jake
New Member
Posts: 10
|
Post by jake on Jun 30, 2020 11:52:12 GMT
I think there is a distinction to be made between non-standard English and English containing developmental errors (or the normal errors that occur as we acquire a new language). Dialects follow rules for grammar and word use in the same way that standard English does. As a speaker of Australian English working predominantly with English speakers from the Northern hemisphere, I am aware that my use of conventions varies from the standard American usage especially. Further, language use is constantly changing and evolving. Just look at all the terms we are using now because of the covid-19 pandemic. I personally love variety in language and the unique word usage found in specific dialects. I agree, all language is constantly changing, and English is no exception! I really like the diversity represented by Englishes, and I don't like the idea that different varieties are considered wrong or right. Specific instances and contexts are endlessly adding to Englishes. Students might be experts in a specific industry or play an online game that exposes them to English varieties that even I'm unfamiliar with, but just because it's new to me doesn't mean it should be thought of as breaking a rule. New language conventions can stem from geographical or context roots, and I think it's exciting more than anything!
|
|
|
Post by marian on Jul 1, 2020 20:31:45 GMT
In terms of how sustainable monolithic ideas about English are, I can confidently now say that in our globalized world they are not sustainable. It is unrealistic to expect that in a classroom in which the teacher is a "non-native" speaker and their students are Chinese, Mexican, Saudi Arabian, German, Dutch, French etc. everyone's English will be the same, uniform and "standard". And it would be quite boring if it were, wouldn't it? It is still a struggle in classrooms in the US or the UK for instance, or in South Korea or China as well (some years ago schools in these countries were requiring that English teachers applying to teach there have a passport from an "English-speaking country" like US, UK, Australia etc. They might still be requiring this), because I think that even if one tried to teach a standardized form on English, it would not 'come out' as such in the majority of learners, but it still expected, especially in a highly academic context. And because teachers want their students to get into a US or UK university, they will teach the English needed for them to do so. I suppose one must always adapt to their context. With the ELT industry being so profitable, it is hard to imagine English varieties being totally accepted and taught in schools and universities, but I do hope that with the high number of NNS teachers and also different student needs, that this will change in time. Hard to imagine the big proficiency tests accommodating for local varieties though...thoughts on this? As a non-native teacher, I have sometimes felt scared of teaching my students "non-standard" English without meaning to do it. I think it is inevitable for people like me to be influenced by many varities of English and our own mother tongue, therefore the English we teach is the result of the globalised world we live in.
|
|
|
Post by Anita on Jul 5, 2020 15:40:00 GMT
As an American teacher who prepares students for the CAE exam, I can safely say this course is exactly what I've been needing. It is reaffirming many of the ideas I have been forming over the last decade about the differences/similarities in British English and American English. I'm also hoping that what I learn here can help my students grasp the concept of pluralistic ideas. I sometimes struggle with my Swiss-German speaking students when they say: "Why can't there be just one English?". It's so weird that they complain seeing as their German is mostly not understood by other German speakers. I think this course will do a lot in helping me find ways to open their minds as well as my own. I had a similar experience in an Arab country. They consider English to be monolithic but use it in plurilithic forms.Faced with various regulations of the language, they are often confused with ''Standard English''
|
|
|
Post by Anita on Jul 5, 2020 17:01:59 GMT
Most educational institutions stress on ‘Standard English’ and have high expectations of their learners. Meeting these standards are challenging when teaching in a context where English is a foreign language. I teach in an Arab country and I’ve observed that students prefer native speaker teachers to develop fluency in the language, but they approach nonnative speakers to get an explanation of the grammatical rules.
Monolithic ideas of English are not sustainable as there are large number of people across the globe who speak different kinds of Englishes. This would eventually reduce the demand of native speaker teachers as compared to non-native speaker teachers.
|
|
|
Post by Anita on Jul 5, 2020 17:06:48 GMT
As an American teacher who prepares students for the CAE exam, I can safely say this course is exactly what I've been needing. It is reaffirming many of the ideas I have been forming over the last decade about the differences/similarities in British English and American English. I'm also hoping that what I learn here can help my students grasp the concept of pluralistic ideas. I sometimes struggle with my Swiss-German speaking students when they say: "Why can't there be just one English?". It's so weird that they complain seeing as their German is mostly not understood by other German speakers. I think this course will do a lot in helping me find ways to open their minds as well as my own.
