Savage bonobo, no!

[fluffyhamster]

This, from a Japanese high school textbook: He presses a symbol on the keyboard. And he can get that thing.

The 'he' refers to Kanzi, the bonobo that Sue Savage-Rabid taught smoked kippers.

The wordlist at the back of the student book mistranslates the meaning of 'get' in this context as 'understand' (rather than as "obtain, receive, GET!"), while in the teacher guide, the full-sentence translation from the context is as it should be (which must be confusing for those Japanese teachers of English who've spotted the discrepancy!).

Anyway, how would you phrase things if you yourself "wanted" to convey the 'understand' meaning of 'get', but could only use 'get', not simply 'understand'? (Or do you think that this trying to introduce "polysemy" i.e. the 'understand' meaning for 'get' sounds like too much work for a writer? How about trying for genuine ambiguity, then?).

[metal56]

Why is it that most of your topic questions give me a headache? Is there a teachers' book that can simplify them?

[jotham]

Well, how about a joke? The person telling the joke fails to elicit a roar of laughter, let alone a smile, and asks "Don't you get it?"

[jotham]

Why is it that most of your topic questions give me a headache? Is there a teachers' book that can simplify them?

Are you hinting that fluffy needs grammarian guidance? But if he gets his point across, no matter how foggy, I thought it doesn't matter. We should just put up with our petty reader headaches and inconveniences. After all, it's all about writer's perogative and there's no right or wrong about it — and I'm offended at your criticism to the contrary. I still understand what he's trying to say...I think.

[metal56]

Code: Select all

Are you hinting that fluffy needs grammarian guidance?

Better, a discourse analyst's guidance.

But if he gets his point across, no matter how foggy, I thought it doesn't matter.

To whom?

and I'm offended at your criticism to the contrary.

Are you the sensitive type? Are you offended when a person labels your posts as drivel?

After all, it's all about writer's perogative and there's no right or wrong about it---

OK, maybe I should write all my posts to you in AAVE from now on. Is that OK?

[jotham]

I was joking about being offended. (Yes, that's right...you've been analyzing and parsing my joke.) It's hard to joke on forums because you really need the voice intonation to pull it off. I was trying to sound like a linguist, not myself.

[fluffyhamster]

I suppose I was just surprised that 1) a mistake like that made it through, even allowing for the fact that the school textbooks here are rather "written by committee"; 2) that a JTE with great English (i.e. the one I've been working with recently) hadn't noticed anything was a bit skewy; and 3) that quite a few JTEs - not uncoicidentally those with weak English - sometimes almost implore me at times like this to not bat an eyelid, to turn a blind eye...and sometimes I do feel like doing just that, because often my word isn't enough*, and I am expected to "explain myself" (with the risk that it then is misunderstood, and/or gets explained somewhat differently to the students etc).

*Or rather, it would be, if the students ever got to meet enough English in their study to be able to see/judge for themselves. (That 'it' just then means 'my word that this means this, not that, in this context').

[jotham]

I suppose I was just surprised that 1) a mistake like that made it through, even allowing for the fact that the school textbooks here are rather "written by committee"

Are these government textbooks? We used to have those here in Taiwan. Believe me; they aren't stellar. I'm told these government committees include specialists in English (never mentioning names I suppose so they won't be open to favors or officious others), but I'm often appalled at some of the demands they make on the private textbook companies regarding obviously wrong grammar. Don't be surprised.

2) that a JTE with great English (i.e. the one I've been working with recently) hadn't noticed anything was a bit skewy;

Well, if they have a blind faith in the textbooks, and have been teaching from these textbooks for many years, they begin thinking these textbooks are a Bible. I've seen the same here, even though the government textbooks haven't been used here in a while and the market has been opened to private companies. I notice that the government textbook is always not far from reach here in the office (and all the local textbook companies) and used as a general guideline/template (usually to my disgust).

3) that quite a few JTEs - not uncoicidentally those with weak English - sometimes almost implore me at times like this to not bat an eyelid.

This may be because it's been taught such a way so long and teachers are used to it, that changing it in the middle is considered rocking the boat, a bother, and inconvenience, which factors sometimes trumps accuracy, especially in the culture you're in. None of what you said surprises me. Don't let them discourage you; too many people do that and nothing ever improves.

Putting yourself into my shoes, how would you deal with all this

Are you a public-school teacher, and not private cram school? If you know that you are dealing with a private textbook, especially used by the same cram school, you could easily tell the manager or call the central office yourself; private companies are usually a lot better about responding to these things. If you're dealing with a government textbook and the government functions like it does in Taiwan, I'd picture myself as a little man in a huge whirlpool in the middle of a raging ocean. But if you can take the time to get through the bureaucratic tape, deal with indifferent individuals, find the right people who care, and have their email and phone number handy, you could continue informing them of other future glitches. As a teacher, I wouldn't ignore it. I'm wouldn't be afraid to say the textbook stinks on such and such a point, or more likely, points.
Perhaps your principal or other person in charge knows how to get through to the committee. I'd at least try to make an effort. In my experience, however, committees think of themselves as God, and you as mere plebes; you may need special status to deign to tell them something.

