Many people are scathing about the teaching of dodgy, over-simplistic rules, such as "We use the word 'any' in questions and negatives." I tend to be a big offender on this front (surprise?) and I would like to list some of the reasons why, and see if I can learn something from the response.
1.It is nearly always more truthful to speak of "patterns" rather than "rules". Students, however, often live in a world of friendly ticks and angry red crosses. When they hear "pattern", they want details. The details are often complex and obscure, and bad for the focus of the lesson.
2.Such rules may work in the students' interlanguage. "'Will' is the English future tense" is true for most basic users, who all need to communicate about the future.
3.Students seek out rules, and infer rules. The "Any-questions-negatives" rules is often taught before they have much metalanguage. However it is presented, the students are going to tell themselves that this is a rule, and gloss over any annoying words like "generally".
4. People expect language rules to have exceptions. They are also only concepts and easy enough to improve upon at a later date, unlike a fossilized mistake in pronunciation, for instance.
5. Let's be honest. It is an easy way to do it. I like to keep things easy, and so do most students. Perhaps in our field, "difficult" and "too advanced at this stage" are synonyms.
6.The ugliest argument of all. I am not their only teacher, usually. If I don't do it, someone else will.
Any thoughts?
Rules and Patterns
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
Why? Because....
Good morning all!
I'll take your bait, woodcutter.
I think the human race likes to know the whys of everything. That dreaded question, repeated thousands of times by the three-year-old, the 9, 15, 25 year old, even up to the end: "Why?"
I think it is, in part, a memory activator. It's like a Mnemonic trick that helps to group items for future reference until those items become an automatic part of communication. Like remembering my secret bank number, the first pair are the year after I had a brush with the law, the second pair of numbers is the year I visited New York city and the mid-west, the third pair of numbers is my birthday, for example. So "any in questions and negatives" groups some useful concepts for quick reference. Those concepts must then be gotten into the mouth for instant use so that the brain can concentrate on what it's trying to say instead of how to try and say it.
People who are not intrested in language itself might only need the simplest rules. Others might think that knowing all the complexities and exceptions of the rules, they will have a firmer grasp on the language. Different music is needed for different types of dance. Sooooo....
Simple rule giving is useful and must be built upon as the student advances. Rules should not be learned to be applied to exams but should rather be reference points for rapid comprehension of an exercise, for efficient correcting, and to satisfy that never ending "why" that leads us to study anything in the first place.
peace,
revel.
I'll take your bait, woodcutter.
I think the human race likes to know the whys of everything. That dreaded question, repeated thousands of times by the three-year-old, the 9, 15, 25 year old, even up to the end: "Why?"
I think it is, in part, a memory activator. It's like a Mnemonic trick that helps to group items for future reference until those items become an automatic part of communication. Like remembering my secret bank number, the first pair are the year after I had a brush with the law, the second pair of numbers is the year I visited New York city and the mid-west, the third pair of numbers is my birthday, for example. So "any in questions and negatives" groups some useful concepts for quick reference. Those concepts must then be gotten into the mouth for instant use so that the brain can concentrate on what it's trying to say instead of how to try and say it.
People who are not intrested in language itself might only need the simplest rules. Others might think that knowing all the complexities and exceptions of the rules, they will have a firmer grasp on the language. Different music is needed for different types of dance. Sooooo....
Simple rule giving is useful and must be built upon as the student advances. Rules should not be learned to be applied to exams but should rather be reference points for rapid comprehension of an exercise, for efficient correcting, and to satisfy that never ending "why" that leads us to study anything in the first place.
peace,
revel.
-
Andrew Patterson
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:59 pm
- Location: Poland
- Contact:
I'll just comment on "some" and "any" for the moment.
This is one of my pet peeves. It is completely missing the point to say that we usually use "any" in questions, and I don't like the term negative.
I prefer to use "zero" instead of "negative" since the word "zero" occurs in more languages than the word "negative" and it is in any case more accurate.
When used with uncountable or plural nouns:
"some" is used for positive (+)amounts; and
"any" is used for zero (0) amounts, or uncertain amounts (???)
"any" can also refer to singular countable nouns when there is uncertainty or generality such as "any given situation", "any person", etc.
The point that many people seem to be missing is that that's it. There is nothing more to learn except why "some" or "any" might refer to a positive, zero or uncertain quantity in any given situation.
