Hyperwhites

[metal56]

The problem is deciding what is slang and what is simply a non-standard or simply informal usage.

It seems that many commentators here have decided such things. I would also say that the kids at Bay city high have also decided.

Whatever we need to teach the forms for recognition, but we must be careful to make sure we don't do the mistake of following a written norm that is far from the current one.

The current one for whom?

This happened to somebody with a French girlfriend. On one particular occasion his girlfriend looked at him and said, "John, you've got to lose the 'nous'."

A good example, but I bet there are French nerds who would insist on retaining that form even in spoken language. I'll bet there are teachers who skirt around such issues and tell students that the most common form is "nous". To me, there are too many teachers who teach only the language forms they prefer using, or, worse, that they assume will be better accepted by all.

[lolwhites]

So for you, language learning is only about being understood, is it?

Not only, but it helps.

It's how they came to think that which is the question. Many of my students around the world and over the years thought that Britain was still as represented in the TV series Upstairs, Downstairs". They didn't learn that at school.

I've had students who did learn these things at school, often from NNS teachers who'd hardly ever set foot in an English-speaking country. The Far East seems to be the worst for this, in my experience; you may remember a thread I started concerning a chip in porridge being taught in China as an everyday English expression.

But with nonnative speakers/learners such change in register has to be taught and conscious - at least in the first years of learning.

So you teach words like chuddies in the first year of learning?

It seems to me that there is just as much chance, or maybe less chance, of picking up Standard English in songs, on the Internet, on chat sites, with penfriends, etc. as there is of picking up so called slang, etc.

I've never said otherwise. What's your point?

If a group of nonnative teenagers ask you to create a course in which they will learn, for example, the language of the American youth culture norm of coolness and you advise them against learning such language and refuse to help them, your motives are suspect, IMO.

And please tell me what you would teach in an ESL setting to a bunch of immigrant teenagers who were afterwards heading for colleges such as Bay City High? Would you teach them to use the superstandard of the Nerds or the "slang" of the youth culture norm of coolness. How would you react if they asked you to evaluate each form of English used at that school?

I'm don't advise against learning such language, I advise against producing such language until such a time as they can be sure how to use it.

I wouldn't teach them to use either "superstandard" or slang. There so a middle way here: use "standard" while listening to what people say around them and not being afraid to ask what stuff means. If possible, I'd try and get a few local teenagers into the class to explain a few favourite expressions. In my experience, young people are actually very keen to explain "their" language to other people - it means they're being listened to for once!. That's what I did when I taught EFL in an FE college which also offered A-levels and vocational training to 16-19 year olds. I even learned a few "yoof" expressions myself!

[metal56]

I've had students who did learn these things at school, often from NNS teachers who'd hardly ever set foot in an English-speaking country. The Far East seems to be the worst for this, in my experience; you may remember a thread I started concerning a chip in porridge being taught in China as an everyday English expression.

The occurrence is minimal, as I said earlier.

Code: Select all

So you teach words like chuddies in the first year of learning? 

Why did you change my "first years" to "first year"? Anyway, I would certainly teach it to those students who wanted to have contact with other people who used such language. yes. Why wouldn't you do do?

I've never said otherwise. What's your point?

You make special case out of slang, etc, but your statement below can apply just as well to Standard English.

It only sounds natural when a NNS has spent enough time among native speakers to acquire expressions rather than learning them from a book or handout.

I'm don't advise against learning such language, I advise against producing such language until such a time as they can be sure how to use it.

Again you make a special case out of slang. Again your statement can apply just as easily to Standard English.

There so a middle way here: use "standard" while listening to what people say around them and not being afraid to ask what stuff means.

"Use standard while listening"? What the F does that mean?

[lolwhites]

The occurrence is minimal, as I said earlier.

I would say a lot of "student slang" sounds forced.

Why did you change my "first years" to "first year"?

Typo you berk. Why do you assume the worst?

Anyway, I would certainly teach it to those students who wanted to have contact with other people who used such language. yes. Why wouldn't you do do?

Did I say I wouldn't? Like I keep saying, teaching for recognition is one thing, teaching for production is another. In my last post, I also explained how I would teach such language - a point you have either overlooked or ignored.

