• Blog Home
  • Comics
  • Videos
  • Downloads
  • Resources
  • About
  • Contact
Bill's English
Follow me

Old School Reading Day

11/21/2016

0 Comments

 
Quick tangential update: This semester I am teaching some composition courses to American students. The experience has been very neat (and also challenging, but in a good way). I have taught American students over the years when subbing for colleagues, doing a lesson on allophones here or there or finishing a linguistics class while a professor went on medical leave, but I haven't taught an entire semester of Americans since 2011. Mini-pity party: I can't easily use any of my grammatical frameworks! When I teach composition to international students, I can say things like, "since this preposition begins the sentence, you must put a comma before the beginning of the full clause" and they would likely know what I meant (or I could quickly illustrate the difference between a clause and a phrase and they would know). My American students make far fewer grammar errors, but I didn't realize how much I used to use grammar jargon to explain mundane things like where to put a comma or what a fragment is (last night I so badly wanted to say "this gerund phrase cannot be its own sentence" but I restrained myself). My first few weeks of teaching, I felt like I just lost my arm, and I kept habitually asking, "do you know what that word means?" after every remotely infrequent word.

As they finish up their literacy autobiographies (the last essay of the semester!), I really wanted them to see a practical example of an essay that uses dialogue to illustrate a point, so on a whim, I ditched the comma lesson planned for today and wanted to have them focus on some elements of good memoir writing, so I told them to get our their McGraw Hill Guide and read over Tanya Barrientos' "Se Habla Español" essay. The one weak link in this plan is we typically don't do a lot with this book, so only two students brought it to class (cue really super sad bwa-bwa-bwaa music). My backup plan was to read the essay aloud and then discuss it together.

I don't know if it's simply because they had to look at the screen and/or listen to my reading of it in order to keep up (since they didn't have books) or if Barrientos' writing is just really good (I happen to think so), but they all seemed very engaged. I heard some students speak up about the essay during class who usually don't, and they were making clear, specific connections to the reading. It was one of those times when you see a really old school method like "read and talk" really work.

Anyway, here's hoping Barrientos' style inspires them to include some vivid dialogue in their essays!

-Bill
0 Comments

The Future Present Perfect Continuous, "Is Said To Be," and Other Strange Constructions

12/15/2013

0 Comments

 
I was helping a student review for a proficiency test and a sentence like this came up on a sample test:
"You haven't heard of Mark Twain? He is ______________ one of the most important American writers."
a. being
b. be
c. saying the
d. said to be

I have yet to see a student run into this construction and nail it. Usually they gravitate toward the distractor, which is anything that yields "is VERB-ing," but what they don't realize is that this is a participial adjective construction like the following:
  • This medicine is taken for diabetes.
  • The flowers weren't intended for you.
  • The poem wasn't written about WWII.

I don't know whether to give the test-designers kudos or to curse them for their devious grammatical trickery. At times I see constructions on these tests that seem so exceptionally rare that I question whether there is value in teaching them. In case you're curious, if you search the COCA for

[vb*] [v?n*] to *

you will generate the following list:
Picture
So I suppose the construction is not incredibly rare after all (there are even more results if you omit the last wild card). But why does this feel so uncommon?

At the same time, I have to acknowledge that the corpus really is just a sampling (albeit a very BIG sampling) of American English usage. For example, I was talking to my brother about our Thanksgiving plans, and he was thinking of sharing a ride with my sisters:

"When are they leaving?"

"They said 4:30."

"Oh. I'll have already been working two hours by then." (i.e. he starts work at 2:30)

"Oh shoot. Well maybe we can work something else out."

My brother is not an English major, yet what he is saying is very linguistically complex, and there was nothing strange or unusual about the context. However, when I searched the corpus for this construction, no results came back. In other words, the corpus may not catch constructions that are still used in everyday situations. I remember talking to my old professor about grammar forms that were not easily classified. He said there are some grammatical theories that contend there are thousands of clause types (a fact which is "terrifying" for students, as he put it), and some of these myriad constructions are restricted to extremely specific contexts (considering the conversation I had with my brother--when else would you use the future present perfect continuous?).

I always feel like this is a cop out answer, but in addition to focused study, I really think it's important to read a lot AND talk to a lot of people AND watch a lot of movies/television AND listen to the radio in the second language on a daily basis, and hopefully, as a result, these things will come in through osmosis.

At least that's the hope.

-Bill
0 Comments

"We fear change."

10/8/2013

1 Comment

 
Occasionally I run into teaching situations where I question my hypotheses about language learning. For example, you might have a student working on writing sentences, and they might produce a grammatical error like a sentence without a verb (which is not technically a sentence). But what do you do if they don't know things like part of speech or a basic understanding of verb phrases, noun phrases, and prepositional phrases? I'm sure some Krashenites would say that students don't need to know all of those terms. All you need is comprehensible input! Input, input, input! Students don't progress? They need better, more comprehensible input!

