Huddleston speaks!

<b>Forum for the discussion of Applied Linguistics </b>

Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Thu Nov 18, 2004 12:34 pm

LarryLatham wrote:
- used to indicate (-) annoyance because of something that has not been done: they could have told me! (...but they didn't)
- used to indicate a strong(!) inclination to do something: he irritates me so much that I could scream. (...but I won't)
:D
Larry Latham
Heh, sure, adding what is usually left unsaid nudges us further along to a "remote" interpretation; it's just a shame, however, that "remote" probably can't be included in the definitions themselves without a lot of reworking and a consequent loss of elegance and brevity. :o

malgeum
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 3:34 pm

Post by malgeum » Thu Nov 18, 2004 2:47 pm

metal56 wrote:
malgeum wrote:I can't see the value in teaching remoteness as a vague-sounding "unified theory of the past form."

If a concept can not be broken down into one or two fairly understandable sentences, it is pedagogically useless in an ESL classroom.
Do us a favour?

Break down the use of some and any into one or two fairly understandable sentences.
I can't and I'm guessing neither can you. My point was that a teacher would only interest a small fraction of his students in as abstract a concept as 'remoteness'. And, why should students have to contend with a concept that native speakers have trouble with? Does knowing about remoteness help you speak English?

lolwhites
Posts: 1321
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Post by lolwhites » Thu Nov 18, 2004 3:03 pm

It doesn't help me speak English because I'm a native speaker! The again, the same could be said for any grammar book intended for non-native students of English. Is that an argument for throwing all grammar explanations out of the window?

Knowing about remoteness is one tool that helps my students to understand some of the stranger "anomalies", "exceptions" and "special uses" that they encounter when they come to the UK to study and hear natural English which appears to contradict the "rules" they were taught back home.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:11 pm

fluffyhamster wrote:
Heh, sure, adding what is usually left unsaid nudges us further along to a "remote" interpretation; it's just a shame, however, that "remote" probably can't be included in the definitions themselves without a lot of reworking and a consequent loss of elegance and brevity. :o
Talking of elegance and brevity, the above sentence is a bit ...

:twisted:

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:13 pm

malgeum wrote:
? Does knowing about remoteness help you speak English?
I think the original question was whether or not the term "past simple" helps you speak English .

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:15 pm

metal56 wrote:Talking of elegance and brevity, the above sentence is a bit ...

:twisted:
Is "perfect" the word you were looking for? :lol:

LarryLatham
Posts: 1195
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)

Post by LarryLatham » Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:25 pm

malgeum wrote:Does knowing about remoteness help you speak English?
I guess I must be the exception here, but knowing about remoteness absolutely helps me to speak English, in the sense that I believe I understand more precisely what I say now, or perhaps I should say I understand more precisely what I think now, based on what I say. My awareness of remoteness makes it possible for my brain to confirm many times every day the usefulness of the concept. I have the experience of mentally clicking off particular language events and sensing how they fit so comfortably into the theory. In addition to believing that I now speak more precisely, I also think I understand better what others say...even when they themselves may not be consciously aware of all the nuances of their choices of language. When I ask pertinent questions to clairify what they mean, their answers always confirm my suspicions.

Larry Latham

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Nov 18, 2004 9:32 pm

LarryLatham wrote:
malgeum wrote:Does knowing about remoteness help you speak English?
I guess I must be the exception here, but knowing about remoteness absolutely helps me to speak English, in the sense that I believe I understand more precisely what I say now, or perhaps I should say I understand more precisely what I think now, based on what I say. My awareness of remoteness makes it possible for my brain to confirm many times every day the usefulness of the concept. I have the experience of mentally clicking off particular language events and sensing how they fit so comfortably into the theory. In addition to believing that I now speak more precisely, I also think I understand better what others say...even when they themselves may not be consciously aware of all the nuances of their choices of language. When I ask pertinent questions to clairify what they mean, their answers always confirm my suspicions.

Larry Latham
Ditto, Larry.

Andrew Patterson
Posts: 922
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:59 pm
Location: Poland
Contact:

Post by Andrew Patterson » Thu Nov 18, 2004 9:57 pm

Ditto again. I haven't contributed to this because frankly I think the discussion has been done to death. Proximity/remoteness is a useful concept for modals and the subjunctive. How else are we to understand them?

Too much analysis beyond that isn't very useful to learners of English. In my opinion, unless we are teaching a linguistics/philosophy class, we should bear in mind that we are trying to teach English and only use as much grammar as is necessary to do that.

Grammar is of use to native speakers in exactly the way that Larry said and that especially includes remoteness for modal verbs and the subjunctive, and retrospection for perfect tenses; indeed as native speakers we can go into the deep philosophical stuff that we shouldn't dream of discussing with our students except perhaps at proficiency level.

woodcutter
Posts: 1303
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2004 6:14 am
Location: London

Post by woodcutter » Fri Nov 19, 2004 12:24 am

The reading I really need to do is on historical linguistics - I think that is crucial here. Anyone know any really good books?

A word is surely generated with one meaning, the central one, and goes from there. The central meaning might alter or be lost. "I feel blue" is the child of the colour blue, we can easily see that and it may give us some bearings, but it is twisted into something quite new. That is surely how language works, that is a reality that the language learner should grasp. They shouldn't spit out a dummy when meeting a new meaning on an old friend, frustrating as it is.

