Recently the school where I am currently teaching decided to hire a manager. I would say she is a new manager, but she is also the first manager we've had. To stir things up a bit and to make a name for herself, this teacher has been drastically changing all of the teaching programs that we used to use, into Cambridge-based stuff. In her own words, "We should teach American English but I want to do that while using the Cambridge programs, so that the students can take the Cambridge tests which are better."
Now I don't have a problem with British English, and I mean no offense to our UK members (and of course being an American, I will be a bit biased), but there are a few things that bother me about this decision. The first thing that bothers me is that if the students are being taught American English, then to take the tests based in British English seems silly. I looked at the guidebook and although it says that the tests are not biased towards British English learners, all of the spellings used are of course in British English, and some of the vocabulary is too.
On the vocabulary list, select words American/British specific words are written, with the other country's equivalent in parenthesis. For example, maybe the list has the following:
apartment (UK flat)
tap (US faucet)
And then there are some I find to be a bit dubious myself:
fire engine (US fire truck)
I know the latter isn't used in the UK, but people also use fire engine in the USA...it is not purely a British word / usage.
Then there are some words that have different meanings in British and American English, and the guide picks and chooses what:
rubber (US eraser)
Well in the USA, rubber = condom. ;)
The thing that bothered me the most though was this one:
trousers.
There was no mention of this word being strictly a UK word, and nowhere in the vocabulary list could I find the word "pants". Yes, I know the UK meaning of that word too ;)
While giving my students a preparation test to see where they fall on the Cambridge scale, my co-teacher said the students all struggled with the following grammar construct: Have you got a ___ ? When I say this phrase in English, it sounds so foreign to my ears, but if I change my accent and say it in a pseudo-British accent, suddenly it sounds normal / ok. SInce my students never learned British English, they never used this construct, and if they were to talk with Americans, they would never / very rarely use this construct as well. But then the guide book says the test is not biased towards those that studied British English? I'd like to see how they reached that conclusion.
Finally, the whole thing just leaves me bitter, as the thing that pisses me off the most is having British people telling Americans how Americans speak their language. Now I know I am somewhat of a hypocrite in saying this (since I just said something very similar in reverse, above), but time and time again I have seen British authors, "experts", etc writing and publishing books on "American English" or American vs British English, and so often there are just so many disputable points.
Okay guys, time to get back to my British Accent training course, so I don't get fired ;D
I personally like the sound of American English vs British. Us North Americans seem to enunciate everything more clearly, with our hard 'R' sound and whatnot. But I'm totally biased because I'm Canadian.
Some British words that I like saying are 'rubish', 'wanker'(don't really know what it means), 'shag', and 'bugger'. I call my cat a little bugger.
Yeah, I also prefer rubbish and trousers. ;)
But I just think the whole situation at my work is stupid, and I also hate the bias / dubious claims that the "experts" make regarding the differences between the two languages.
Here's something that's different for Americans and British people - the way we pronounce 'Z'.
Is it Zed or Zee? It's obviously Zee. Is 'C' said like Ced? Or 'P' like Ped? I like consistency. It makes no logical sense to pronounce a 'D' sound.
For example, ZZ Top sounds better as Zee Zee Top, instead of Zed Zed Top. Or the ZX Spectrum computer? You know what, Zed Ex Spectrum sounds ok, maybe because it kinda sounds like Fed Ex.
There is very little that's logical about the English language, which apparently makes it a pain to learn as a second language.
My personal favourite (yes, with a "u" ;D) is "fanny". Means backside in American English, and vagina in UK English - the word fannypack becomes especially hilarious.
Anyway heathens, we invented the language, you just tried to claim it as your own and messed it up in the process ;) Just joking! It's interesting to see how it's evolved, they're adding words to the dictionary even now, although mainly text-speak type stuff that just makes me angry. The varieties in the way the language is spoken is incredible - compare an American to an English speaking Canadian to an Australian... And then there are regional accents. A thick Scottish accent makes it sound like a whole different language!
I'm pretty sure a lot of oddities of the English language (including how Z is pronounced here) are inherited from mainland European languages but as I'm not an expert on this sort of thing I'm just guessing. :P
Honestly, I prefer US accents because they tend to be clearer (certainly compared to my voice at least, I sometimes resent my accent :upsetroll:) but we have the best slang IMO. And yeah, I don't really care about American English differences much, I think anyone who's fluent in English should be able to understand both forms. :bomb:
Quote from: fcgamer on November 24, 2015, 07:54:00 pm
The first thing that bothers me is that if the students are being taught American English, then to take the tests based in British English seems silly. I looked at the guidebook and although it says that the tests are not biased towards British English learners, all of the spellings used are of course in British English, and some of the vocabulary is too.