If I ask the question, "Would you like some chocolate." I have a positive amount available to give you."
If I ask, "Would you like any chocolate." I am uncertain if you want any so I am refering to an uncertain amount.
Both are equally correct.
This then sets the ground to teach something/anything, someone/anyone, etc, which follow the same pattern.
This is not rocket science, too many textbooks make really heavy weather of "some" and "any", but talking about "exceptions", etc is ony going to confuse the students and possibly the teacher too.
This is one of my pet peeves. It is completely missing the point to say that we usually use "any" in questions, and I don't like the term negative.
I prefer to use "zero" instead of "negative" since the word "zero" occurs in more languages than the word "negative" and it is in any case more accurate.
When used with uncountable or plural nouns:
"some" is used for positive (+)amounts; and
"any" is used for zero (0) amounts, or uncertain amounts (???)
"any" can also refer to singular countable nouns when there is uncertainty or generality such as "any given situation", "any person", etc.
The point that many people seem to be missing is that that's it. There is nothing more to learn except why "some" or "any" might refer to a positive, zero or uncertain quantity in any given situation.
If I ask the question, "Would you like some chocolate." I have a positive amount available to give you."
If I ask, "Would you like any chocolate." I am uncertain if you want any so I am refering to an uncertain amount.
Both are equally correct.
This then sets the ground to teach something/anything, someone/anyone, etc, which follow the same pattern.
This is not rocket science, too many textbooks make really heavy weather of "some" and "any", but talking about "exceptions", etc is ony going to confuse the students and possibly the teacher too.
The problem from my end is that when I teach students who've come to the UK to improve their English, they can get very peeved to find that the language they come into contact doesn't fit the "rules" they were taught back home. All too often I have arguments with students who say "But my teacher said (insert your favourite "rule" here)" and go on to berate me for my inability to speak my own language just because I said "Two coffees" instead of "two cups of coffee" or some such unforgivable violation of some grammar point. Students can be very dogmatic about such "rules".
Having said that, we do have to teach rules and I accept that at times and at lower levels, particularly in multilingual classes where we can't resort to L2 explanations, I may have to simplify. However, this has to be done with the proviso that the simplified rule is not the whole story and the understanding that the students will have to modify their structure as their level improves.
R.A. Close sums it up well when he says: "The teacher must distinguish between helpful advice and absolute statement. He would be justified in advising his pupils not to use know, remember etc in the ..ing form of the verb until they are more advanced. He would be wrong in making them learn a 'rule' to the effect that these words are not used in the prgressive form at all".
Incidentally, it's perfectly possible to teach elementary students how some and any really work without having to resort to contorted claims of positive, negative and interrogative sentences with exceptions when you make an offer and other associated nuggets of B.S.
Having said that, we do have to teach rules and I accept that at times and at lower levels, particularly in multilingual classes where we can't resort to L2 explanations, I may have to simplify. However, this has to be done with the proviso that the simplified rule is not the whole story and the understanding that the students will have to modify their structure as their level improves.
R.A. Close sums it up well when he says: "The teacher must distinguish between helpful advice and absolute statement. He would be justified in advising his pupils not to use know, remember etc in the ..ing form of the verb until they are more advanced. He would be wrong in making them learn a 'rule' to the effect that these words are not used in the prgressive form at all".
Incidentally, it's perfectly possible to teach elementary students how some and any really work without having to resort to contorted claims of positive, negative and interrogative sentences with exceptions when you make an offer and other associated nuggets of B.S.
-
woodcutter
- Posts: 1303
- Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2004 6:14 am
- Location: London
replies
Nice to hear from you Andrew - thanks for the message about the phantom anti-Korean poster by the way.
I'm not sure about your rule - I think I might say "Do you want some chocolate?" to somebody whilst in the supermarket.
Lolwhites- I know what you mean, but when the students start with the "but this is a RULE!", that may be the signal for the arrival of a suitable time for a deep discussion. Of course, it is possible to be fiercer than you need be when teaching these "rules".
Revel, you complained about being left out in another post, but you don't produce that much I would want to argue with!
I'm not sure about your rule - I think I might say "Do you want some chocolate?" to somebody whilst in the supermarket.
Lolwhites- I know what you mean, but when the students start with the "but this is a RULE!", that may be the signal for the arrival of a suitable time for a deep discussion. Of course, it is possible to be fiercer than you need be when teaching these "rules".
