tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post2575022100111148059..comments2024-03-26T06:07:35.453+01:00Comments on Kalinago English: Which came first: time or tenses?KALINAGO ENGLISHhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15202016406865561740noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-89239951167978609102010-11-23T09:45:36.074+01:002010-11-23T09:45:36.074+01:00Oh great post, Karenne, and some great comments he...Oh great post, Karenne, and some great comments here too. <br />Many thanks for the video reference Mike, which I hadn’t seen and greatly enjoyed. I’ve often wondered where the ordering came from as I’ve struggled with it (and against it), and thank you for digging out that reference Graham – why yes, Hornby! (1954) It prompted me to run a search for an old Robert O’Neill book called ‘English in Situations’, which took me to Peter Viney’s site: http://peterviney.wordpress.com/about/elt-articles/influential-elt-books/<br />Here’s Peter’s description of the book (but he has more interesting things to say about it on his site):<br />“O’Neill’s English in Situations lasted around 35 years, but seems to be out of print now. It had no illustrations. It was in three sections and presented problem areas of grammar in neat contrastive pairs at different levels. It was an ideal stand-by because whenever a question came up in class you could find a short, clever contextualization with a careful set of questions that led students to the contrast. English in Situations set a whole approach and its strong influences can be seen in the selection and ordering of structures in a wide range of current intermediate textbooks.”<br />(Many thanks for the blog link, Karenne!)Vicki Holletthttp://vicki@holletts.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-36193241854759939202010-11-19T06:18:52.249+01:002010-11-19T06:18:52.249+01:00In general, I agree with you. Especially working i...In general, I agree with you. Especially working in a country where all foreign languages are taught grammar first, vocab second, speaking and writing and actual communication only to test grammar and vocab.<br /><br />I would point out that there is some logic at work though. I would never teach a student past perfect first for example. It's so rarely used and pretty difficult to understand unless you know the past simple first. I would probably not teach students present continuous as a future tense first, and then as a present tense because logically it's easier to understand that we use present continuous for future when there is some action in the present that relates to the future. I might teach them the structure, "I'm going to..." for future before I taught them present continuous though. They can just memorize that chunk. I can think of other examples of grammar I would not teach first. I wouldn't teach present or past continuous until I'd taught them to conjugate "to be" But I do teach "to be" very early on because it's such a vital verb for communication in English. <br /><br />So my point is just to point out the obvious that you are right that we don't need to teach present simple, then continuous, then past. Or teach adverbs of frequency with present simple and time phrases and since or already with perfect tenses. But we do have to have some logic to our teaching based on the students' needs and on what they need to know.Waltonhttp://www.englishadvantage.infonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-69228699330188353912010-11-18T14:27:00.377+01:002010-11-18T14:27:00.377+01:00Adam's point about Chinese 'grammar' i...Adam's point about Chinese 'grammar' is useful. In fact, Chinese uses several particles to modify the time reference, but most important, the time adverbial always comes first, before the base form of the verb, and the particle, if necessary. You could get a lot of basic communication very early on in English with a similar system, especially with lots of time adverbials, as Teacher Greg suggests. Combine this with the fact that in Chinese, the distinction between parts of speech isn't terribly helpful, which is also true in English where the noun form is the same as the verb form, etc. then you begin to have a much more similpified system, which I'd even hesitate to call grammar 'as we know it.'Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00583397593971041832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-38127176912550654022010-11-18T08:21:04.288+01:002010-11-18T08:21:04.288+01:00Well, at the risk of being laughed out of the prof...Well, at the risk of being laughed out of the profession, I posted on my site "Verb tenses - harder than they need to be?" with examples of all 12 active tenses using only the basic form of the verb.<br />The link is http://www.teachergreg.com/1/post/2010/11/verb-tenses-harder-than-they-need-to-be.html.