You make special case out of slang, etc, but your statement below can apply just as well to Standard English.

It only sounds natural when a NNS has spent enough time among native speakers to acquire expressions rather than learning them from a book or handout.

I'm don't advise against learning such language, I advise against producing such language until such a time as they can be sure how to use it.

Again you make a special case out of slang. Again your statement can apply just as easily to Standard English.

Sure it could, but you seem to be saying teaching students to use slang has equal validity or importance. That is utter tripe. If I went to Newcastle and started using Geordie words, I'd stand a fair chance of actually causing offence. You seem to be saying you would encourage to claim membership of language communities they may not actually belong to. That's precisely why slang is a special case.

"Use standard while listening"? What the F does that mean?

I said use standard while listening to what people say around them.

Pleeaasse! Swan resists discussing or publishing pedagogical material on such things because he wants to make money. The ESL/EFL publishing world has a hold on the English it will allow learners access to. Swan follows suit.

Ah yes, the silent conspiracy of the EFL teaching establishment. It is possible to make money out of giving sound advice and still retain your integrity you know. Is the best argument you can give against Swan really that he's a capitalist pig? You can tell people are on shaky ground when they ignore someone's arguments and attack their integrity instead. If you had actually read what he said, you would have noticed that he doesn't say "There's no point in learning slang, so don't bother", he says "be very careful how you use it". And you have yet to produce one coherent argument as to why that is unsound advice.

[JuanTwoThree]

Surely the point is this:

It's fascinating that trousers are called strides, kecks, daks, slacks, trews, britches and, I imagine, countless other things, some temporarily.

But you do have to ask yourself what a person who habitually used the word "kecks" for trousers and not underpants would ask for in a shop 500 miles away if they wanted to be readily understood. While there are naive people who don't change their variety of English under any circumstances, it would occur to other people that perhaps "trousers" or "pants" might be the most sensible thing to ask for.

So, given that life is very short, the priority is "trousers/pants" as active vocabulary, mentioning the BrE /AmE pants confusion at some point, of course. The other possible words are very interesting and there is absolutely no prohibition intended when I say that I personally wouldn't teach them, given the other priorities that I have in the limited time there is.

If I really did have unlimited time to teach synonyms for trousers/pants and nothing better to do, or if the words came up for some reason, I think I'd still make an argument for not actively producing them willy-nilly. I don't say "ale" when I visit Yorkshire: I'd sound strange if I did.

BTW I'm talking about TEFL: teaching students who are going to be in Dublin one moment and London the next ( and more probably Amsterdam and Seoul, which is another reason for sticking to "trousers/pants").

These hypothetical situations of teenagers on their way to a high school (or somebody on their way to live in Glasgow) are another matter. I don't know what I'd do then.

But I think it's almost axiomatic that once some cool youth slang has filtered through to a 50 year old teacher who only gets to an English speaking country for a week once or twice a year, then that particular piece of slang is very dated indeed. My son's Spanish high school slang changes very fast and presumably English is no slower. My reluctance to try to teach up-to-date cool high-school slang is because I doubt if I can. Teaching last year's cool high-school slang would not do any favours.

It would be possible, I suppose, to discover what the cutting-edge slang is in one particular area amongst one particular age group with perhaps one particular interest, but if a 15 year old skate boarder X said s/he was going to a school Y in country Z I'd stick to checking knowledge of words like "wheel" "knee" "graze" "casualty/ ER" before I got round to whatever these might be being called that month in that place by some people, if there was a way of finding out.

[metal56]

I would say a lot of "student slang" sounds forced.

You said already.

These also sound forced, IMO:

To whom would you like to speak.
It is I. (When answering the phone)
May I ask...
Could you possibly...

And many more.

Typo you berk. Why do you assume the worst?

"Berk", now that could be useful to many students.

Like I keep saying, teaching for recognition is one thing, teaching for production is another.

And I disagree with your approach to separating slang as only that which need be recognised and not produced. All depends on context, the students in front of you, their needs etc, and what THEY are paying YOU to do.

Sure it could, but you seem to be saying teaching students to use slang has equal validity or importance.