Revel, you complained about being left out in another post, but you don't produce that much I would want to argue with!
At your level,
Good morning all!
Hmm, though I often scoff at the "level" that students, other teachers or even the "administration" use to lable individuals so that several can be in the same group, I do indeed say "at your level, this is the explanation, at a future level, this matter will be expanded on, for example...."
So, at the "level", perhaps better said, early point in the process, in which students must first come into contact with "some/any" (for example, without getting into real explanations here of those words that we all have to confront often), must learn to pronounce them (fortunately, they are not difficult to spit out), must learn where they go in affirmations and negations and interrogations (word order, that is, and word choice), the explanation might go like this:
"'Some' is a quantity without saying how much, usually not a lot, but enough. We use it in affirmations because it means, yes, we have bananas though I don't say exactly how many.
"'Any' is an amount that does not exist and is actually a kind of wild word. If you are asking, you don't know if there is or there is not what you are asking about so you really can't say how much but English wants a word in the 'how much' slot in that structure, so there's 'any' to fill that need. Further along in the process, you will find 'some' in questions as well, and that usually means that we expect or hope that there is a bit of what we are asking about, though we aren't sure and that's why we are asking. But for now, stick to 'any' in questions.
"Somewhere along the line, English speakers agreed that two negative words in the same sentence isn't acceptable. 'Any' again is like a wild word, it's not negative (doesn't start with an 'n'), but being a quantity that does not exist, can be used with a verb that has been negated. Here you would very rarely find 'some' used, since 'some' is a bit that there is and a negative sentence is saying a bit that there isn't. There will certainly be some example or other where 'some' might be used, but well, face it when it appears in your process.
"And now, boys and girls, let's get down to some serious practice of this rule. Is there any milk in the bottle? Yes, there's some milk in the bottle. There's a lot of milk in the bottle. There's a little milk in the bottle. There's little milk in the bottle. The bottle of milk is half full. The bottle of milk is half empty. There isn't any milk in the bottle at all..."
Change the content and apply to: present perfect, present continuous, use of 'will' and 'would' in future and "conditional" sentences, tag questions, inversion of verb/subject, and so on. Always remember that it is a process, if a sound is influenced by those it has around it, if a word changes meaning because of the context created by its sentence mates, if a sentence can be inflected to sound angry, happy, questioning, if a conversation can be misunderstood when taken out of its universe of discourse, then a grammar rule alone is a grammar rule alone, once it is placed with other grammar rules it becomes part of the process.
peace,
revel.
Hmm, though I often scoff at the "level" that students, other teachers or even the "administration" use to lable individuals so that several can be in the same group, I do indeed say "at your level, this is the explanation, at a future level, this matter will be expanded on, for example...."
So, at the "level", perhaps better said, early point in the process, in which students must first come into contact with "some/any" (for example, without getting into real explanations here of those words that we all have to confront often), must learn to pronounce them (fortunately, they are not difficult to spit out), must learn where they go in affirmations and negations and interrogations (word order, that is, and word choice), the explanation might go like this:
"'Some' is a quantity without saying how much, usually not a lot, but enough. We use it in affirmations because it means, yes, we have bananas though I don't say exactly how many.
"'Any' is an amount that does not exist and is actually a kind of wild word. If you are asking, you don't know if there is or there is not what you are asking about so you really can't say how much but English wants a word in the 'how much' slot in that structure, so there's 'any' to fill that need. Further along in the process, you will find 'some' in questions as well, and that usually means that we expect or hope that there is a bit of what we are asking about, though we aren't sure and that's why we are asking. But for now, stick to 'any' in questions.
"Somewhere along the line, English speakers agreed that two negative words in the same sentence isn't acceptable. 'Any' again is like a wild word, it's not negative (doesn't start with an 'n'), but being a quantity that does not exist, can be used with a verb that has been negated. Here you would very rarely find 'some' used, since 'some' is a bit that there is and a negative sentence is saying a bit that there isn't. There will certainly be some example or other where 'some' might be used, but well, face it when it appears in your process.
"And now, boys and girls, let's get down to some serious practice of this rule. Is there any milk in the bottle? Yes, there's some milk in the bottle. There's a lot of milk in the bottle. There's a little milk in the bottle. There's little milk in the bottle. The bottle of milk is half full. The bottle of milk is half empty. There isn't any milk in the bottle at all..."