<br />It shows that we can understand each other without all the playing around with verbs we currently do. Further, it asks whether we should be more accepting of learners' utterances when they ARE understandable even if not grammatically correct.<br />I'd like to see what others think.<br />Cheers, Greg.Greg Qhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08814001926490462040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-31163756154377559702010-11-18T00:05:30.071+01:002010-11-18T00:05:30.071+01:00There is evidence to suggest that certain structur...There is evidence to suggest that certain structures appear to be acquired earlier than others (e.g. verb+ing occurs quite early - hence all those "I going" sentences). 3rd person present simple is generally a late arrival and there's not a lot we can do about that. Past simple irregular forms follow very similar patterns for both 2nd lang learners as well as for children. <br /><br />But then you have first language transfer, and generalisations from that which can confuse matters, and also influence it.<br /><br />On top of which there are issues such as cognitive load (why teach present continuous for something occuring at the moment of speaking first, when actually we tend to use it more for fixed future plans), and perhaps mopst important of all the usefulness to the learners. <br /><br />Our task, then, is to look through all these ideas and make an infoprmed decision about curriculuim design based on these. But certainly that's what coursebook writers have done and still do...Sam Shepherdhttp://twitter.com/samshepnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-22722802602571133632010-11-17T22:48:47.859+01:002010-11-17T22:48:47.859+01:00"OK, now let me see...I haven't looked at..."OK, now let me see...I haven't looked at this book since I did that module on course design for my Master's," he says as he blows the dust off A.P.R.Howatt's 'A History of English Language Teaching' (1984, OUP).<br /><br />"Hmmm...page5...early language teaching materials relied mainly on texts, and the dialogue form...Joseph Priestly's 'Rudiments of English Grammar' (1761) broke texts into digestible chunks so that they could be better learnt by heart..."<br /><br />"The first textbooks designed to solely teach English as a foreign language appeared in the late sixteenth century after the arrival of large numbers of French Huguenot refugees..."<br /><br />"then there's a section about the popularity of phrasebooks and polyglot dictionaries....hmmm...skip to the index....look up grammar...now, there's an interesting reference here to Harold E.Palmer and his 1938 book 'The New Method Grammar' - an attempt to teach grammar to young learners through an analogy with railway networks...no, that's not what we're looking for..."<br /><br />"OK...this looks like what we're looking for...1954 sees the publication of A.S.Hornby's 'Guide to Patterns and Usage in English'...and it seems that 'few course books after 1954 have been written without at least half-an-eye on the Hornby pattern lists' - Hornby's called this 'the Situational Approach' and this meant that each new pattern should be introduced to the class in advance of the work with the text...and what was introduced first was by what he thought learners needed to achieve a reading knowledge of the language..."<br /><br />"OK, I'll stop there...is that any good to you?"blog-eflhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09532316449457675061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-14273609114801003412010-11-17T21:35:26.254+01:002010-11-17T21:35:26.254+01:00Gods and gurus...
Mike, it's a silly play on ...Gods and gurus...<br /><br />Mike, it's a silly play on words and meanings - I dunno I guess I always wanted to be different kind of writer and was always hunting down subplots so when I drafted this a while back I thought it could be an interesting way to explore.<br /><br />Ta for the Thornbury link, that's a brilliant one!<br /><br /><br /><br />Hi ya Berni, <br />I reckon it was the Latin influence... the English had to learn Latin through grammar - right? I wonder if this "system" stretches back 500 years... longer? Hmm... wish wikipedia knew!KALINAGO ENGLISHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15202016406865561740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-1104392771858689132010-11-17T20:43:40.475+01:002010-11-17T20:43:40.475+01:00Wow that was quick!! Lovely piece! I absolutely ag...Wow that was quick!! Lovely piece! I absolutely agree with Sue base it on what they need! Much of modern language teaching has its roots in Latin and we all know where that ended up!! (Having said that I tried Past Perfect with an Intermediate today and we had our moments!!! It worked in the end!)rlibernihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07100417723155556629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-24384058603990622202010-11-17T20:00:47.159+01:002010-11-17T20:00:47.159+01:00I'll