|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
robbie_davies
Joined: 16 Jun 2013
|
Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2014 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jongno2bucheon wrote: |
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| Jongno2bucheon wrote: |
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| Jongno2bucheon wrote: |
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| candy bar wrote: |
| ontheway wrote: |
| http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhninL_G3Fg |
After listening to that, now I know why Korean mothers want North Americans teaching their little Korean boys and girls. |
Audrey Hepburn is Belgian, it is like saying Koreans should learn from Americans because you saw a film starring Dick Van Dyke.  |
Demand is for the American accent.
America = Lionel Messi and Michael Jordan
Its the market. If you can hire Lionel to be your coach vs. thierre henry who would you pick?
Soon it will be China. But for now, America's hegemony is the only reason you are here teaching English. |
I am not in Korea teaching English.
I would rather have an anal cavity inspection off an orang utan than to return there.  |
Yeah, its better to quit the crack when you did.
Capitalism never ran on principals of idealism and equality. It is what it is holmes! |
I earn more money and have less stress now - I win.
 |
I feel the same way. You can win if you like.  |
I do, it feels great knowing that I will never be dong chimmed again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2014 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| robbie_davies wrote: |
It is a very self-centric view of your accent, you don't know that for a start because you haven't been amongst that many different types of native speaker ... |
How do you know how many different types of native speakers I've been around? As for being "self-centric," it's nothing of the sort. My accent is a very clear one, but it's hardly the only very clear one. There are varieties of British English which I would be equally certain anyone could understand clearly without needing time to adapt. There's a reason certain accents end up in national/international news and media far more often than others. It's not random, and it's not especially controversial outside of situations where we pretend it's controversial for the sake of "equality." I suppose I don't know that my proposition is true with absolute and unwavering epistemic certainty, but I am almost certain it's the case, and I don't think it applies just to me either. It's not about me, and it's not about drawing lines between British and American dialects of English, it's about whether or not a competent speaker of the language will be able to understand the speaker of a certain dialect without substantial previous exposure to that specific dialect. Sometimes they can, sometimes they cannot. That's non-trivial as I see it.
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| - as for a Glaswegian, you may have trouble at first but you would soon pick it up - within a week, it wouldn't take you long. Same with myself when I meet someone from Arkansas, I may have trouble at first but I will soon understand them in a short amount of time, the same can't be said for a non native speaker of English who would have lots of trouble but then, who's responsibility is that? |
You or I requiring a week of adaptation to understand a fellow native speaker is obviously less optimal than us requiring no adaption though, isn't it? No one would choose that situation. Yet assuming you have a reasonably clear British accent no speaker from Arkansas would require a week of adaptation to understand you (at the very least, there are varieties of British English which the Arksansas speaker would not require adaptation to understand). And as you say, so much the worse for non-native speakers. You ask, "Whose responsibility is that?" but I'd say it's less about responsibility and more about the simple reality. I'm using that reality to come to a conclusion, namely that some dialects really could be considered superior to others with regards to the primary purpose of language. By contrast, you seem to be looking at that reality and saying, "Well, it just lays down an additional burden that must be met by language learners." That's not false, but I feel like it's truth reinforces my point rather than detracts from it; additional burdens are generally avoided rather than embraced, unless there is good reason to embrace them. If learning one dialect means a language learner will struggle to be understood in much of the English speaking world, and learning another will lead him to be broadly understood, it seems to me that he's better learning the second. If he has the time and inclination, he can broaden his horizons and master multiple dialects, but if we're comparing individual dialects on a one-to-one basis, I think we can reach conclusions about which one might prefer in a general sense.