And i certain contexts, some I've mentioned above, it might just be of equal validity and importance. Why do you think you have the right to decide what is or is not important for certain individuals? If you're paid to teach Standard English, do so. If not, teach that which your asked to.

If I went to Newcastle and started using Geordie words, I'd stand a fair chance of actually causing offence.

What nonsense.

You seem to be saying you would encourage to claim membership of language communities they may not actually belong to.

Read the article above. There, it shows that such people are in fact welcomed into certain language communities precisely because they make an effort to use the language and behaviour of such groups.

You spend every day pushing students to learn Standard English. Do you think that you are also not encouraging students "to claim membership of language communities they may not actually belong to"? Do you think that Standard English is an unmarked form in the eyes of all?

Ah yes, the silent conspiracy of the EFL teaching establishment.

My God, wake up! Do you think it is silent?

Is the best argument you can give against Swan really that he's a capitalist pig?

Don't be childish. Swan is very useful for those who wish to teach Standard English and play at the edges of that form, but he is like all publishers of ESL/EFL materials. He toes the line in order to make a living and gain "respect". No problem with that attitude, but don't make his work something more than it is. Ask him to publish an ESL/EFL teaching book on slang, see what he replies.

There's no point in learning slang, so don't bother", he says "be very careful how you use it".

It's not Swan I'm arguing with, it's you. You said that you would only teach the word pants. You said you would do that no matter the context or student needs/demands. It is you who needs to heed Swan's advice.

[fluffyhamster]

Forget 'undies', I want to know synonyms for 'unedifying', 'catfight' and 'in a teacup'.

[metal56]

But you do have to ask yourself what a person who habitually used the word "kecks" for trousers and not underpants would ask for in a shop 500 miles away if they wanted to be readily understood.

Do you think you could use the word "pants" for "underpants" all over the UK in every shop? I'm English and have never heard that word used for men's underwear. So... Now, try going outside the shop 500 miles away and asking local teens if they know where you can buy underpants. They may giggle and say, "Ah you means skiddies", or something like that. Nothing wrong there as long as you don't mind folks giigleing at you. But, let's say you are a teen or young adult and plan to study, settle, and/or work in a certain area that is alien to you. You'd do well to learn localisms before you went there. You would then choose when, how often, and with which people to use such terms. You choose.

But what you have here, from Lorikeet and a few others on this forum is the creation of fear and paranoia among their students. We are also seeing patronising attitude form teachers toward nonnative speakers, especially those who ask to be taught localisms, slang, etc. The messgae form some teachers is "Be warned, if you attempt to use slang, you will probably be ridiculed, and may cause offense!". And that is just nonsense.

In general, dialect speakers and those who do not use a pristine version of the standard form, or those who reject the standard form are pretty accomodating when it comes to communicating with nonnative speakers. Before finding "foreign" use of their slang offensive, they would probably find it curious. I use Spanish colloquialisms and slang all the time and in 8 years of living in Spain not one person has taken offense. So, what we have is the same old cover up story, the same old paranoia weaving, from native speaking and nonnative speaking English teachers.

It's understandable that they want to project the form they find easiest and most profitable to teach, but that form is not the most useful form for everyone. It depends on an individual learner's needs, on what that learner plans to do with his/her newly acquired English.

[metal56]

So, given that life is very short, the priority is "trousers/pants" as active vocabulary, mentioning the BrE /AmE pants confusion at some point, of course.

But I think it's almost axiomatic that once some cool youth slang has filtered through to a 50 year old teacher who only gets to an English speaking country for a week once or twice a year, then that particular piece of slang is very dated indeed.

What is this pre-Internet world you speak of? Access to all kinds of speech is just a keystroke away. And, nothing has been said about hiring a teacher straight from the American youth culture of coolness groups. One could do that. Would you reject such a move?

And, among all this smoke and mirrors activity, you and you friends here forget that much Standard English or EFLese taught in classrooms all over the world bears little resemblance to actaul usage. sure, you'll be understood if you use EFLese, but is being understood all you want from your language learning efforts?

I first learned Spanish in England. My native-speaking Spanish teacher insisted on the use of "usted" in all "polite" situations. When I came to Spain I followed his "advice". Sure, people understood me, but making friends, being part of something meant that I had to listen to the usage around me and forget that which I'd learned in my "Spanish" class.