|
|
mkhan
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by mkhan on Jul 13, 2020 9:09:58 GMT
I totally agree. In the age of globalization and global interaction expecting one form of language or standard language wouldn't be appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by beatrizguerra on Jul 20, 2020 22:33:28 GMT
Standard English has plenty of existing infrastructure available for teaching and learning, its single system of forms makes it easier to test accuracy and it has high social prestige. Considering that, I can see why the monolithic concept of English is still the most common approach in ELT. However, insisting on strict regulations does not necessarily mean fluency but accuracy. Standard English regulations can prompt the learner to feel ashamed of the way they speak, which can affect their learning process. Since English is an international language, there's a large range of learners throughout the world, which implies different cultural contexts. So, it's unsustainable to insist on a single form of learning, as long as there's not a single group of learners. The process of teaching a language must be focused on the function of the language, which is the clear communication between speakers.
|
|
|
Post by Ulla on Jul 24, 2020 12:33:36 GMT
"When students ask you whether a word, structure or pronunciation is (correct) English or not, you can only honestly answer 'yes' or 'no' in relation to specific tasks and contexts of use—never absolutely." I agree with this statement and I try to use this approach in my teaching, especially with advanced learners. It often leads to interesting discussions, but also causes a lot of frustration. It sometimes seems to me that what we as language teachers experience as liberating (non-standard forms are also valid; English is plurilithic; be descriptive rather than prescriptive) makes learners feel insecure. Maybe it is natural, when you first start learning a language, to want clear rules to hold on to. When you are more advanced, seeing different varieties and approaches becomes interesting and exciting.
I find it interesting that EAP often comes up as one area where it is necessary to teach learners 'the standard'. I often wonder about the impact of the dominance of English on academic publications. I think researchers who are not confident users of (standard) English often face quite serious disadvantages because of their language use - in the peer review process, but also because they might not be able to express themselves as clearly as they would in their first language, so their work might be perceived as less impressive for linguistic reasons. It would be great if there was more awareness of this outside of the world of ELT and linguistics.
|
|
|
Post by Ulla on Jul 24, 2020 12:36:22 GMT
In terms of how sustainable monolithic ideas about English are, I can confidently now say that in our globalized world they are not sustainable. It is unrealistic to expect that in a classroom in which the teacher is a "non-native" speaker and their students are Chinese, Mexican, Saudi Arabian, German, Dutch, French etc. everyone's English will be the same, uniform and "standard". And it would be quite boring if it were, wouldn't it? It is still a struggle in classrooms in the US or the UK for instance, or in South Korea or China as well (some years ago schools in these countries were requiring that English teachers applying to teach there have a passport from an "English-speaking country" like US, UK, Australia etc. They might still be requiring this), because I think that even if one tried to teach a standardized form on English, it would not 'come out' as such in the majority of learners, but it still expected, especially in a highly academic context. And because teachers want their students to get into a US or UK university, they will teach the English needed for them to do so. I suppose one must always adapt to their context. With the ELT industry being so profitable, it is hard to imagine English varieties being totally accepted and taught in schools and universities, but I do hope that with the high number of NNS teachers and also different student needs, that this will change in time. Hard to imagine the big proficiency tests accommodating for local varieties though...thoughts on this? As a non-native teacher, I have sometimes felt scared of teaching my students "non-standard" English without meaning to do it. I think it is inevitable for people like me to be influenced by many varities of English and our own mother tongue, therefore the English we teach is the result of the globalised world we live in. I think these are really important points. Many of us English teachers have lived and worked in different countries and interact with peple who speak many different varieties of English. This applies to native speaker teachers as well! Many of us end up with a sort of global/international English that reflects our lives and the world we live in.
|
|
|
Post by miabae on Aug 2, 2020 14:04:26 GMT
While monolithic ideas about English are quite often not true or fair to other language varieties, they are sustainable and helpful to the TESOL system. If everyone is right and there are no mistakes, how on earth are we going to assess and evaluate? So I wouldn't throw the monolith out of the window just yet
|
|
|
Post by Anita on Aug 13, 2020 15:23:39 GMT
Standard English is certainly undergoing a drastic change.The Pluralithic nature of English is more prominent in countries where English is a foreign language.As a non native speaker of English, reflecting on the way I learned the language, I would surely say that monolithic ideas are not sustainable.