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| Secondly, lots of people understand Glaswegians and have no difficulty in understanding them - I have no problem even though I don't come from there, lots of people understand the good people of Arkansas a lot better than I do, what does that mean? Because I don't understand people from Arkansas then their accent is inferior to mine and is unsuitable for teaching? Do you see what I am getting at here? |
I agree with the particular point that you've made regarding exposure eventually leading to comprehensibility. Nonetheless, I wouldn't hire someone with a thick Southern accent to teach English to non-advanced learners unless their particular language goals somehow revolved around that particular dialect. Being a native speaker that other native speakers need to spend some time acclimating to in order to understand is bad enough, but being a speaker of English as a foreign language in the same position would be much worse. If someone is an advanced learner and looking to broaden their scope, or if someone is a new learner but planning to live or do business in the region where that dialect is used, then exposing them to such dialects is a different matter, but whether they want to spend time on that is up to them.
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| Quote: |
| I think it's questionable whether all dialects of Arabic are truly mutually intelligible, and there's a reason Koreans slap subtitles on the screen when people of certain regional dialects are speaking. |
They are, there are regional differences but I have worked with Arabs from Libya to Iraq and they all seem to converse with each other without much of a problem. |
Why have I read that speakers of Moroccan Arabic have trouble conversing with speakers of Iraqi Arabic then? Do you know enough Arabic to be able to tell whether they are each speaking their own dialect or whether they're switching to Modern Standard Arabic? Because MSA is a separate dialect in itself, and if a Moroccan and Iraqi switch to MSA to converse with one another, that's not the same as their dialects being mutually intelligible. I don't want to derail the thread too much with this particular issue, but I'm genuinely curious about it and want to know more.
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| Quote: |
| But you just said I, a native English speaker, would have trouble with the Glaswegian dialect, so either you're accusing me of being non-fluent, or your definition has problems. |
You need to stop taking what I wrote out of context, you may have trouble at first with a Glaswegian accent but you would soon understand them thoroughly within a short amount of time. |
Well, your specific words were, "Part of fluency is the ability to understand English of all accents and dialects," not being able to learn to understand all accents and dialects with some additional effort. I don't think I'm taking that out of context. But okay, we'll modify that to, "Part of fluency is the ability to come to understand English of all accents and dialects with some modicum of passive effort." That's reasonable, right?
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| Again, it is a self-centric view based on your exposure, upbringing etc, who is to say her English isn't understandable to the community around her? |
Of course I'm not saying that. You just suggested that I was taking you out of context, but given I very specifically qualified my position saying, "... there are obviously dialects which are less phonetically clear and, accordingly, simply worse at producing clear communication on a non-local scale," I think it's fairly clear I'm not saying others in her community can't understand her. Of course they can, or else the dialect could never have arisen in the first place. But to suggest that they'd also be able to understand me without problem really isn't that remarkable a claim, and I don't think it's particularly "self-centric."
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| Because I might have a problem with people from Arkansas doesn't mean other people will or I am a better English teacher than them. The reality is there are a lot of accents that are native to the English language and as soon as a learner gets used to them the better. |
That's a point with which I strongly disagree, at least within the context of how language learning actually works. Yes, if we could just swallow a pill and instantly acquire total knowledge, it would be better to acquire that knowledge as soon as possible, but that's not how it works. When I was learning Korean, the last thing I would have needed is constant interjections, "Oh, but this particle is pronounced this way in Busan, and this way in Gyeongsannam-do, and this way in blah blah blah," or, "Oh, but North Koreans use this word instead of that one, etc." Better to master the basics first and then broaden one's horizons than to teach someone to swim by dumping them in the middle of the ocean. Beginning learners starting with a single, clear, reasonably standard accent (either American or British, but choosing one) is best. As they gain confidence and capability, then assuming their goals include total mastery, starting to expose them to clear accents of the other sort (i.e. American English if they started with British, or the reverse) is fine. No one who isn't at an advanced level needs to be spending time listening to Deep South or Cockney dialects of English.