Change the content and apply to: present perfect, present continuous, use of 'will' and 'would' in future and "conditional" sentences, tag questions, inversion of verb/subject, and so on. Always remember that it is a process, if a sound is influenced by those it has around it, if a word changes meaning because of the context created by its sentence mates, if a sentence can be inflected to sound angry, happy, questioning, if a conversation can be misunderstood when taken out of its universe of discourse, then a grammar rule alone is a grammar rule alone, once it is placed with other grammar rules it becomes part of the process.
peace,
revel.
-
woodcutter
- Posts: 1303
- Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2004 6:14 am
- Location: London
Any point?
Well, if we are going to get down to the nitty-gritty with "any", it means "doesn't matter which" doesn't it? Not really an opposite to "some".
What really strikes me about "Some" and "Any" in particular is what a trivial matter it all is. Use them, use them wrong, leave them out altogether, it isn't a big deal. Maybe we could find better things to worry about. It isn't me who sets the exams though, so I teach the "rules". Working in an ideal environment I might tend more towards, ahem, "Lathamism".
I think learner levels are important, and I'm quite fond of Krashen's L+1 type of thinking. One thing is for certain though, classes do not often come in packages showing much equality. The academic literature, however, usually assumes they are all very much at the same level.
What really strikes me about "Some" and "Any" in particular is what a trivial matter it all is. Use them, use them wrong, leave them out altogether, it isn't a big deal. Maybe we could find better things to worry about. It isn't me who sets the exams though, so I teach the "rules". Working in an ideal environment I might tend more towards, ahem, "Lathamism".
I think learner levels are important, and I'm quite fond of Krashen's L+1 type of thinking. One thing is for certain though, classes do not often come in packages showing much equality. The academic literature, however, usually assumes they are all very much at the same level.
-
Duncan Powrie
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 3:33 pm
Rules are like the arguments put forward by lawyers in court, examples like the evidence, and our beliefs in teaching somewhat like the laws that regulate how the evidence can be used in pursuing the arguments (I know all about this stuff from watching LA Law).
What happens in lawcourts often results in mistrials, "miscarriages" of justice etc - nobody, it seems, can really say "what really happened", and is therefore a true version of those past events (apart from the witnesses, if we choose to believe them and feel they themselves actually "know what they saw")...so not everyone accepts whatever conclusions or rulings the courts reach.
In teaching, formulating rules can be useful in helping students (and teachers too!) in their pursuit of understanding (the evidence), but it is not as though everyone had or has no chance of seeing events (the evidence) as they actually happened, happen and presumably will continue happening (because we are dealing with text, not crimes, obviously!) and drawing their own conclusions (and it may take quite some time for our "jurors" to reach a satisfactory - to them, not to us, the "judges"! - "verdict"!)!
What happens in lawcourts often results in mistrials, "miscarriages" of justice etc - nobody, it seems, can really say "what really happened", and is therefore a true version of those past events (apart from the witnesses, if we choose to believe them and feel they themselves actually "know what they saw")...so not everyone accepts whatever conclusions or rulings the courts reach.
In teaching, formulating rules can be useful in helping students (and teachers too!) in their pursuit of understanding (the evidence), but it is not as though everyone had or has no chance of seeing events (the evidence) as they actually happened, happen and presumably will continue happening (because we are dealing with text, not crimes, obviously!) and drawing their own conclusions (and it may take quite some time for our "jurors" to reach a satisfactory - to them, not to us, the "judges"! - "verdict"!)!
Rules and levels
Good morning all!
Duncan, forgive me if I don't follow your comments, the coffee has not set in and I watch CSI, don't get LA LAW in my corner of the world.
woodcutter, you are right, you and I don't have much to argue about. For example, that "some / any" set of rules. It isn't all that important, few will catch on perfectly from the very beginning, all will make mistakes in its use and some will learn from those mistakes. As I said earlier, repeating a short, easy rule is often just a memory stimulator: tercer persona singular en el presente siempre lleva "s", no hay excepción!, that I spit out dozens of times in a school year, like a nice long word in Danish. I don't mean "listen to this rule!" but rather "put an "s" on that word now!". The sentence says the rule but means the application of that rule.
