Search results for 'tag:American English tag:Teaching English' matching tags 'American English' and 'Teaching English'

Re: What makes English so difficult to learn?

Anonymous — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:34:01 GMT

Hello, another English teacher here. I have been teaching English in China for about 2 and a half years now and also speak fluent French, decent Spanish and am learning Chinese (not as hard as you may think once you get the hang of those tones, easy grammar). Now I'll start off by saying that English seems to be an incredibly easy language to communicate with (and by this I mean to give the general idea of what you're trying to say). However, if you want to learn English like a native speaker then it's a completely different story. The pronunciation CAN be difficult to learn depending on your native language and also the age you attempt to learn it at. Training your tongue and mouth to move the same way a native speaker does can be difficult to do, especially if you're like many of my students who got their start at an older age or didn't have good teachers. I've also noticed that my younger students are able to mimic my speech much easier than the older ones speaking, both of whom are studying at the same level. I started learning French when I was 4 years old (Quebec French, I'm Canadian) and because of the quality of my teachers and my young age I was able to become quite good with my pronunciation. With my Chinese because I'm learning from scratch from native speakers my pronunciation is also decent (notice I said decent, not great, although when speaking Chinese I'm always understood). Native language has a lot to do with it too as the sounds you use in one language may be very different for another. I've taught in both the north and south of China and find that the people all have the same problems. Chinese people have problems with s (they often pronounce it as a sh sound) and with closing their mouth for the letter m ("sometimes" is a nightmare for them and they often say it like "suntine"). L and R can also be troublesome. One can't forget sentence stress as well as well as linking words together to make it go smoothly.

The vocabulary can also be a pain. Someone here mentioned 150,000 words in the English language but the number is actually much higher. The Oxford English Dictionary (2nd edition) contains over 600,000 definitions. Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged contains 475,000 main headwords and it is believed the language grows by 25,000 words a year. Don't believe me, check Wikipedia. There's also the difference in spelling and vocabulary between the different forms of English. British English and American English use different words and the words that are the same can be spelled differently. American English and Canadian English essentially share the same vocabulary to a large degree but the spelling of Canadian English in many ways is closer to British English. British English is pretty much the English form most Asian and European countries will learn but American pop culture will also have an influence, not to mention the American economy and it's impact. This can all be very confusing. To the person saying they are tired of using "well" as in "well, then..." there are many substitutes you could use.

The grammar is also a nuisance. It's not the hardest of things but certainly isn't the easiest. Sure French has a gender attached to all of it's nouns (which I hated when learning it), but English still has more exceptions to it's rules that need to me memorized. So many even native speakers have trouble with it. A language like Chinese that may seem hard to speak actually has very simple grammar. For example if you wanted to ask someone where they are you would say "ni zai na li" or simply "ni zai nar" (you where?). To ask a question in Chinese you merely ad "ma" to the end of a statement. "Ta hui shuo zhongwen" is "he/she speaks Chinese whereas "ta hui shuo zhongwen ma" is "does he/she speak Chinese?". Also in Chinese as there are no forms of he or she.

It's impossible to say which language is easy and which is hard when compared to each other because there are so many things that need to be taken into consideration. Let's just say that English has it's easy parts and it's ridiculously difficult parts as well. Speaking at a native speaker level can be done and I know people who have done this, but it takes a lot of hard work, good instruction, and a good learning atmosphere. I hope all that made sense, I stumbled onto this site a 2 in the morning and am quite tired.

Re: Whose property?

Tam Sadek — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 21:04:45 GMT

As we're talking 'Linguistic Imperialism', I thought this might be relevant to the discussion... It's an excerpt from something I wrote a few years ago regarding the British Council and its role in ELT...

âA knowledge of English gives rise in its turn to a desire to read English books, talk to British people, and learn about British life or some aspect of itâ¦ As a resultâ¦ the British Council representative will receive many requests from peopleâ¦ who wish to visit the United Kingdom, usually to study some subject. From such applications are chosen the distinguished visitorsâ¦ whom it is considered worth while to assist.â (Drogheda report summary as quoted in Donaldson, 1984, pp181-82)

The British government realised that if English language teaching overseas was to expand then special steps would have to be taken. However, there was a problem for the British Council in that it had little or no expertise in teaching English as a Foreign Language (EFL) in multilingual societies. This factor was to have major consequences for the way English Language Teaching (ELT) was to develop as both the Colonial Office and the Ministry of Education rejected the Councilâs claims to educational expertise in this area.

