similar conditionals

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

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

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

Post by lolwhites » Sat Mar 26, 2005 4:54 pm

You have to remember that many of us are using coursebooks which continue with the convenient fiction of conditionals by numbers, we are often sharing classes with teachers who do the same, we are offering classes in addition to those school classes where the conditionals are taught in this way and you have to choose your battles.
You highlight a very real issue here, Juan, as few of us have the time to produce our own materials and, as you say, nor do we teach in isolation.

Obviously dissing your colleagues doesn't make for good work relationshipd and don't do much for your chances of keeping your job next year. The way round it is not to say to students "Teacher X is talking crap" or "This book is bollix", but say "It's not the whole story; work with it for the time being and wait till you're at a higher level before you can understand everything."

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

Post by fluffyhamster » Sat Mar 26, 2005 6:20 pm

Or wait until you can become a student on one of Major Metal's no-nonsense courses. :D

JuanTwoThree
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:30 am
Location: Spain

Post by JuanTwoThree » Sat Mar 26, 2005 6:52 pm

I suppose I must subvert the system from within, with such questions as "Is this a Zero: When I was young, if I had money, I bought beer" . Or "What's "If it's raining, I'm not going" ?

It should be easy enough to come up with functional descriptions (something like habits, rules, generalisations then promises, then hypotheses, either about the present,or future or past) which cover far more of the endless possibilities but don't directly contradict one's colleagues and materials.

As for "It's not the whole story; work with it for the time being and wait till you're at a higher level before you can understand everything" , isn't that the caveat that we apply to almost every single grammar "rule" at every level? Or we should apply.

I hate the word "exception". I never use the word. Well, not as a rule.

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

Post by lolwhites » Sat Mar 26, 2005 8:20 pm

As for "It's not the whole story; work with it for the time being and wait till you're at a higher level before you can understand everything" , isn't that the caveat that we apply to almost every single grammar "rule" at every level? Or we should apply.
If my experience is anything to go by, then "should" is definitely the operative word here. I have no doubt that it's true for most of us here but it seems not to be the case more widely throughout the profession.

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

Post by metal56 » Sat Mar 26, 2005 10:10 pm

JuanTwoThree wrote:or future or past) ...which cover far more of the endless possibilities
The `possibilities are not endless, there is a system.

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

Post by metal56 » Sat Mar 26, 2005 11:32 pm

Stephen Jones wrote:

Because all the possible uses of a verb form are still possible after "if".
Including this?

If he has been working on the script, I'll give him another advance. Otherwise...

Pablo-747
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:40 am

Mixed Conditionals

Post by Pablo-747 » Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:59 am

Is there a problem with teaching 4 conditional structures and mixed conditionals? Won't students who know "the 4 conditionals" have an enhanced feeling for what is being expressed in e.g.

If we arrive tomorrow, it'd be wonderful.

I haven't found that students are really thrown by mixed conditionals; I can't remember a student ever saying "wait a minute, shouldn't that be 'will'? Boy, I'm confused".

I don't teach "rules" on conditionals, but guides to usage. Also if we use plenty of authentic materials - and I'm guessing the kind of mixed conditionals we're talking about are more typical in spoken English [where, by the way, the past of arrive would be hard to distinguish in the above example :wink: ] - then students experience how to extemporise with these structures.

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

Post by lolwhites » Wed Mar 30, 2005 1:27 pm

Hi Pablo. Nice to have someone else on board :D

Your students may not be thrown but I get questions like the one you describe all the time and not just about conditionals. It's good to see you saying you teach guides to usage rather than rules.

The issue here, as I see it, is that the only reason anyone has come up with for teaching four "types" of conditional is because that's what the books say. Is there a good linguistic reason for doing it? Getting students to drill "If I win/won the lottery, I will/would buy a mansion" does more harm than good - it restricts them artificially (Is If we arrive tomorrow, it'd be wonderful really any more complex than If we arrived...?) and encourages mindless application of "rules" (e.g. 1st = Present Simple + will) and the expense of encouraging students to explore structure and meaning.