I'm all about language teaching being communicative and functional, but I feel like sometimes, you have to give them grammar terminology. Ideally, it would be nice to have purely communicative lessons unhindered by curricular constraints that expose students to input they may or may not be developmentally ready to acquire, but when I picture it playing out, I think a lot of students would be frustrated by an endless relay of inductive lessons where they would be required to rely on their wits and reasoning ability to construct real, acquired linguistic knowledge... actually, wait a minute--that sounds really exciting! Okay, but not all students are interested in being interested in uncovering the mysteries of spoken and written language. Many of them have big important concerns looming overhead: What score will they get on the TOEFL/IELTS/TOEIC/[insert language proficiency test here]? What school will they apply to/gain acceptance from? How will they survive the occasional, unpredictable and yet somehow inevitable gastronomic disturbances from unfamiliar local cuisine? No. We need to be systematic and efficient because time is of the essence. With curriculum objectives and outcomes, teachers don't have time for wild grammar goose chases and I-spy-something-that's-a-fragment in the hopes that something clicks and they "get" it!

But then I stop and think about the utilitarian garble that just came out of my head and feel a sudden uneasiness, like I just felt some empathy by crossing into the orbit of another pedagogical philosophy--the intersection of form-focused and pure communicative approaches:
Picture
I'm not sure if this diagram makes sense to you, but I'm suddenly reminded of Halliday and Matthiessen's frequent use of unexplained/un-referred to diagrams in An Introduction to Functional Grammar (http://amzn.com/0340761679).
Could we be so focused on efficiency that we don't take the time to reevaluate how we're approaching classroom instruction? Could it be that our curriculum is actually not that confining and alternative and better ways but that we are too sold on how we think language instruction ought to work to consider something new? Do we fear change?

I always come back to this passage from Nassaji and Fotos (2004):
Extensive research on learning outcomes in French immersion programs by Swain and her colleagues showed that, despite substantial long-term exposure to meaningful input, the learners did not achieve accuracy in certain grammatical forms (Harley & Swain, 1984; Lapkin, Hart, & Swain, 1991; Swain, 1985; Swain & Lapkin, 1989). This research suggested that some type of focus on grammatical forms was necessary if learners were to develop high levels of accuracy in the target language. Thus, communicative language teaching by itself was found to be inadequate (also see Celce-Murcia, Dörnyei, & Thurrell, 1997; R. Ellis, 1997, 2002b; Mitchell, 2000).

(Nassaji and Fotos, 2004, p. 128)
It's still important that it be practical and based on what students need to communicate, but teaching more form-focused lessons is not a waste of time.

Okay, I can go to bed now, but why can't I shake the feeling that Stephen Krashen is hiding under my bed (metaphorically-speaking, of course)?

-Bill
1 Comment

    Hi! I'm Bill.

    Picture
    I'm all about making English more accessible to English language learners and their teachers. Click here to learn more about me and my site.
    View my profile on LinkedIn
    Blog Home
    Comics
    Videos
    Downloads
    Resources
    About
    Contact

    Latest Comic:

    Archives

    May 2019
    September 2018
    July 2018
    December 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    November 2016
    February 2016
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    January 2015
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    June 2014
    April 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    February 2013

    Categories

    All
    Action Vs. Non Action Verbs
    Action Vs. Non-action Verbs
    Adjectival Nouns
    Adverbial Phrases
    Americans
    Assessment
    Auxiliary Verbs
    Cartoon
    Citation
    Clauses
    Collocations
    Comics
    Communicative Language Teaching
    Complete Sentences
    Complex Sentences
    Composition
    Contest
    Corpus
    Count Vs. Noncount
    Credibility
    Critical Thinking
    Cross-linguistic Interference
    Culture
    Descriptivism Vs. Prescriptivism
    Dialect
    Extensive Reading
    Form-focused Instruction
    Fragments
    Grading
    Grammar
    Helping Verbs
    Homophones
    Idiom
    Incomplete Sentences
    Infinitives
    -ing Vs -ed
    Intensive Reading
    Japanese
    Listening
    Modals
    Nominalization
    Non Restrictive Relative Clauses
    Non-restrictive Relative Clauses
    Noun Phrases
    Part Of Speech
    Passive Vs Active Voice
    Pedagogy
    Phrasal Verbs
    Plagiarism
    Present Perfect
    Pronunciation
    Relative Clauses
    Research
    Restrictive Relative Clauses
    Rhetoric
    Shell Nouns
    Simple Past
    Simple Sentences
    Sla
    Speaking
    Spelling
    Stative Vs. Dynamic Verbs
    Stress
    Stress Timed
    Stress-timed
    Stress Timed Language
    Stress-timed Language
    Syllable-timed
    Take It Literally
    Teacher Problems
    Tense
    Transformation
    Verbalization
    Vocabulary
    Vowel Reduction
    Vowels
    Which Vs. That
    Word Forms
    Working With Sources
    #writingtips

    RSS Feed

    Privacy Policy

    Click here to read my privacy policy.
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.