And yet, at some point the rule has to move quite far into the background, we can't be thinking about so many things at once when we are trying to speak L2, especially at levels where people are just starting out. That brings me to levels. It's mentioned in your post that you do not set the exams. Yet you would set levels....based on? If the tool for evaluating the linguistic level of a student is an exam-like exercise with multiple choice questions, hmmm, those I've seen sometimes look like tests from Cosmopolitan, not in that they are silly, but rather in that the conclusions drawn are generalizations, while each student is a specific case.
In my academy, for example, levels are determined by the score on one of these tests and available groups. The pedagogical levels are based on a standard progression of grammar and usage points. To move from one level to another, one has only to pay the next course. In my last group of 9 adults I had three distinct levels, or better put, three different groups, each group with similar challenges in using English: severe pronunciation interference; proficient in grammar but deficient in speech; poor assimilation of earlier material.
Levels are interesting as additional information for the teacher, but having almost always to confront a class with different levels, I have to find common denominators that may have little to do, no, probably have little to do with the official level of the class. Or, am I not to drill a "level 8" class for two days running on the possessive adjectives and pronouns, something that they haven't touched on for over a year and use wretchedly?
On the other hand, all this I seem to be thrashing also serves its purpose, that is, helps to organize and name certain milestones, which keeps us moving forward. It simplifies preparation of curriculum and classes as well as evaluation of progress. I'm not sure I would like a class where everyone was really of the same level, variety is the spice of life! But I do see that to make my contribution, in my corner of the world, I have to have students, they are paying clients, so there's a product in the middle. Sigh.
peace,
revel.
Duncan, forgive me if I don't follow your comments, the coffee has not set in and I watch CSI, don't get LA LAW in my corner of the world.
woodcutter, you are right, you and I don't have much to argue about. For example, that "some / any" set of rules. It isn't all that important, few will catch on perfectly from the very beginning, all will make mistakes in its use and some will learn from those mistakes. As I said earlier, repeating a short, easy rule is often just a memory stimulator: tercer persona singular en el presente siempre lleva "s", no hay excepción!, that I spit out dozens of times in a school year, like a nice long word in Danish. I don't mean "listen to this rule!" but rather "put an "s" on that word now!". The sentence says the rule but means the application of that rule.
And yet, at some point the rule has to move quite far into the background, we can't be thinking about so many things at once when we are trying to speak L2, especially at levels where people are just starting out. That brings me to levels. It's mentioned in your post that you do not set the exams. Yet you would set levels....based on? If the tool for evaluating the linguistic level of a student is an exam-like exercise with multiple choice questions, hmmm, those I've seen sometimes look like tests from Cosmopolitan, not in that they are silly, but rather in that the conclusions drawn are generalizations, while each student is a specific case.
In my academy, for example, levels are determined by the score on one of these tests and available groups. The pedagogical levels are based on a standard progression of grammar and usage points. To move from one level to another, one has only to pay the next course. In my last group of 9 adults I had three distinct levels, or better put, three different groups, each group with similar challenges in using English: severe pronunciation interference; proficient in grammar but deficient in speech; poor assimilation of earlier material.
Levels are interesting as additional information for the teacher, but having almost always to confront a class with different levels, I have to find common denominators that may have little to do, no, probably have little to do with the official level of the class. Or, am I not to drill a "level 8" class for two days running on the possessive adjectives and pronouns, something that they haven't touched on for over a year and use wretchedly?
On the other hand, all this I seem to be thrashing also serves its purpose, that is, helps to organize and name certain milestones, which keeps us moving forward. It simplifies preparation of curriculum and classes as well as evaluation of progress. I'm not sure I would like a class where everyone was really of the same level, variety is the spice of life! But I do see that to make my contribution, in my corner of the world, I have to have students, they are paying clients, so there's a product in the middle. Sigh.
peace,
revel.
-
Duncan Powrie
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 3:33 pm
Yeah, sorry about the extended analogy, revel, I am sure it is full of holes if not sh*te (not that it would help this thread to pick it to pieces or chew over it too much 
).
Anyway I've just posted a new thread that connects to this one (patterns/examples/details vs. rules - not that the two aren't written on the same side of paper!), so please take a look at it. It's called, "I wish I...(had) had a good textbook!".
).Anyway I've just posted a new thread that connects to this one (patterns/examples/details vs. rules - not that the two aren't written on the same side of paper!), so please take a look at it. It's called, "I wish I...(had) had a good textbook!".