be a bit more helpful in commenting this ...I'll be a bit more helpful in commenting this time - I think I'd put anyone wondering and wandering about grammar onto Mr Thornbury's vid, Seven ways of looking at grammar, here on YouTube:<br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp8QSGcS0QI" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp8QSGcS0QI</a><br /><br />and also say that I guess any order in the classroom should be descriptive rather than prescriptive. But, then lots of us teach in contexts where something learners have to do to pass X exam is make the present simple ok, for Y exam the past simple. Go figure.<br /><br />As for who invented the order - don't know, but some people are making a heck of a lot of money from it, eh?<br /><br />PS - didn't realise that first Something was supposed to be God ;o)Mike Harrisonhttp://www.mikejharrison.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-59281250986759646132010-11-17T18:37:54.016+01:002010-11-17T18:37:54.016+01:00Hi ya,
Thanks so much all for not thinking me nut...Hi ya,<br /><br />Thanks so much all for not thinking me nuts :) <br /><br />Sue - ditto!<br /><br />Mike...<br />You caught it, see how I went and made God a girl too... LOL<br /><br />Greg & Adam,<br />Malay does this too - actually learned basic and very survival level while backpacking for about 4 months through Indonesian isles. Thought it was a very "neat" language - althugh I was told by Malays that it gets harder past a certain point.<br /><br />Uwe,<br />I hear you on that! I usually teach intermediate and advanced learners but currently doing intensives with beginners (yup here in Germany!) - we're having a bunch of fun even while following a book and I've thrown baby out with bath water and when they attempt to express a future or past or past perfect continuous I give it them anyway. Whaddever you know. And actually the itch of another post just sprang to mind on German Learners - watch out for this one!<br /><br />And thanks so much for your comment by the way, I love hearing new voices!<br /><br />KarenneKALINAGO ENGLISHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15202016406865561740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-38162784114133423092010-11-17T17:23:46.451+01:002010-11-17T17:23:46.451+01:00Teacher Greg, take a look at Chinese. That languag...Teacher Greg, take a look at Chinese. That language seems to get by with one tense with time adverbials marking when stuff happens.Adamhttp://www.yearinthelifeofanenglishteacher.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-8546770467286760642010-11-17T17:04:57.344+01:002010-11-17T17:04:57.344+01:00Great post :-)
Things are getting even more compl...Great post :-)<br /><br />Things are getting even more complicated as soon as there is obvious interference with the learners' tense use in their mother tongue... <br />Reading your post, I do appreciate to be able to teach intermediate / advanced learners. It is a blessing to have the chance to teach / revise tenses as a whole - not in a sequence. Not sure though whether kids understand more this way ;-)<br />UweUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17442925299686208159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-41752782661782865872010-11-17T13:20:16.648+01:002010-11-17T13:20:16.648+01:00"Who put this grammatical system we use today...<i>"Who put this grammatical system we use today in place? When? Why? What was his intention, his agenda?"</i><br />So you think it was a man?? Hmmm...Mike Harrisonhttp://www.mikejharrison.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-54358862287544595402010-11-17T08:43:59.105+01:002010-11-17T08:43:59.105+01:00Yes, it would be great if we could simply use the ...Yes, it would be great if we could simply use the basic form of verbs (infinitive minus "to") and append time indicators (like yesterday, tomorrow, then, next, before, etc). Life would be simpler, though possibly less elegant. We already modify verbs using adverbs, etc, so why not do the same for time?<br />Of course, making such a change might be problematic given my lack of authority on such matters.Greg Qhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08814001926490462040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8572501698854836939.post-79230700296834579092010-11-17T08:11:55.870+01:002010-11-17T08:11:55.870+01:00Yep; am with you on this one, Karenne.
Even begin...Yep; am with you on this one, Karenne.<br /><br />Even beginners need to be able to use past and future forms in simple sentences, and my view is that we ought to be giving learners the language they need to get by in their daily life, ASAP.Sue Lyon-Joneshttp://the-pln-staff-lounge.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.com