Perhaps the grammatical words or morphological items are entirely different, though I don't see it. If "remoteness" is chiefly used to help students understand why a thing is one thing here and another thing there by telling them that this is a perfectly logical aspect of a great unity, then I think that would be misleading.

LarryLatham
Posts: 1195
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)

Post by LarryLatham » Fri Nov 19, 2004 12:55 am

Perhaps we all are looking for much the same result: simplicity in concepts so that students might have less to deal with (=less confusion).

But we have different approaches. I, for one, feel that large, unifying ideas about how English works will make for the easiest handle for students to grasp. If we present the language as many faceted, and full of exceptions and illogical constructions (using past forms for present or future meanings, for example, or present forms for future events) because of historical conventions, and an unending catalog of forms, then it shouldn't surprise us when students are confused or dispirited.

My interest in promoting remoteness lies in the simplicity I believe it offers. Past forms always (no exceptions) imply remoteness. You only need allow for the exact nature of the remoteness in a particular use to be open to interpretation. But all language is subject to interpretation, so that should pose no particular difficulty for students.

Larry Latham

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Fri Nov 19, 2004 1:09 am

There isn't a "yawn" emoticon, so "rolling eyes/sighing" will have to do: :roll: .

:lol:

I don't have any books specifically on Historical Linguistics (and am not entirely sure why you think you need one in relation to the thread's topic(s)), but there's a nice chapter on "The History of Linguistics" (by Lyle Campbell) and then a slightly drier one on "Historical Linguistics" (by Brian D. Joseph) in the excellent The Handbook of Linguistics (Aronoff, M and Rees-Miller, J, eds. Blackwell Publishing, 2003). Of the introductory textbooks available, I'd hazard a guess that Campbell's, or Trask's, would both be engagingly written and worth a look. P.H. Matthews has also written a few books with a historical slant, and let's not forget the likes of Otto Jespersen!

One book that I really want to get is:
http://www.blackwellpublishers.co.uk/bo ... 917&site=1
http://cf.linguistlist.org/cfdocs/new-w ... imeout=500
http://www.salisbury.edu/schools/fulton/ace/S%27s_4.htm

Then again, Seuren sounds like he can be a bit of a pr*ck himself (despite the fact that he is a vocal critic of Chomsky and thus worth listening to):
http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~radford/ ... eyears.htm

I thought this course looked interesting:
http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/wehmeyer/ ... N7118.html

Blackwell have a Handbook of Historical Linguistics too:
http://cf.linguistlist.org/cfdocs/new-w ... imeout=500

This is a very useful link on LinguistList:
http://cf.linguistlist.org/cfdocs/new-w ... -pub1.html

Freebie:
http://www.bartleby.com/186/

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Fri Nov 19, 2004 8:07 am

woodcutter wrote:The reading I really need to do is on historical linguistics - I think that is crucial here.
More like, hysterical linguistics. ;-)
That is surely how language works, that is a reality that the language learner should grasp. They shouldn't spit out a dummy when meeting a new meaning on an old friend, frustrating as it is.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Fri Nov 19, 2004 8:13 am

The impact of spatial orientation on human thought and, in particular, our understanding of time has often been noted.[1] Lakoff (1993: 218) assumes that our metaphorical understanding of time in terms of space is biologically determined: (...)

---------------------------------------

We need spatio-physical metaphors to speak about time in the same way that we need concrete metaphors to speak about other internal states such as emotions or thoughts.

http://www.spz.tu-darmstadt.de/projekt_ ... adden1.htm
Could "remoteness" be one of those metaphors?

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Fri Nov 19, 2004 8:43 am

The relation between experience, conceptual structure and meaning: non-temporal uses of tense and language teaching

Andrea Tyler and Vyvyan Evans


(Extract)

There are four kinds of non-temporal uses of tense that we will consider. The first function relates to a designation of intimacy between the speaker/s and others. The second relates to what we will term salience (commonly referred to as foregrounding and backgrounding in the discourse literature). The third concerns what we will term actuality, in which tense is used to signal the extent to which the experiencer (or speaker) believes the event described corresponds to the actual world-state and conditions holding (this has been variously termed epistemic stance, cf. Fillmore 1990, or as a distinction between realis and irrealis). The fourth function concerns what we will term attenuation, in which certain speech acts are "softened"' or mitigated in terms of their threat to face (cf. Brown and Levinson 1987). This function is commonly referred to in terms of linguistic politeness phenomena.

http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Users/vyv/Exper ... eaning.pdf

BAD SCIENCE!!:

The argument is that in a sentence such as: I just wanted to ask you if
you could lend me a pound (ibid.: 19), the addressee can determine from
context that the use of the past tense does not relate to a past desire,
but rather to a current situation. This common approach has tended to
reinforce the view that non-temporal uses should be treated as exceptions*.


The difficulty for language teachers, and one we have faced ourselves in classroom settings, is how to insightfully present the nontemporal uses associated with tense. The approach offered by received wisdom, as reflected in course books and pedagogical grammars, is to treat them as exceptions, or worse to ignore them altogether.

For instance, Westney (1994) has observed that in pedagogical grammars: "[T]ime reference is treated as dominant and other uses are simply appended" (ibid.: 79). Riddle (1986) notes that most pedagogical texts ignore the uses of tense to signal intimacy, salience, and attenuation.

http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Users/vyv/Exper ... eaning.pdf

*My emphasis.

Post Reply