I find it difficult to teach students about remoteness when they're starting out as many of them don't have the metalanguage for me to explain it to them (my classes are multilingual so I can't explain anything in L1). Furthermore, it is often so at odds with their expectations (i.e. that tense=time) that they may not be ready to make that conceptual leap. However, once they've been in the UK a while, hearing real English as opposed to Grammar Book English, I start explaining remoteness to them.
The result is often that I can almost see a light going on in the students' heads as they realise all the "wrong" English they've been hearing on the streets of Cambridge actually fits into a coherent system, albeit not one they were taught by their teachers back home.
Read Lewis and go away and think about it.
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
Aw c'mon, Dunk. If ya can't stand the heat, then go do the gardening.Duncan Powrie wrote:
Anyway, can't you see the "cline" drooping through my three artfully-arranged examples?! Is there much of a difference between a cline and a line? Shame on you, you are a bad bad man mr metal56, a filthy typist, and I won't respond to your nonsense ever again!!!
That depends if you believe that modals have a "past" form. Why is there then a choice between can and could in polite requests?woodcutter wrote:What then is the definition of "remote"? It clearly has nothing to do with physical distance, as it normally does. In regards to time it ought to mean past or future, but it only seems to mean "past" to Mr.Lewis. I suppose we can follow that it may mean "remote from reality". However, a remote tone is the opposite of a polite tone, so it must mean remote from "directness". Yet the most important thing about changing "Open the window!" into something indirect is the addition of the modal, not the employment of a past form.
The definition of remote is as it stands, Lewis has never changed that. He does say that there are many ways to perceive remoteness though: one though the senses (touch, sight, hearing, etc.) ie, physically; another way is psychologically. Lewis refers to the latter regarding tense. He does refer to the former regarding deictic expression and such.
Last edited by metal56 on Wed Oct 20, 2004 7:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
Unless they are visually impaired... have you tried drawing diagrams?I find it difficult to teach students about remoteness when they're starting out as many of them don't have the metalanguage for me to explain it to them (my classes are multilingual so I can't explain anything in L1).
I've even taught the "concept" of remoteness and proximity in tense choice to visually impaired ESL beginners. I'll leave you to figure out how.
It is not your place to whine on about difficulties one encounters in trying to communicate things to students. Do you think that the age old method of trying to communicate the use of the present perfect is easy? You are a teacher, be creative.
Some homework:woodcutter wrote:What then is the definition of "remote"? It clearly has nothing to do with physical distance, as it normally does.
The key to making sense of this behavior is an understanding of remoteness as primarily conceptual and not merely temporal; temporal distance becomes one possible, even preferred, realization of the broader phenomenon of conceptual distance.
http://www.slavica.com/jsl/jsl_9_1.html
----
If it's good enough for the Greeks...:
This, in the end, gets back to the question of time reference with the Greek verb. Now, I don't really want to re-open the aspect wars, but if the Imperfect is seen as remote instead of merely past referring, conditions like this come as no surprise. Sometimes the remoteness is temporal--a past event. But sometimes the remoteness is logical--an impossible event portrayed as a wish.
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-gr ... 12491.html
Last edited by metal56 on Tue Oct 19, 2004 12:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
And who said that Lewis was the first to mention remoteness in laguage choice:
It is not strange that his admiration for those writers should have been unbounded.—Macaulay.
In this use should goes through all persons and is equivalent to a gerund with possessive: that a man should be is the same as a man's being. We can only guess at its origin; our guess is that (1) should is the remote form for shall, as would for will in d. above, substituted in order to give an effect of generality;
-----------
And later:
I wish you would not sneeze. Before subordination this is: You will not sneeze: that is what I wish. W. remains, but will becomes would to give the remoteness always connected with wish, which is seen also, for instance, in I wish I were instead of I wish I be.
H.W. Fowler (1858–1933). The King’s English, 2nd ed. 1908.
My emphasis.
It is not strange that his admiration for those writers should have been unbounded.—Macaulay.
In this use should goes through all persons and is equivalent to a gerund with possessive: that a man should be is the same as a man's being. We can only guess at its origin; our guess is that (1) should is the remote form for shall, as would for will in d. above, substituted in order to give an effect of generality;
-----------
And later:
I wish you would not sneeze. Before subordination this is: You will not sneeze: that is what I wish. W. remains, but will becomes would to give the remoteness always connected with wish, which is seen also, for instance, in I wish I were instead of I wish I be.
H.W. Fowler (1858–1933). The King’s English, 2nd ed. 1908.
My emphasis.
Have you finished your multiple posting yet Metal? Good...
As for "whining", I was just pointing out the difficulties involved in getting across abstract concepts to students with a low functional ability in the language they are learning. Since you're such an expert, how about telling us how it's done, as one professional to another?