This is the part that is just silly, it's intentionally setting the students up for having a harder time learning, and making it more likely that they'll fail the tests.
It's funny to see those discussions as a non native english speaker :D
I've learned seven years British english and three years American english at school.
I'm not entirely sure, but I think I tend to use British words more often than American words.
It depends on what the use of English is being taught as. Also a lot of your points are to do with colloquial language, which shouldn't be the main focus in my humble opinion.
Pants, tap, and truck for example, as well as rubbish / trash are really small fry local usage in that sense and both should be taught, people should know the difference.
So, reading this makes me think your complaint is a more emotional-based one rather than an academic one, which doesn't serve your point too well, at least to an observer, no offence intended I promise.
I agree that on paper, Cambridge English sounds much more appealing - if an Asian person can say they learned according to Cambridge spec.
However, Taiwan is so much more US-centric, and also with the Japanese links it makes more sense to learn US English, as it does in Japan.
For business I would suggest it makes more sense, but for impressions, Cambridge English and exam rules will always look better on a CV than Harvard English and perhaps that's why it's been chosen.
It has much more history and a steeper pedigree, I hope you can see that.
I am British for the record and also studied the English language a lot as my Grandmother was an English teacher, so I've grown up with traditional English having a significance.
You may have also noticed though, that I use US grammar as and when I wish in posts, because several US norms actually aid communication in written English (i.e. commas before 'and' in a sequence).
So my point is that it makes sense to use 'whatever works best' - which is exactly why things like rubber/fanny/pants differences should be noted whether you learn US English or British English. They are important details as the meaning can be vastly different depending on the listener/reader. Likewise, if Cambridge spec is more attractive to employers and colleges, then I would understand that approach.
It fundamentally depends on the agenda of course, which the way you outline it does sound a bit like a superfluous change made just to make someone look good.
18+Spoiler
In short: http://memecrunch.com/meme/1P7AH/were-here-to-fuck-shit-up/image.png
I'll comment more later on my thoughts, but from my personal studies of a second language (German), I remember learning German, Austrian, and Swiss word variations; however, we were always encouraged to use the German forms and with good reason. It is one thing to be aware of the differences - as an American, I already knew what trousers were as a child, remember seeing "center" and "centre" on some of the road signs, etc. At the same time though, it is sort of like my example with German versus Austrian German, or even Swiss German (shudders). The vast majority of German second-language learners want to learn Germany's standard. Likewise, although English originated in England, (and if we want to get technical about it, all of these languages just evolved from a Germanic ancestor), outside of Europe, I would suspect that the majority of people wanting to learn the language do so because it is a world language, which (like it or not) is somewhat due to the USA's position in the world. It may be partly pride on my part for saying this, but for the record my great grandfather was from Liverpool.
As another analogy, it is the same reason why a large majority of Chinese learners want to learn Simplified characters and Beijing dialect Mandarin. Finding a textbook with traditional characters AND Taiwanese grammar is quite difficult, even in Taiwan. ;)
On that note - I think it's a real shame if traditional Chinese doesn't make a resurgence. We're past the days where this had to be simplified to teach quickly.
It's like an art form and my child will be learning Traditional Chinese, not that diluted easy mode stuff! :)
Quote from: L___E___T on November 25, 2015, 05:12:55 am
(i.e. commas before 'and' in a sequence)
Aw, yeah. Oxford comma for life ;D
Finally, to address all of your comments fully, L___E___T.
To begin, I think we will both have some national pride in this topic, and as such, some bias on how we see / perceive things. To me, this is absolutely normal and to be expected as well. I just want to put this as a disclaimer, since I really respect you as a forum member, and consider you a friend on here, so I don't want any hard feelings or resentment to arise from a silly issue such as this.
In actuality, when I was in the university (after having returned from a semester in Germany) I preferred the British variant of English to that of America. But I just hate when it rears its head in my teaching field, since I am American, since it just causes worries of job security, arguments with students about how things are pronounced (well my other teacher told me it is done this way...), etc. I think it is wise for students to be aware of some of the differences between variants, but ultimately it is best to pick one version and stick with it. No one wants to read a mix of American and British English ;)
As an English teacher and also a learner of many languages (I have studied the following languages at some point, to one extent or another: German, Spanish, Dutch, Afrikaans, Croatian, Bulgarian, Spanish, Mandarin, and Indonesian), I am always trying to "discover" or find a way of helping people learn foreign languages in the most efficient way possible. While studying some of these languages, I have taken classes at the university, studied abroad, had small (fan) classes, had private tutoring, language exchange, self study, etc. Time and time again I saw that the people who progressed the fastest and were ultimately the most successful learners were those who focused on speaking and listening as the primary goal, with grammar and reading taking a passive role.