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| I agree. But I am sure if you come across a North Korean and cannot understand what they are saying, you aren't going to blame them for speaking 'bad Korean' but Koreans blame native speakers all the time and they need to be informed that all native accents are of equal value and that the onus of being able to understand and be understood is theirs alone. |
I feel like the way in which you're using the term "value" is different from the way I'm using it. My position is a largely utilitarian one, while you still seem to be talking about "bad Korean" and "equal value" in some sort of almost aesthetic sense, if not a moral one. I don't think a Southerner speaks "bad English," but I do think he speaks English of a sort which is less phonetically clear (and phonetic clarity is a real thing; the pin-pen merger and the cot-caught merger are two specific, well known examples in American English of shifts towards loss of clarity and phonetic distinction) and which is of relatively less value to many (maybe even most) learners of English as a foreign language given their goals. Aesthetic factors may also play a role in such opinions (and it's okay if they do as far as I'm concerned), but they're not my focus.
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| Quote: |
| But my case isn't about liking or disliking how a particular dialect sounds, that's why I'm baffled regarding your accusations of prejudice. |
Yes, it might not exist in your case but it exists a great deal amongst Korean students who will baulk at an excellent teacher from South Africa and would rather have a mediocre teacher from Iowa because they speak the kind of English they are used to. This kind of thinking, in my opinion, needs to be discouraged. |
I think this is a slightly different matter; not dialect prejudice per se, but citizenship prejudice. It's like the fellow who started the thread: he's lived in America since childhood, so his accent is American, but the British passport itself leads to judgment. That does seem unreasonable to me. As for South Africans specifically, in my personal experience South African English is often quite clear (although that experience is limited to having met fewer than 10 people). I'd personally prefer hiring any of the South African teachers I'd met to our hypothetical Deep South dialect speaker (at least within an early or intermediate learning context), which I hope highlights how I'm really not trying to make this about me or my particular dialect.
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| All what you have written is fine but if they are placed outside the narrow parameter that they have put themselves with their language learning then this is their problem and it is no use blaming anyone else for it ... |
I agree that no one can "blame" another person for speaking their own native dialect. If you want to communicate with someone, learn to communicate with them, and if you don't, that's that. I'm not trying to exonerate such "blame game" behavior here.
| robbie_davies wrote: |
and we go back to Candy Bar and their claim that NA English is the most superior strand. In his opinion it might be but then as an American - he would say that wouldn't he?  |
Well, I disavowed Mr. Bar's position in my first post on the topic for a reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
robbie_davies
Joined: 16 Jun 2013
|
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
How do you know how many different types of native speakers I've been around? |
I am pretty sure you haven't, the list of native accent types are exhausting, there are 100s of distinct accents in the UK alone.
| Quote: |
| As for being "self-centric," it's nothing of the sort. My accent is a very clear one, but it's hardly the only very clear one. |
It is clear to you, A Geordie thinks they speak clearly but who is to judge? I am taking your word for it and there is no way to tell on this forum is this is the case or not. It is a bit like someone who proclaims they are very handsome/beautiful without showing their picture.
| Quote: |
| There are varieties of British English which I would be equally certain anyone could understand clearly without needing time to adapt. There's a reason certain accents end up in national/international news and media far more often than others. |
Funny, the BBC's main anchor was Welsh, the main weather person is Scottish and the breakfast anchor is from the North West with a strong accent but speaks clearly. Once upon a time, the BBC would have never had those people on their flagship programmes but it just goes to show that people can get used to and adapt to the people speaking to them.
| Quote: |
| It's not random, and it's not especially controversial outside of situations where we pretend it's controversial for the sake of "equality." I suppose I don't know that my proposition is true with absolute and unwavering epistemic certainty, but I am almost certain it's the case, and I don't think it applies just to me either. It's not about me, and it's not about drawing lines between British and American dialects of English, it's about whether or not a competent speaker of the language will be able to understand the speaker of a certain dialect without substantial previous exposure to that specific dialect. Sometimes they can, sometimes they cannot. That's non-trivial as I see it. |
But why can't the person with the challenging accent speak clearly in a teaching context? That is what I don't understand, how many teachers go in and teach in a southern drawl anyway?