Now, as you say, life is very short, and I felt that I had somehow wasted much of my time on Spanish classes. Many, many ESL students complain of the same. So, don't go telling me that the language taught in ESL classrooms is perfect for all situations. The naive teachers may believe such, but I'm much too seasoned to listen to such nonsense.

[fluffyhamster]

Metal, I'm a Brit and I don't mind saying 'pants', and I can't honestly recall the last time I had to do an "Asking for directions to the underwear shop/department" lesson with teenagers (esp. girls). Oh, what a thorough "ESP" teacher you must be - you could even do masterclasses on the Twilight Zone.

Put a sock in it before people stop taking you seriously at all (that, or start asking when the PT - Pant Thesaurus - job can be expected).

[fluffyhamster]

And, nothing has been said about hiring a teacher straight from the American youth culture of coolness groups.

If these youths are like anything as like unarticulate as like those in Jeremy Iversen's High School Confidential: Secrets of an Undercover Student ("student") then you can like keep them. It's like hanging with Paul Walker like 24-7.

[Stephen Jones]

I first learned soanish in England. My native-speaking Spanish teacher insisted on the use of "usted" in all "polite" situations. When I came to Spain I followed his "advice".

The problem here though is that since the death of Franco, Spain has been in a sociological flux and questions of 'tratamiento' reflected that. In the late 70s and 80s there was a tendency towards the almost universal use of 'tu'; I believe there has been a certain backlash.

However for a long time there was no right answer. The barman could be offended by being addressed as 'tu' because he hadn't given you permission to be unduly familiar, and another barman would be offended at being addresses as 'usted' because he felt you were being unduly distant and formal (I have personally witnessed both reactions).

We see the same change happening with Catalan 'vos'. This was originally the neutral form, the familiar form being 'tu' and the respectful form being 'vosté'. However the fact that the form 'vos' was almost exclusively used in conversation by older people meant that younger Catalans took it to be the ultra-formal form, a kind of super-respectful 'vosté'.

In English until the thirteenth century 'thou' was singlular and 'ye' was plural. However in the 13th century, presumably following French courtly patterns, it became common to use 'ye' for singular people one wished to show respect towards, and 'thou' only to children or people of inferior rank. The distinction disappeared as a result of political pressure from the Levellers, and thus we have the present situation in modern English where 'you' is the only form.

The point I am making is that whilst the situation was clear before, and in the case of English second person pronouns, has become clear since, it would be impossible to give an accurate statement of use in the period of flux, precisely because there was no norm to follow.

[fluffyhamster]

That's all very interesting SJ, but where does it leave us in the "discussion" of the various forms for undergarments?

[JuanTwoThree]

How often I visit the UK really isn't the point. Nor is the internet the panacea that you describe. The whole point about cool up-to-date slang is that it's old hat the moment it gets into the main stream. It's not supposed to be used by parents and teachers. When they start to use the same words it's time to move on. That's too ephemeral to be taught in language classes.

I wouldn't reject a cool young American teacher, even if the language was changing whilst they were on the plane and that to be a qualified teacher they'd probably be out of touch with the slang of their 15 year old siblings.


As for trousers and pants etc. Be honest. I'm your student and I'm visiting the UK next week and I'm going to buy some clothes so I want to revise the vocab:

Q What is the word for "pantalones" in English?

A Trousers.

Q Do I need to know any other words?

A (thinks) No, but there are lots.

Q And "calzoncillos"?

A I'd recommend "underpants" to be safe but there are lots of words like "briefs" and "boxers" to describe the various shapes and they are the words you'd find on the packet . I'd go to a big shop and have a look round the section first. The section is probably called "men's underwear".


OK It's another story if I were your student going to spend a year in a Liverpool school. That might involve a bit of homework. But I'd get the student to do it if I were you

On the subject of pants, don't teach "that's pants" because nobody says that now except "lame teachers", according to my niece. It's probably that area, of disapproval and approval, that changes the most. Which is why English is so groovy and far out.

[metal56]

Forget 'undies', I want to know synonyms for 'unedifying', 'catfight' and 'in a teacup'.

You want to know, but do not want to teach, synonyms, right?