So what? I guess I am of the humble opinion that language, at a local level, matters very much. Students need to learn how to adapt and change, to notice the patterns instead of the differences, to embrace what they know instead of that which they don't. Slang is an entrance into culture, and without knowing the culture, you truly can't speak or understand the language with any sort of fluency. So while rubbish and garbage are just small fish in the grand scheme of things, these are noticeable differences. And to teach children trousers as the exclusive word, when pants is seen and heard everywhere in the media for the same piece of clothing that covers our lower body, it just seems a bit silly and also seems to be hindering, rather than helping.
Regarding prestige: I certainly agree that British English carries a higher level of prestige than the American variety. I hate my accent because of this perception, actually. With that said, I sort of view it in the following way. Britain certainly has a rich history, but the USA is currently one of the larger players in the forefront (for better or worse, imo for the worse). So with that being said, I would recommend learning American English over the two varieties, though personally I like Indian English, South African English and Australian English the best.
On another note, I think it is important to mention that a lot of people feel that American English is the more conservative of the two varieties of English. ;) Basically, American English preserves items that were originally part of British English, but then the latter variant went and evolved. This is just something to think about.
Also, a fun fact about the hated "American" term soccer:
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/06/the-origin-of-the-word-soccer/
Quote from: L___E___T on November 25, 2015, 05:12:55 am
It depends on what the use of English is being taught as. Also a lot of your points are to do with colloquial language, which shouldn't be the main focus in my humble opinion.
Pants, tap, and truck for example, as well as rubbish / trash are really small fry local usage in that sense and both should be taught, people should know the difference.
So, reading this makes me think your complaint is a more emotional-based one rather than an academic one, which doesn't serve your point too well, at least to an observer, no offence intended I promise.
I agree that on paper, Cambridge English sounds much more appealing - if an Asian person can say they learned according to Cambridge spec.
However, Taiwan is so much more US-centric, and also with the Japanese links it makes more sense to learn US English, as it does in Japan.
For business I would suggest it makes more sense, but for impressions, Cambridge English and exam rules will always look better on a CV than Harvard English and perhaps that's why it's been chosen.
It has much more history and a steeper pedigree, I hope you can see that.
I am British for the record and also studied the English language a lot as my Grandmother was an English teacher, so I've grown up with traditional English having a significance.
You may have also noticed though, that I use US grammar as and when I wish in posts, because several US norms actually aid communication in written English (i.e. commas before 'and' in a sequence).
So my point is that it makes sense to use 'whatever works best' - which is exactly why things like rubber/fanny/pants differences should be noted whether you learn US English or British English. They are important details as the meaning can be vastly different depending on the listener/reader. Likewise, if Cambridge spec is more attractive to employers and colleges, then I would understand that approach.
It fundamentally depends on the agenda of course, which the way you outline it does sound a bit like a superfluous change made just to make someone look good.
18+Spoiler
In short: http://memecrunch.com/meme/1P7AH/were-here-to-fuck-shit-up/image.png
Absolutely. Let's compare:
British:
"For lunch I had salad with bacon, sausage and egg in a sandwich."
VS:
American:
"For lunch I had salad with bacon, sausage, and egg in a sandwich."
- Were the eggs and sausage combined in the sandwich? It's only clear in the US version. I think I got that illustration right at least!
^^^ I was always taught that the Oxford Comma was optional (which it is, of course) but this was from an American school.
Post Merge: November 25, 2015, 09:40:29 am
I guess my point is, if the "American version" is being taught as "optional", how exactly does that make it American?
Hang on - what on earth are Indian English, South African English and Australian English? I refuse to accept those exist, in terms of academic use. Those are local variants and dialects surely? As relatively recent colonies, they should all be following British English as a rule, I have never seen those referred to at all.
Also agree that American English is the more useful style, for business and online communication these days. British English is preferred in my experience, as the pedigree version.
By the way, for benefit of other readers - American English (or US English) is by no means 'incorrect English'. There are many oft-quoted examples of incorrect English used by American people (i.e. "You did great!") but it's a bit like Canadian French, the differences go further ack when the language was still evolving and so certain differences appear when you branch off.