| Quote: |
| You or I requiring a week of adaptation to understand a fellow native speaker is obviously less optimal than us requiring no adaption though, isn't it? No one would choose that situation. |
Because it is life, sometimes it happens, what happens with us happens to non native speakers and they have to adapt surely?
| Quote: |
| Yet assuming you have a reasonably clear British accent no speaker from Arkansas would require a week of adaptation to understand you (at the very least, there are varieties of British English which the Arksansas speaker would not require adaptation to understand). |
They would need two weeks at least!
| Quote: |
| And as you say, so much the worse for non-native speakers. You ask, "Whose responsibility is that?" but I'd say it's less about responsibility and more about the simple reality. I'm using that reality to come to a conclusion, namely that some dialects really could be considered superior to others with regards to the primary purpose of language. By contrast, you seem to be looking at that reality and saying, "Well, it just lays down an additional burden that must be met by language learners." That's not false, but I feel like it's truth reinforces my point rather than detracts from it; additional burdens are generally avoided rather than embraced, unless there is good reason to embrace them. If learning one dialect means a language learner will struggle to be understood in much of the English speaking world, and learning another will lead him to be broadly understood, it seems to me that he's better learning the second. If he has the time and inclination, he can broaden his horizons and master multiple dialects, but if we're comparing individual dialects on a one-to-one basis, I think we can reach conclusions about which one might prefer in a general sense. |
Some accents might be superior to you I personally disagree that there are superior accents for teaching, it is proven all the time with the amount of non native students who live and study in Scotland. It may have been a bit more challenging for them to adapt to the various accents that exist in Scotland but they did without any big trauma, therefore, the differences that exist are moot. Yes, I agree some accents are more challenging than others for non native speakers to understand but students overcome all this without too much difficulty.
| Quote: |
| I agree with the particular point that you've made regarding exposure eventually leading to comprehensibility. Nonetheless, I wouldn't hire someone with a thick Southern accent to teach English to non-advanced learners unless their particular language goals somehow revolved around that particular dialect. |
Surely you would ask them to curb their natural speech, most experienced teachers do.
| Quote: |
| Being a native speaker that other native speakers need to spend some time acclimating to in order to understand is bad enough, but being a speaker of English as a foreign language in the same position would be much worse. If someone is an advanced learner and looking to broaden their scope, or if someone is a new learner but planning to live or do business in the region where that dialect is used, then exposing them to such dialects is a different matter, but whether they want to spend time on that is up to them. |
Again, this is up to the teacher to speak clearly and if they do, then there is no problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItNJV77EEeY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iA1ZO098qqE
The two people above would have never have worked on the BBC twenty years ago because their accents would have stopped them from getting a job, however, they speak clearly and everyone understands them.
| Quote: |
| Why have I read that speakers of Moroccan Arabic have trouble conversing with speakers of Iraqi Arabic then? Do you know enough Arabic to be able to tell whether they are each speaking their own dialect or whether they're switching to Modern Standard Arabic? Because MSA is a separate dialect in itself, and if a Moroccan and Iraqi switch to MSA to converse with one another, that's not the same as their dialects being mutually intelligible. I don't want to derail the thread too much with this particular issue, but I'm genuinely curious about it and want to know more. |
Well yes, they do speak to each other in Modern Standard Arabic, they have made the conscious desicion to modify their natural accent and make themselves understood therefore, the natural accent they speak within their native community is moot.
So, the point I am coming to is that as long as a teacher can adapt then there shouldn't be a problem.
| Quote: |
| Well, your specific words were, "Part of fluency is the ability to understand English of all accents and dialects," not being able to learn to understand all accents and dialects with some additional effort. |
You do understand those accents though it might take some more effort to understand them as well as your neighbour back home, I have never not been able to understand a native speaker ever. Get a Korean and put them in Cape Town or Dublin and the inevitable shut down begins - there is a big difference between you and Mr Kim.
| Quote: |
| I don't think I'm taking that out of context. But okay, we'll modify that to, "Part of fluency is the ability to come to understand English of all accents and dialects with some modicum of passive effort." That's reasonable, right? |
Yes.