Therefore in March 1956 An âOfficial Committee on the Teaching of English Overseasâ, (TEO) which consisted of representatives from the Foreign Office, Scottish Office, Commonwealth Relations Office, Colonial Office, the Board of Trade, the Ministry of Education, the University Grants Committee and the British Council, reported to the Cabinet. The committeeâs report was entitled âThe Opportunityâ and it stated that:

âOpportunities unquestionably exist for increasing the use of English as a second language in most parts of the non-English speaking worldâ¦ Within a generation from now English could be a world language â that is to say a universal second language in those countries in which it is not already the native or primary tongueâ¦ it is important that its expansion should take place mainly under Commonwealth and United States auspicesâ (as quoted in Phillipson, 1994, p149)

It may appear somewhat surprising that the United States is included as an ally in the battle for English domination; however, during the mid-fifties the threats to British English were perceived as alternative languages such as Arabic, Chinese and Hindi rather than American English. Although the report does note the threat from American cultural imperialism to traditional British export markets the report notes that âthere was a preference overseas for the Queenâs English as opposed to American Englishâ (Donaldson, 1984, p203) and the report goes on to state that:

âBritain has nothing to lose and much to gain by the closest possible collaboration with the United States.â (As quoted in Phillipson, 1994, p150)

This reflected the fact that American ELT and linguistics were far more developed than in Britain. This was due to Americaâs experience in Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL) to immigrants. Thus, the British Council and the State Department (the USAâs Foreign Office governmental equivalent) had already started co-ordinating strategy together and had even issued identical memos to their overseas offices endorsing co-operation between Britons and Americans in this field.

This report also marked a change in the policy of the British Council from that of âculturalâ to âeducationalâ affairs and from âdevelopedâ to âdevelopingâ countries (Pennycook, 1994, p148).

Pennycook further suggests that: âFor Britain, it became especially useful to have a ânon-governmentalâ agency for continued cultural and political influence in the face of the demise of the colonial education service.â (Pennycook, 1994, p148)

There's more, but I think that's more than enough for now...

Re: Why American English??

monfrancom — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:31:26 GMT

Reapply to inissial poughst. (though - poughst!)

Is this "arogant", or is it "arrogant", or is it "a-row-guant"? To ask the question is to answer it! The united statesians kept that trait from their "fore farthers". As did the Quanadians. With enuff information (spoken in French gives "information"), u kan get bi. Some body actually cares!

As one of this land (myyyyy fore farthers came to this land thousands of years ago crossing the Berring straight, and weren't even recognized as having a soul by the roman church -circa 1525- therefore justifying making slaves out of them - they got screwed though, because people of the First Nations were terrible slaves, disobedient and all! -so- they went looking to Africa for slaves) I have had english shoved down my throat from birth. I was bilingual when I first went to school at age five. Colonialism still rocks real hard here in Kanada!

I mean it's made its way to QuÃ©bec (pronounced kouabeck by the english who refuse to say Kaybeck -which they could if they had the good will) where they will start teaching English when children start grade one at the tender age of 6 years old. This, of course, proves that colonialism in this country survives to this day, and even among French Canadians who are assimilated -to varying degrees.

At this point in my life, I've gotten over it and am putting forth tremendous effort to assert myself by speaking English when it suits me and not when it suits the pretentious other. So when the pretentious tell me to "speak white" I say "f*** y**, is that white enough for you?" And English folks in this country are still telling me to speak white.

After "Le dÃ©clin de l'empire amÃ©ricain" (http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=F1ARTF0002195), a friend suggested the overpowering ego of Americains came to them through the greeks who thought that THEY were the perfect incarnation of "man"! (Americains are those who live in the Americas even if united statesians do have a very big ego and Canadians are wimps) Only big egos would fight over -ise and -ize. Get a life.

But, to answer your question "Why American English?", it's called "ego"! I mean, what else can it be: how do you justify calling a united statesian American when the latter namesake should actually refer to all those living on the two continents? I mean, I'm an American since I live in Canada, but you would never refer to me as such since that word is reserved for united statesians. The bottom line then, is that the English can simply never agree... wherever they come from!!!

Of course, you could replace the word "English" and replace it with "people", and the statement would still be true!

All this being said, may I quote u? "Sorry for being a bit rude but this really gets me."

Re: American Accent Training!

Anonymous — Sun, 04 Jun 2006 09:09:06 GMT

Hi Nympha,

I sent an email to Arvin and Eric a few days ago through this website --- but then I realized that their emails were dated a few months back so I dont know if they'll be reading our emails soon.

Unfortunately, accent reduction trainng cannot be done by reading books alone - you'd have to work with someone who already speaks English with the American accent. Verbal language learning is an audio experience. I've lived in the US for 22 years and I'm finishing up my ESL (teaching English as a Second Language) Certification at Berkeley University, California, USA. I'm curious, how much would you and others who may want to speak in American English (say for a call center job); be willing to pay for a 4-week accent reduction training program? Each session will be 4 hours per day for 4 weeks.

Thanks for your reply.

Carol W.