|
|
|
Post by Rachel Dry on Aug 20, 2020 13:45:30 GMT
Having read through some of the comments and considered the points made on the course so far, I wonder if a ‘use of language’ portfolio might be a possible alternative to examination of ‘standard English’? Just ‘blue sky’ thinking perhaps and I haven’t got any further than comparing the academic qualification we have in the UK, such as A-Levels for example, and more practical, evidence based diplomas. With my advanced ESOL class, I hate marking because I’m supposed to highlight all corrections (and I understand why) but I’m really just asking myself, ‘can I understand the point’ and ‘what impact does this piece of writing create’? I hate that learners think their work is being judged on how many commas are in the right place. Especially when I can’t write even one sentence in Arabic or Lithuanian. I completely agree with this suggestion from TJ, a 'use of language' portfolio would be a brilliant idea where learners are able to demonstrate their ability to complete a number of different communicative tasks using English. Consequently their ability to complete the task is focused upon therefore the function of the language rather than it's accuracy, just as we reviewed in the Ban Ki Moon data. Teachers would then be able to mark students work highlighting areas where their meaning was ambiguous or difficult to comprehend and the linguistic reasons for this, rather than nit picking at every article or past participle that is 'incorrect'. This would also give teachers scope to accept pluraliithic ideas of different Englishes from different non native speakers etc. I have many students who are communicatively competent however their oral 'accuracy' is extremely poor. What right do I have to give that student a low grade or mark despite being able to converse and understand their responses?
|
|
|
Post by Zoe Thomas on Aug 27, 2020 17:31:44 GMT
I agree that it is hard to imagine the big proficiency tests accommodating for local varieties of English, simply because marking would become so much more complicated. In my opinion however, this should not stop us, as teachers, from adopting a more confident approach to promoting a plurilithic idea of English in the classroom. It does seem key to keep in mind that our goal should be to help learners to become successful and satisfied communicators in the contexts for which they need the language skills. Working in a boarding school in the UK, I am only too aware that my pupils need to learn, and use, an entirely different English for socialising outside the classroom from the written English that will access high marks in a GCSE literature exam. I see it as my job to ensure that they have the language skills to be able to think about register and function so that they can choose to adapt their language appropriately - whether or not that adaptation should be a requirement, is certainly up for debate!
Where successful communication in the real world (as opposed to exams and exam preparation) is concerned, it seems entirely illogical to focus on anything other than whether the message of the speaker/writer is clear and I have always thought that to undervalue a person's intellect and experience because of the way they speak is entirely counterproductive and shows a real lack of understanding of what it is like to try to communicate as a NNS.
|
|
|
Post by profalomO on Nov 14, 2020 15:11:41 GMT
Спасибо за информацию.
|
|
|
Post by Consuelo on Mar 18, 2023 12:57:44 GMT
In terms of how sustainable monolithic ideas about English are, I can confidently now say that in our globalized world they are not sustainable. It is unrealistic to expect that in a classroom in which the teacher is a "non-native" speaker and their students are Chinese, Mexican, Saudi Arabian, German, Dutch, French etc. everyone's English will be the same, uniform and "standard". And it would be quite boring if it were, wouldn't it? It is still a struggle in classrooms in the US or the UK for instance, or in South Korea or China as well (some years ago schools in these countries were requiring that English teachers applying to teach there have a passport from an "English-speaking country" like US, UK, Australia etc. They might still be requiring this), because I think that even if one tried to teach a standardized form on English, it would not 'come out' as such in the majority of learners, but it still expected, especially in a highly academic context. And because teachers want their students to get into a US or UK university, they will teach the English needed for them to do so. I suppose one must always adapt to their context. With the ELT industry being so profitable, it is hard to imagine English varieties being totally accepted and taught in schools and universities, but I do hope that with the high number of NNS teachers and also different student needs, that this will change in time. Hard to imagine the big proficiency tests accommodating for local varieties though...thoughts on this? I wouldn’t expect the big standardised English tests to accommodate from one day to another because it is a big system that has taken years to be what it is nowadays. However, if English teachers, EMI teachers, and institutions progressively start to plan their courses based on a plurilithic view, the acceptance of diversity in the English language will increase. As a result, this growing acceptance will trigger a change of the attitude towards language diversity among the new generations of English speakers.
|
|