| Quote: |
Of course I'm not saying that. You just suggested that I was taking you out of context, but given I very specifically qualified my position saying, "... there are obviously dialects which are less phonetically clear and, accordingly, simply worse at producing clear communication on a non-local scale," I think it's fairly clear I'm not saying others in her community can't understand her. Of course they can, or else the dialect could never have arisen in the first place. But to suggest that they'd also be able to understand me without problem really isn't that remarkable a claim, and I don't think it's particularly "self-centric."
|
Again, we don't know that, we are taking your word for it, for the record, my accent needs to be toned down for clarity and I wouldn't speak to you as I would to my pals back home but I have never had a problem teaching in the long run, students have problems at first but they soon get used to it and thrive - does that mean I should lose out to a job from someone from Ohio?
| Quote: |
| That's a point with which I strongly disagree, at least within the context of how language learning actually works. Yes, if we could just swallow a pill and instantly acquire total knowledge, it would be better to acquire that knowledge as soon as possible, but that's not how it works. When I was learning Korean, the last thing I would have needed is constant interjections, "Oh, but this particle is pronounced this way in Busan, and this way in Gyeongsannam-do, and this way in blah blah blah," or, "Oh, but North Koreans use this word instead of that one, etc." |
Yes, there are bad teachers, I knew a guy who would mark down students who spelt 'honour' as 'honor' and I would pull him up. There is no room for nationalistic chauvinism in teaching English and I personally teach American variants of word and their spelling rather than British as it tends to be the variant the students are used to. A good lesson is teaching the various differences between British English and American English and always piques students interest wherever I been. Do you need to be an American to teach American spelling and vocabulary? I would say most native speaker teachers are well versed in NA vocabulary and spelling.
| Quote: |
| Better to master the basics first and then broaden one's horizons than to teach someone to swim by dumping them in the middle of the ocean. Beginning learners starting with a single, clear, reasonably standard accent (either American or British, but choosing one) is best. As they gain confidence and capability, then assuming their goals include total mastery, starting to expose them to clear accents of the other sort (i.e. American English if they started with British, or the reverse) is fine. No one who isn't at an advanced level needs to be spending time listening to Deep South or Cockney dialects of English. |
Yes, if a teacher comes into class and goes 'wotcha my saaan' then yes, they need to a talking to. But I know Cockney and Southern teachers who can speak clearly even if it might take some effort for them.
| Quote: |
| I feel like the way in which you're using the term "value" is different from the way I'm using it. My position is a largely utilitarian one, while you still seem to be talking about "bad Korean" and "equal value" in some sort of almost aesthetic sense, if not a moral one. I don't think a Southerner speaks "bad English," but I do think he speaks English of a sort which is less phonetically clear (and phonetic clarity is a real thing; the pin-pen merger and the cot-caught merger are two specific, well known examples in American English of shifts towards loss of clarity and phonetic distinction) and which is of relatively less value to many (maybe even most) learners of English as a foreign language given their goals. Aesthetic factors may also play a role in such opinions (and it's okay if they do as far as I'm concerned), but they're not my focus. |
Unfortunately, this is how Koreans see the world, there is 'good' and 'bad' English and they wonder why they are struggling with learning English despite the money being thrown at it. Yes, some accents are harder to understand than others but they are neither 'inferior' or 'superior' also, some accents are easier to understand based on the listeners culture and proximity to the speaker. Because I find a Scots person easier to understand than you, does that mean their accent is difficult to understand?
