By what principles?

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Mon Apr 04, 2005 9:26 am

Discussion:

By what principles do we select one item as a good example of a particular usage, and reject another as being marginal or eccentric?

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

Sentence borrowed from Patrick Hanks (1991) and then bastardised.

The original was focusing only on lexis, I'd like to extend it to all items of language usage.

Original:

By what principles do we select one citation as a good example of a particular sense or usage, and reject another as being marginal or eccentric?

Metamorfose · Post by **Metamorfose** » Mon Apr 04, 2005 3:50 pm

The principle of likelyhood would I dare say.

(1) Do you be on extention 213?

At least this is a good example I wouldn't show my pupils

José

Stephen Jones · Post by **Stephen Jones** » Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:31 pm

Too vague a question. Who is 'we' and is the present simple implying best or normal practice.

We could say frequency (though it is difficult to determine the linguistic unit we are going to chose for the frequency sample, and often just as difficult to test it).

IN general we start with our own prejudices and the more conscientious or cautious amongst us then attempt to check our hunches.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Mon Apr 04, 2005 9:04 pm

Stephen Jones wrote:Too vague a question. Who is 'we' and is the present simple implying best or normal practice.

We could say frequency (though it is difficult to determine the linguistic unit we are going to chose for the frequency sample, and often just as difficult to test it).

IN general we start with our own prejudices and the more conscientious or cautious amongst us then attempt to check our hunches.

<Too vague a question. Who is 'we' and is the present simple implying best or normal practice. >

We, the users of language. Dogs and cats excluded.

<IN general we start with our own prejudices and the more conscientious or cautious amongst us then attempt to check our hunches>

Sounds like me.

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Mon Apr 04, 2005 9:46 pm

metal56 wrote:<IN general we start with our own prejudices and the more conscientious or cautious amongst us then attempt to check our hunches>

Sounds like me.

Get your students to compare at least these 4 sentences (there are many more possible combinations):

If you allow us to pat you on the back, that will/would be surprising.
If you allowed us to pat you on the back, that would be wonderful.
If you allowed us to pat you on the back, that would be surprising.
If you did allow us to pat you on the back, that is surprising.

There's a good lesson or two to be had here! Have fun!

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Mon Apr 04, 2005 10:41 pm

fluffyhamster wrote:
metal56 wrote:<IN general we start with our own prejudices and the more conscientious or cautious amongst us then attempt to check our hunches>

Sounds like me.
Get your students to compare at least these 4 sentences (there are many more possible combinations):

If you allow us to pat you on the back, that will/would be surprising.
If you allowed us to pat you on the back, that would be wonderful.
If you allowed us to pat you on the back, that would be surprising.
If you did allow us to pat you on the back, that is surprising.

There's a good lesson or two to be had here! Have fun!

They finished it in 5 mins. Or should I say finished with it in 5. They say it sounds as if those have been written by a trainee teacher, and as a result, are boring examples.

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:51 am

Completed/binned within just 5 minutes, eh? You should've got them making passives too, then - might've filled a few more minutes. I have plenty more teaching tips like that, if you need 'em.

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 1:18 am

By the way, your students are pretty perceptive - the examples indeed were made up by the clueless trainees that I'm currently re-educating in my conditionals masterclass. I asked them to imagine they were addressing a smug trainer that they hate (couldn't possibly be me though, of course not - they LOVE me, I'm sure!

=smirk smirk)

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 12:06 am

fluffyhamster wrote:By the way, your students are pretty perceptive - the examples indeed were made up by the clueless trainees that I'm currently re-educating in my conditionals masterclass. I asked them to imagine they were addressing a smug trainer that they hate (couldn't possibly be me though, of course not - they LOVE me, I'm sure! =smirk smirk)

<... I'm currently re-educating in my conditionals masterclass. >

Do you have a hidden earphone somewhere and the master dictating the teaching process to you?

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 8:18 am

Seeing as there's not much else happening here on the AL Forum at the moment, I suppose we may as well continue with this thread for a while, eh!

I tried the hidden radio mic and tuned it in to "Metal56 FM's Methodological Morsels", but there was too much static...

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 4:44 pm

fluffyhamster wrote:Seeing as there's not much else happening here on the AL Forum at the moment, I suppose we may as well continue with this thread for a while, eh!

I tried the hidden radio mic and tuned it in to "Metal56 FM's Methodological Morsels", but there was too much static...

I think you've got it tuned to Bedtime Story, you are putting me to sleep.

Andrew Patterson · Post by **Andrew Patterson** » Thu Apr 07, 2005 6:35 pm

I've just watched an episode from "Keeping up appearances". In it there was a scene where Richard was lying on a couch unable to move because a big dog was on top of him. Hyacinth shoos the dog away. The dialog then procedes as below:

Hyacinth: Oh Richard, you're covered in hairs.
Richard: As far as I'm concerned that's an improvement - a minute ago, I was covered in dog.

Now Richard's quip is perfectly natural but we tell our students that "dog" is countable.

Lucjan · Post by **Lucjan** » Fri Apr 08, 2005 12:46 am

Hyacinth: Oh Richard, you're covered in hairs.
Richard: As far as I'm concerned that's an improvement - a minute ago, I was covered in dog.

Now Richard's quip is perfectly natural but we tell our students that "dog" is countable.

So is Hyacinth's but there are those who might tell their students that "hair" is uncountable because it is more commonly the case.

Depends whether you tell them everything from the start, don't ever tell them or tell them fibs until they're big enough and good enough to be told the truth.
I scribbled on a man's hand once to show how having pen on one's hand is different from having pens on one's hand, he wasn't as impressed with my quick thinking example as I was.

lolwhites · Post by **lolwhites** » Fri Apr 08, 2005 9:25 am

While lying on the sofa, one of my cats decided to sit on me. The other instantly became jealous and decided to do the same, with the result that both cats circled each other, on me, squaring up for a fight.

My response? I'm drowning in cat. Of course, I could have said I'm drowning in cats but the latter would have suggested at least two individual animals as opposed to an amorphous mass of fur, whiskers and claws. The countable/uncountable distinction is far less rigid than grammar books suggest.