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

Re: Mixed Conditionals

Post by metal56 » Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:24 pm

Pablo-747 wrote:Is there a problem with teaching 4 conditional structures and mixed conditionals? Won't students who know "the 4 conditionals" have an enhanced feeling for what is being expressed in e.g.

If we arrive tomorrow, it'd be wonderful.

I haven't found that students are really thrown by mixed conditionals; I can't remember a student ever saying "wait a minute, shouldn't that be 'will'? Boy, I'm confused".

I don't teach "rules" on conditionals, but guides to usage. Also if we use plenty of authentic materials - and I'm guessing the kind of mixed conditionals we're talking about are more typical in spoken English [where, by the way, the past of arrive would be hard to distinguish in the above example :wink: ] - then students experience how to extemporise with these structures.
It seems to be that it is native speakers who have most problems accepting:

If we arrive tomorrow, it'd be wonderful.

revel
Posts: 533
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 8:21 am

An accidental experiement

Post by revel » Thu Mar 31, 2005 6:20 am

Good morning all.

Beat me with a wet noodle, if you wish, I find the whole "conditionals" thing to be foolishness and unnecessary complication of structure, grammar and syntax. Save your disparraging remarks about my person or my teaching style or whatever, If I Were King of the World, students would certainly learn this material in a dramatically different manner.

However, as mentioned by others, we are often "forced" to teach this poppyc*ck because of the book we have been "forced" to use. Even when choosing the book myself, I find myself with the obligatory side-bar explaining the first, the second, the third, when, why, where....argh! And so after doing several exercises writing artificial sentences "If I met an alien on the street...." "If Julia Roberts rang my doorbell....", I decide to include a section on conditionals on the second trimester test. That way my boss, who is also a conditionals fan will think that I am actually teaching this oh-so-important aspect of ESL (I've mentioned elsewhere that I was asked in my job interview if I would be able to teach the conditionals, as if it were tantamount as an example of being a good ESL teacher).

So, I put a number of half-sentences under the title "First Conditional. Complete these sentences." However, the first half of the sentences provided was second conditional. The students who bothered to read the instructions happily wrote first conditional endings to second conditional sentences. The others, who either didn't read the instructions or just didn't associate first with one structure and second with another, completed the sentences "correctly", that is, in second conditional.

The experiement was accidental, there was no control group, the group is too small (ten students) to draw any useful conclusions. Exactly half taking the test wrote the wrong answers, though they were wrong because they were first conditional endings as instructed by the instructions. Half taking the test wrote the correct answer but had not followed instructions which is something I'm always harping at them about. I didn't realize my mistake until correcting the exam and finding this half and half thing. I finally threw the five sentences out and graded the exam without them. I can't interpret this anecdote (well, I can, but just don't feel like all the controversy on my person) and leave it to others to batter about.

peace,
revel.

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

Post by Andrew Patterson » Sat Apr 23, 2005 7:13 pm

.
Last edited by Andrew Patterson on Sat Apr 23, 2005 7:23 pm, edited 3 times in total.

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

Post by Andrew Patterson » Sat Apr 23, 2005 7:22 pm

I've been classifying the subordinate conjunctions that can be used to make conditional sentences so far I've come up with this list:

# Conditionality: Plain: if
# Restrictive: only if
# Provisory: provided (that), providing (that), as long as
# Insurative: in case
# Assurative: lest
# Assumptive: assuming that
# Opportune: as, since
# Conjectural/Suppositional: given that, supposing
# Decisive: when
# Abrogational: unless
# Non-abrogational: even if, whether or not
# Salvational: but for, without
# Volitional: now that

I'd like to know if:
a) I've missed any conditional conjunctions; and
b) you could you think of better adjectives to describe them?
c) you would classify them differently.

Thanks.

Post Reply