And I am sorry to say this but there has been many an occasion that an American speaker has come on here and say they have a 'neutral' accent or in fact, no accent at all! Which is ridiculous as the accent they speak has a definite cultural and regional stamp - even if they don't think it does to themselves. That is the problem as far as I can see.
| Quote: |
| I think this is a slightly different matter; not dialect prejudice per se, but citizenship prejudice. It's like the fellow who started the thread: he's lived in America since childhood, so his accent is American, but the British passport itself leads to judgment. That does seem unreasonable to me. As for South Africans specifically, in my personal experience South African English is often quite clear (although that experience is limited to having met fewer than 10 people). I'd personally prefer hiring any of the South African teachers I'd met to our hypothetical Deep South dialect speaker (at least within an early or intermediate learning context), which I hope highlights how I'm really not trying to make this about me or my particular dialect. |
I agree with South African teachers, they tend to be excellent teachers but shouldn't hiring practices be about qualifications, experience and if they have a 'challenging' accent, they the ability to make themselves understood?
| Quote: |
| I agree that no one can "blame" another person for speaking their own native dialect. If you want to communicate with someone, learn to communicate with them, and if you don't, that's that. I'm not trying to exonerate such "blame game" behavior here. |
Unfortunately, there are too many teachers who try and play the game of there being 'superior' accents for learning a language in a crap attempt to secure their own jobs. Candy Bar thinks he is a better teacher than a British or an Irish teacher just because he can understand people from his immediate culture and not understand the teacher from Liverpool or Dublin so he thinks that extends to teaching ability. And if he is in a class of Koreans who are only too happy not to have a meltdown because they can understand the NA teacher then an artificial cocoon is built which doesn't transpire to the real world where native English speakers with all kinds of weird and wonderful accents exist, hey, if one wants to just speak and learn English from Iowa or California then bully for them - but they are disabling their learning progress - that is all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 3:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| So tell us all. What did we do to deserve your full page postings? Those are truly wonderful to behold. What happened to your partial page anti-American troll posts? Are we to see more of you now along with all the other crap that people are fed up with? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
robbie_davies
Joined: 16 Jun 2013
|
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 3:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| young_clinton wrote: |
| So tell us all. What did we do to deserve your full page postings? Those are truly wonderful to behold. What happened to your partial page anti-American troll posts? Are we to see more of you now along with all the other crap that people are fed up with? |
Stop your bleating, it seems more people want to read what I write than you whose posts got deleted from this thread.
Again, let me apologise for my countrymen who bullied you in that Thai school. If I would have been there I would have put a stop to it.
And stop playing the 'Anti-American' card where it doesn't exist. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, it's just as much my fault as Robbie's that these posts have gotten so long, so I'll try to be more concise in closing.
Regarding teachers adopting more easily-understood dialects while working, I agree that if they can do that, there's no real impediment. When you say, "Yes, I agree some accents are more challenging than others for non native speakers to understand..." that's more or less the point I think I've been trying to make. When I spoke of reticence to hire a teacher with a deep southern accent, I imagined him teaching in that accent, but of course if he's able to clarify his accent while in the classroom that ceases to be a concern. My position is not about trying to deny anyone jobs or protectionism; my interest in the matter is more or less abstract. Anyone who is both willing and able to clarify their unusual dialect patterns in the classroom can do a fine job (at least assuming they're otherwise a good teacher).
Regarding this:
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| And I am sorry to say this but there has been many an occasion that an American speaker has come on here and say they have a 'neutral' accent or in fact, no accent at all! Which is ridiculous as the accent they speak has a definite cultural and regional stamp - even if they don't think it does to themselves. |
I agree. I think some accents and dialects really are more clear than others, but that doesn't mean they stop being accents. It's not about the "right or wrong" way of speaking.
Regarding this:
| robbie_davies wrote: |
| I agree with South African teachers, they tend to be excellent teachers but shouldn't hiring practices be about qualifications, experience and if they have a 'challenging' accent, they the ability to make themselves understood? |
I think it's hard to draw an absolute rule. If one's goal is to simply "learn English," then yes, that's seems like a reasonable enough proposition to me. But if, for example, one is planning to move to South Africa, might one not be interested in hiring a specifically South African teacher not merely to be exposed to the local accent but even learn more about the culture? That doesn't seem unreasonable or discriminatory to me, just goal-driven. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Stan Rogers
Joined: 20 Aug 2010
|
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Its very simple. The Koreans prefer North American English. All other types of English are viewed as less valauble or useful.