When was the last time a doctor said "I've worked out how to cure cancer, but I'll leave you to work it out for yourself?" Is your top priority helping the students or just showing how smart you are? I've had a lot of time for you in the past but you seem more interested in point scoring than professionalism here. Very disappointing
So much for using this forum to exchange ideas and share good practice...I've even taught the "concept" of remoteness and proximity in tense choice to visually impaired ESL beginners. I'll leave you to figure out how.
As for "whining", I was just pointing out the difficulties involved in getting across abstract concepts to students with a low functional ability in the language they are learning. Since you're such an expert, how about telling us how it's done, as one professional to another?
When was the last time a doctor said "I've worked out how to cure cancer, but I'll leave you to work it out for yourself?" Is your top priority helping the students or just showing how smart you are? I've had a lot of time for you in the past but you seem more interested in point scoring than professionalism here. Very disappointing
Hey. Mr Innocent, read back on your own posts. Nice and friendly? Mocking?lolwhites wrote:Have you finished your multiple posting yet Metal? Good...
So much for using this forum to exchange ideas and share good practice...I've even taught the "concept" of remoteness and proximity in tense choice to visually impaired ESL beginners. I'll leave you to figure out how.
As for "whining", I was just pointing out the difficulties involved in getting across abstract concepts to students with a low functional ability in the language they are learning. Since you're such an expert, how about telling us how it's done, as one professional to another?
When was the last time a doctor said "I've worked out how to cure cancer, but I'll leave you to work it out for yourself?" Is your top priority helping the students or just showing how smart you are? I've had a lot of time for you in the past but you seem more interested in point scoring than professionalism here. Very disappointing
Mocking? Me? Naaaah, just giving as good as I get, although I was actually objecting to the content rather than the tone.
Feel free to be as sarcastic as you like (I certainly am), but my point was could you share your knowledge and experience (no irony here, metal, I honestly believe you to be knowledgeable and experienced) rather than behaving as the Keeper of the Forbidden Knowledge of Conveying the Concept of Remoteness to Students.
Just a thought.
Feel free to be as sarcastic as you like (I certainly am), but my point was could you share your knowledge and experience (no irony here, metal, I honestly believe you to be knowledgeable and experienced) rather than behaving as the Keeper of the Forbidden Knowledge of Conveying the Concept of Remoteness to Students.
Just a thought.
-
Duncan Powrie
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 3:33 pm
Maybe this remoteness thing is like the Lexical Approach, intuitively appealing on paper, and something you can talk about passionately once you've got your head around it, but which is lacking in specifics beyond its implications.
However, to be fair, it has been presented by Lewis more as a way to view and analyze language, a viewpoint that we bring to language, than an approach for organizing learning (and the language to be learnt), but it is a shame that more has not been done* to produce a grammar or course organized according to Lewis's grammatical (and not just lexical) theories; as it is, we still need to work through and deal with more traditional terminology and viewpoints in available materials, so there will inevitably always need to be some reworking and reshaping of things, which might lead to friction, not least with less "enlightened" colleagues.
* Correct me if I'm wrong!
However, to be fair, it has been presented by Lewis more as a way to view and analyze language, a viewpoint that we bring to language, than an approach for organizing learning (and the language to be learnt), but it is a shame that more has not been done* to produce a grammar or course organized according to Lewis's grammatical (and not just lexical) theories; as it is, we still need to work through and deal with more traditional terminology and viewpoints in available materials, so there will inevitably always need to be some reworking and reshaping of things, which might lead to friction, not least with less "enlightened" colleagues.
* Correct me if I'm wrong!
-
Duncan Powrie
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 3:33 pm
It'll probably be hot in the garden too, and I don't exactly have green fingers. No, if you don't mind, I'll stay in and try to dice these here onions as best I can, whilst keeping an eye on you and lol as you circle each other warily with the decent knives.metal56 wrote:Aw c'mon, Dunk. If ya can't stand the heat, then go do the gardening.
[quote="Duncan Powrie"
I've had few problems doing so, and my students love it as a compliment to other methods.
It sounds as if you are another who has tried and failed to introduce and make work the lexical approach in the classroom.]Maybe this remoteness thing is like the Lexical Approach, intuitively appealing on paper, and something you can talk about passionately once you've got your head around it, but which is lacking in specifics beyond its implications.
I've had few problems doing so, and my students love it as a compliment to other methods.
Last edited by metal56 on Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
woodcutter
- Posts: 1303
- Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2004 6:14 am
- Location: London
Before I enter the dark underworld of Metal's links, I just want to say that Duncan has it quite right about polite phrases being silly. The art of being polite involves being as nonsensical as you can without actually asking something impossible, because a direct request is just so awfully rude. Almost any old rubbish will do.
"I wonder if you mightn't be able to see your way clear to helping me out with that?"
What other rule could be at work here?
"I wonder if you mightn't be able to see your way clear to helping me out with that?"
What other rule could be at work here?
If there is ever a comedy sketch show involving ESL teachers with crazy ideas this phrase will feature.My students love it!