with JTEs, but there is often a tendency amongst them to be very dogmatic about things that are probably not attested much if at all in any variety of English |
I didn't mean that individual teachers are playing fast and loose with the language. I meant that the way the country itself decides on which language parts the JTEs will teach from different varieties. The JTEs, having been educated in Japan where the goal of the education system is to produce people who will unquestioningly follow rules, teach THOSE rules- and are extremely dogmatic about it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rxk22
Joined: 19 May 2010
Posts: 1629
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fluffyhamster wrote: |
| OK, so it can perhaps be argued that Rxk22 isn't in much of a position to be criticizing anyone's English, but I am, right? |
As I said, it's a forum, and I don't really care. In real life, I actually do have pretty decent grammar and what not, as I care more about speaking to people who I can see. Hence people abbreviating, and taking other shortcuts. It's how things are on the web. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bread
Joined: 24 May 2009
Posts: 318
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rxk22 wrote: |
| Bread wrote: |
| rxk22 wrote: |
| True indeed, but I do not think that most NS make basic mistakes, on a regular basis. I am not saying that they need Native speakers. |
You have a simple comma error in a sentence stating that native speakers don't make basic mistakes on a regular basis. Just think about that for a second. And in the next sentence you capitalized "native" for god knows what reason. You are not in a position to be criticizing people's English. |
It's the internet , get over it. I'm not writing letters to foreign dignitaries here. Get over it.
MOD EDIT |
Get over what? I just find it pathetic that someone who actually created a thread about how Japanese teachers' grammatical mistakes were harming students' English can barely string a sentence together himself.
What bothers ME, far more than Japanese teachers making mistakes, is the idea that, just because someone is a native speaker, they automatically have a mastery of the mechanics of their language. The vast majority of native English "teachers" I've met in Asia couldn't write a sentence to save their lives. "It's the internet" is not an excuse and just shows how poor your English skills are. If you actually knew what you were doing, you wouldn't make those kinds of errors in the first place. It would never even occur to me to stick commas in random places like you're doing in every one of your posts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PO1
Joined: 24 May 2010
Posts: 136
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's refreshing to read a discussion here that's hasn't COMPLETELY went off track. Like some have said, outdated textbooks are rather rampant in Japan. However, I don't think it's the responsibility of an English teacher to teach slang to students. They need to learn fundamentals first. In an eikaiwa setting it can work teaching slang. In any other setting , I don't think it should really apply. In most cases it's a waste of time because there's so much slang out there it's impossible to cover it.
Even lots of Japanese slang I learned is outdated now. "KY" was a popular thing to say. I'm sure "the kids" don't even say that anymore.
I had a student once that wanted me to explain "sucks." That was a fun lesson. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 3292
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Heh GBBB, sure, they can be as dogmatic as they like about their 'Japanese Standard English', because most of it won't be that questionable to any reasonably competent user of (whatever functioning variety of) 'English'. I do still wish they'd make more space for informal written Standard English and especially informal spoken Standard English though, because with too formal and/or prescriptive they can start tying themselves up in knots (again, see that "absolute beauty" that I linked to on page 1).
| Rxk22 wrote: |
| As I said, it's a forum, and I don't really care. In real life, I actually do have pretty decent grammar and what not, as I care more about speaking to people who I can see. Hence people abbreviating, and taking other shortcuts. It's how things are on the web. |
Sorry, I wasn't meaning to get on your case, and I was hoping that my joking about the "seriousness" of my having made an error myself in one of my own posts would've made my position clear (me=neutral wimp ). Plus on page 1 I was trying to defend you if not your writing, trying to divert the attention away from it, remember? 
Anyway, like PO1 I think this has turned out to be a reasonably interesting thread, and I don't think it should really matter too much quite who "began it" now (I mean, I'm not sympathetic to weak JTEs myself, and I've started enough similar threads of my own in my time that starting one just like this one here wouldn't've been too far out of the question!).  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seklarwia
Joined: 20 Jan 2009
Posts: 1546
Location: Monkey onsen, Nagano
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fluffyhamster wrote: |
| Hmm, in British unis there seems a reasonable mix of NSs and NNSs in foreign language departments, but in schools I rather suspect that the government increasingly finds it easier (and cheaper) to hire NSs, especially for "exotic" languages like Chinese, but perhaps that is only fair seeing as there probably wouldn't have ever in the UK then been the money (like there is - increasingly "has been"? - with JET) [not made available at least, anyway!] with which to bring in those NSs as assistants to top-dog NNS teachers. So the UK might be in some respects the complete reverse of Japan - NSs being top of the pile, which perhaps ultimately says something about western versus eastern attitudes to language learning if not social integration too - with little or no money being available for assistants (mere ~ , which would probably be held to be a bit unfair, or even discriminatory). But seeing as foreign languages haven't been compulsory secondary school subjects for about five years now in the UK, there probably aren't that many secondary language teachers of either type (NS "versus" NNS) being hired much nowadays anyway! |
Depends on how much importance the secondary schools and universities place on language learning.
I went to a grammar school where by year 9 we were required to be taking at least 2 modern languages or 1 modern language and Latin, with only a few particularly talented students being allowed to drop a language for music if it wasn't already their pratical subject choice. More than 90% of our modern languages teachers and assistants were NS with an excellent command of English. Most of the modern language speakers in the nearby grammar schools were NS, too. And even amongst the few that were NNS, very few were actually British (e.g. we had Brazilian assistant once who helped with Spanish orals for first year learners as well as Portugese).
True that our school in particular wasn't reliant on the government contributions it received, but the boys' school was grant mantained and received funding for NS teachers.
And at my uni, the School of Languages and Area Studies was 2nd in importance only to Pharmacy. And with very nearly the entire of the 3rd year away on compulsory study/work abroad as well as students from other faculties, it has one of the largest amounts of students participating in ERASMUS in the UK. Of course, with languages being so important to the university, most of the teachers are NS.
As an Applied Languages student, we had to study linguistics, sociolinguistics, pragmatics, etc, as well as at least 2 modern languages.
I only had a NNS for my first semester of Japanese. He was the British husband of the main NS teacher, who taught from the 2nd semester onwards. All of my other teachers, including those in Austria, Spain and Germany were native speakers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