The market gets what the market demands. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
edwardcatflap
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Its very simple. The Koreans prefer North American English. All other types of English are viewed as less valauble or useful.
|
That was implied in the original question. I think we were discussing why. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JimDanDee
Joined: 05 Oct 2013
|
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
First, let me apologize. Not for what I will say, simply because someone will be offended.
I was educated(?) in the American South, but not as a 'normal' lad. My speech patterns are very difficult to ascertain and are as close to unaccented as most people ever hear - though I will mention that I have owned 'all wells' if I decide to put on airs. When I entered university many, many years ago, my two best pals each had a girlfriend who ended up rooming together their second year. One young lady was from Boston and the other was from Natchitoches. I became a regular visitor and impartial judge as they tried to outshine each other with their regional culinary skills. My contribution was as a translator between the two. Really, I would be called to breakup almost physical fights between the two that started as simple pronunciation errors. (the classic being, "Why would you put sewing in the refrigerator?")
In my opinion there ARE 'better' and 'worse' accents because some English speakers can NOT make themselves understood by other English speakers. I would feel sad if one of my students finished a course of mine sounding like either of those lovely coeds (at an accredited university in Kansas City.)
I have met 'Native Speakers' from at least four of the 'English speaking countries' who should be sued for fraud. Many of them from the 'British Isles' though I prefer a clear British accent. I understand wanting to avoid the chance of the least desirable accents and would recommend the OP insist that the recruiters talk via Skype (or some other means, although Skype is very easy - and free) in order to demonstrate ability to speak clear English.
I am still surprised that English conversation instructors are hired before having to demonstrate conversational proficiency. Too many non-North Americans speak unclear English (compared to the NUMBER of North Americans), so recruiters are wary with cause and are unable to judge conversation on their own. Yes, it is the recruiters fault, but now YOU must deal with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wonkavite62
Joined: 17 Dec 2007 Location: Jeollanamdo, South Korea.
|
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 6:09 pm Post subject: Acents and the lack thereof |
|
|
I remember that years ago, with far less teaching experience than now, I came to Seoul to look for work. It was very much a last minute thing. I was attracted by the bright lights and stimulation of the capital. I did not expect to really experience discrimination.
I came to Seoul bright-eyed and bushy tailed. I went to the interview and the school's director had to conduct the interview through an interpreter since he spoke ONLY Korean. I got the job. But they kept on asking why at 31, I wasn't married.
I moved into a small, but lovely and well-equipped apartment in northern Seoul. Oh joy, I could see pagodas from my window! What I did not like was that there was a Korean teacher next door, who let me know that she would watch over me.
A couple of days later, I met the director's wife. I politely mentioned she had a slight Southern accent. That was my first mistake. Ah, accents" she sighed,"you know that Scottish accent is gonna cause us problems." Then she mentioned that I was not in their church and that would cause problems too. I am happy enough to go to church, what if it's the wrong church?
Very quickly, this Korean American dismissed me, but it was up to her husband to say so. I had not signed any contract.
I got a call from another recruiter-a smarmy Korean-Canadian with a Brian Mulroney accent. He told me that I could not get a job in Seoul, because (a) I was from Scotland with an accent, and (b) I had turned 31 and too old to be teaching in Seoul, and was (c) unmarried. If that call had taken place today, they might have mentioned a preference for women. I don't know. But religion had also come up. My relative LACK of experience wasn't even mentioned.
The reason I told this story is I want to point out that some schools, especially the little hagwons, discriminate on the basis of accents and all sorts of other things as well. It's not always rational, or fair, it's often not about teaching English, and sometimes it defies commonsense.
This may partly explain why it is that Koreans have a relatively low level of English on average?
When the Cathay Pacific plane landed in Hong Kong en route to London, I remember getting out and hearing the announcements. I heard Cantonese, Mandarin, and then-WAIT FOR IT- English in a Scottish accent. The woman spoke with the same accent as myself, and was perfectly clear.