[fluffyhamster]

I'm an AET in a public junior high in Japan, and yes, they use (have to use) government-approved textbooks. Actually I should've said that it's a new edition of the textbook, so the JTE's unfamiliarity is understandable (besides, she was like I say interested in my reaction to the text's translation, and willing to rectify things) - no, any beef I might have is with the people producing the book and/or forcing schools to use it.

These errors or distortions might not seem like much to write home about taken in isolation, but they do start adding up when you examine the books closely over their three-year span. But then again, many say, it is only junior high school, right?

[jotham]

yes, they use (have to use) government-approved textbooks.

Well, government-approved and government-written can be different things entirely. Probably not too much you can do if the market is shut out.
Don't be afraid to rely on your own judgment in the classroom and go against the book. Also, you can keep a running list of all the mistakes and share them with the other English teachers at your school or other schools, especially the non-native teachers, who don't have their own sprachgefuhl and need to rely on yours.

[metal56]

It's hard to joke on forums because you really need the voice intonation to pull it off.

Or:

[metal56]

These errors or distortions might not seem like much to write home about taken in isolation, but they do start adding up when you examine the books closely over their three-year span. But then again, many say, it is only junior high school, right?

There are many errors and lots of misinformation in ESL/EFL classrooms world over. Being a student, one often has to take pot-luck regarding materials, teachers' limited knowledge or personal bias regarding use, etc. Often, one finds out much later that teachers and books are not perfect things. Tell your students that, if you dare.

[fluffyhamster]

I'm glad to see that nobody's disagreed about what the sentence means. I'd still be interested though in knowing how you guys would explain things to a JTE who didn't want to believe that the textbook could be so wrong, yet seemed to have little idea why it wasn't quite right.

[lucy lace]

This, from a Japanese high school textbook: He presses a symbol on the keyboard. And he can get that thing.

The 'he' refers to Kanzi, the bonobo that Sue Savage-Rabid taught smoked kippers.

The wordlist at the back of the student book mistranslates the meaning of 'get' in this context as 'understand' (rather than as "obtain, receive, GET!"), while in the teacher guide, the full-sentence translation from the context is as it should be (which must be confusing for those Japanese teachers of English who've spotted the discrepancy!).

Anyway, how would you phrase things if you yourself "wanted" to convey the 'understand' meaning of 'get', but could only use 'get', not simply 'understand'? (Or do you think that this trying to introduce "polysemy" i.e. the 'understand' meaning for 'get' sounds like too much work for a writer? How about trying for genuine ambiguity, then?).

Fluffy, I am confused by your writing. I, like Metal, find it headache-inspiring. "The 'he' refers to Kanzi, the bonobo that Sue Savage-Rabid taught smoked kippers." Taught smoked kippers what? This sentence doesn't make sense to me. What am I missing?

Why don't you tell the Japanese teacher that "get" as in "to understand" isn't usually used with the modal of ability? If you use "get" with the modal, it takes on the more traditional meanings of "to obtain, aquire, possess, receive, fetch" etc, as in, "I can get it (the telephone)".

Or, with the teacher, why not just say with some finality, "It doesn't make sense"? Surely, as a native speaker, you have some sort of authoritative voice on the matter?

Personally, the part of the sentence that rubs my ear the wrong way is "that thing". Why not "it"?

[jotham]

I think if you kept a running list showing the continuity of errors, they'll eventually get it. Also, have professional grammar resources to back you up, when possible, to solidify your position and so they don't think it's just your gut feeling all the time. You could also explain that the textbooks by a government committee is probably not by a committee of native speakers. Such a committee is probably more concerned with number of vocabulary and government stipulations of what should be learned than with the quality or naturalness of the sentences or context they're being put in.
Just yesterday, I was correcting an exercise in which students put active sentences into passive. The passive sentences were so weird though. Since passive sentences are used in special situations, I told them (non-native textbook writers) to use a reverse process when coming up with example sentences: start with good, natural passive sentences first, and then turn them into active sentences to be used as prompts. At first, they couldn't see the point because to them, the focus of the lesson was to have kids just learn how to turn active sentences into passive, like some kind of mathematical equation that doesn't need to have any real-life application. Naturalness was just an unneccessary bother, luxury, or icing on the cake, and thus expendable. But I think that additional lessons are being taught or received — not just sentence transformation: we're constantly and maybe unconsiously developing their sprachgefuhl with every exercise.