After all, we don't all speak Olde English as Chaucer wrote, it's not like we're chasing some pure form of English - hence my use of hyphens in written English and as I said (wrote!) 'whatever works'.
So I do think it depends on what the core goal is by using Cambridge resources. It's not something I would say is clear, but it looks like a mix of things, with no set reasoning, which must be irritating for sure.
@L___E___T: There are dictionaries available for those other variations of English. If they are dialects, they are dialects of what, exactly? How are they any different from American English? As an example:
English speakers went to South Africa and colonized it, and their English became influenced by local languages as well as Dutch (which later became Afrikaans). Suddenly this variant of English is different than that spoken in England.
Now let's compare to the following:
People from England went to North America and settled, and due to local (Native American) languages and languages of other settlers (German, French, Swedish, etc) as well as distance, the language changed from that spoken in England.
In both situations, the exact same thing occurred.
And for fun:
https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/boekmakierie/Sept15/September2015-547.JPG
Yes, I also collect dictionaries, so I am quite familiar with other official variants of the language. ;)
On another note, I used to have a South African colleague (and I knew some other South Africans) which would always say the following (incorrect) sentence: This is a jeans. Maybe this is how they talk in those parts.
Post Merge: November 25, 2015, 10:02:45 am
Quote from: L___E___T on November 25, 2015, 09:45:54 am
So I do think it depends on what the core goal is by using Cambridge resources. It's not something I would say is clear, but it looks like a mix of things, with no set reasoning, which must be irritating for sure.
The manager is only using this as a way to make a name for herself. She wants to force the students (children) to take the Cambridge test (the highest level would be A2 for primary education), yet a lot (most?) of the parents don't even want to do this, as it is expensive and unnecessary at this stage of the game (3rd grade, 4th grade...). As the manager had said to me while trying to choose a new name for the school, "I want the students to learn American English, but want to name it after a place in Britain, since it sounds 'bigger'". IMO this is not really a good reason to go with Cambridge.
Bah, lots of South Africans where I live and although I love a braii - those are just words, I'm not convinced there's a different style of written English.
Is the teacher British herself? Seems like she has a hard on for Cambridge standards, which suggests otherwise.
I think it depends on what looks better for the school - I know a good chunk of Mainland Chinese have an obsession with English heritage education, I'd have thought Taiwanese prefer Harvard standard. Depends on who / what the market is and strategy for the school I guess. Let's hope they don't see this thread though ;)
Quote from: fcgamer on November 25, 2015, 09:59:12 am
On another note, I used to have a South African colleague (and I knew some other South Africans) which would always say the following (incorrect) sentence: This is a jeans. Maybe this is how they talk in those parts.
what's wrong with that sentence?
i think it's okay unless artificial jean exists in the wild. Some objects/items don't exist in a singular form. Compare with gloves. One glove could exist and be useful at the same time.
jeans, scissors are the object that can't be split and remain its functionality.
i can't imagine myself saying something like 'a pair of jeans'. It's ridiculous and doesn't make any sense. A pair of things that can't be decoupled by design. It's a rock solid item. One item. ;D
Ridiculous or not, "pair of jeans" is correct. No one ever said English makes sense ;)
Like it or lump it, jeans is a plural, so you can't use 'this' or 'a' alone - it has to be 'these' and 'a pair of'.
Yup I agree with you guys as well with that sentence. For all we know though, it could be considered acceptable / correct English in South Africa. That is my point about different varieties of English.
From a historical perspective, all variants of English stem from one language, well Old English / Anglo Saxon, which was closely related to other Germanic tongues. Then due to distance, time, the Norman invasion, colonization, etc, English spread elsewhere and changed again and again. So from that reasoning, there is no reason to say that South African English or Australian English is any less of a variant of English than the two major players. It is just that these varieties are not as desirable to learn, and as such, have probably not been codified as much or studied as much. ;)
Just to branch out on the topic a bit (but since I started this thread, I guess I'm allowed): before moving to Taiwan, I had been extremely interested in obtaining an Icelandic / English language dictionary and trying to remove many of the French borrowings from English, replacing them with Germanic alternatives. Why did I want to use the Icelandic words as a source for inspiration? Simply because it is one of the most conservative of the modern Germanic languages. I had learned some interesting things, such as how their word for balloon is the same as their word for bladder. Pretty interesting stuff. But then I became preoccupied with other things and the project never went anywhere, not like anyone would have ever used it for anything anyway.