But I supposed many Koreans had not gotten past Suwon. They had never communicated in a global (multi-lingual and multi-accented) market place. This is language with which the cookie cutter mindset has nothing to do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
le-paul

Joined: 07 Apr 2009 Location: dans la chambre
|
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I know one thing for sure, theres no point bickering amongst ourselves over this - thats how it is and its unlikely it will change.
Koreans are very fickle and gullible. For some reason it has become more faddish to say this accent is better .
My guesstimation is that parents are blaming anything/everything on their children not succeeding. The children complain they don't understand teachers so parents assume it must be 'x'.
teachers then agree with parents.
Teachers complain to managers.
Managers complain to recruiters who will do anything to get money, so agree.
= North american accents prevail.
Ive also noticed this phenomenon a lot with regard to dokdo - that it is common knowledge 'it is all Japans fault' and the US had nothing to do with it.
I've also noticed a lot of kids saying these days, that they love the usa as it was the USA that saved them in the korean war (with no mention of the UN).
Ive also noticed a lot of Korean people saying lately that the USA are 'the peace keepers of the world'.
Ten years ago, the usa were the korean peoples enemy and almost everyone hated them and wanted them out of the country. I even remember defending the US soldiers here in an argument with 3 separate koreans.
Am beginning to wonder if these susceptible to suggestion people, are being fed this information from somewhere to encourage trade agreements?
Its all related |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jongno2bucheon
Joined: 11 Mar 2014
|
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dood peoples... America is the global hegemon.
absent any british colonization influence or anti american oil politics it makes sense from a cost benefit analysis and market demand perspective. That's it. be like mike or messi. you have one spot... You get the one that gives you the most benefit. america has proved to be trustable than china over the past 10 years. Much more trustable.
That simple. korea will change when the world changed. fin |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| candy bar wrote: |
| ontheway wrote: |
| http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhninL_G3Fg |
After listening to that, now I know why Korean mothers want North Americans teaching their little Korean boys and girls. |
Yes and it would be a good call by the mother. Someone from the north of England nobody is going to understand even after weeks. Would they want their children sounding like that? In the US people from the deep south usually talk slower and I think they are easier to understand than someone from say Birmingham. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
robbie_davies
Joined: 16 Jun 2013
|
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 10:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JimDanDee wrote: |
| My speech patterns are very difficult to ascertain and are as close to unaccented as most people ever hear |
I bet any money I would know you are American. There is no such thing as 'unaccented' speech, this is the problem with poli-sci majors teaching English language acquisition, they have no clue.
| Quote: |
| I have met 'Native Speakers' from at least four of the 'English speaking countries' who should be sued for fraud. Many of them from the 'British Isles' though I prefer a clear British accent. |
Which 'clear' accent? There are hundreds of accents in the British Isles. Here are some, can you understand them?
Yorskhire
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39ya2Drpj3s
Scotland
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZ85RplDgYI
Wales
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItNJV77EEeY
| Quote: |
| I am still surprised that English conversation instructors are hired before having to demonstrate conversational proficiency. Too many non-North Americans speak unclear English (compared to the NUMBER of North Americans), so recruiters are wary with cause and are unable to judge conversation on their own. Yes, it is the recruiters fault, but now YOU must deal with it. |
Again, this ignorant self-centric view about what accents are understandable and what accents aren't is a problem when Koreans insist on hiring unqualified people who have no clue about language acquisition, I pity 'JimDanDee's' students.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
robbie_davies
Joined: 16 Jun 2013
|
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jongno2bucheon wrote: |
dood peoples... America is the global hegemon.
absent any british colonization influence or anti american oil politics it makes sense from a cost benefit analysis and market demand perspective. That's it. be like mike or messi. you have one spot... You get the one that gives you the most benefit. america has proved to be trustable than china over the past 10 years. Much more trustable.
That simple. korea will change when the world changed. fin |
Well, I'll tell you what, little of that made any sense. |
|
| 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
|
|