Re: none
- From: Tony Cooper <tony_cooper213@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 18:15:16 GMT
On 12 Jul 2006 07:54:30 -0700, "mb" <azythos2@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tony Cooper wrote:
On 11 Jul 2006 13:24:18 -0700, "mb" <azythos2@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Point is, it comes from a teacher. Even if the teacher had the same
vernacular as yourself, it[1] is supposed to teach standard, written
English.
I dunno. Yes, the EFL teacher teaches standard English. But if his
pupils have any curiosity, do any outside reading, or are exposed to
movies and television, the teacher is going to get questions about
idiomatic usages.
The things his pupils read and see outside of the class are not going
to all be examples of standard English. I can't see a good teacher
ducking questions about non-standard usage.
Of course not. It [1] is supposed, however, to first make sure that the
form, as they say, enshrined in print is first established before local
variants are offered, tagged as such. Especially because we're talking
ESL, not EFL.
Sorry for the ESL/EFL error.
In the case of a ESL teacher in China, who may not have any real
experience in AmE or BrE other than his own classroom experiences, I
wonder who teaches *him* about idiomatic usages.
There are people posting in this newsgroup who are cheek-to-jowl with
either AmE or BrE and can't agree on the meaning of some idiomatic
usages.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: none
- From: Mike Lyle
- Re: none
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Gubernatorial
- Next by Date: Re: Submitted for your Approval
- Previous by thread: Re: none
- Next by thread: Re: none
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading