Search results for 'tag:Phonetics tag:Literature' matching tags 'Phonetics' and 'Literature'

hi.please help me can any one check statement of purpose and can guide me f

Ahnajfi — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:26:53 GMT

My interest in Science and English dates back to my school days. Being an inquisitive boy, I always have been eager to learn more and more around me. My interest in wide range of subjects and my inner aspiration helped me a lot to acquire a significant knowledge of the Science, history and culture of the world. With the passage of time my eagerness for knowledge got specified and my desire to go deeper into my subjects intensified.

After completing my graduation with chemistry Biology and English I started teaching in Sir Syed Secondary School âa reputable institute of District Sahiwal (Pakistan). Here I had a chance to instill my curiosity and my knowledge into my students. I gave them the basic concepts of Science and taught them how to use correct English. I also learned from their questions as my teachers had from mine. Along with teaching I also worked as an educational counselor by keeping close relation with students and their parents.

To familiarize my self with latest teaching and management techniques I got admission in bachelor of Education (B.Ed) program of Allama Iqbal Open University Islamabad. In this course I learned to teach English and science at elementary level.

Major subjects during this course were school administration and management education psychology, theories of education and Evaluation. At the end of the course I completed ten days workshop in which I was selected the representative of the class. I also helped the other trainee teacher.

The most important decision in my life was when I took admission in master in English language and literature. I have got a chance to get a wide range of knowledge in the realm of English the core courses during my master in English which have a great effect on my personality were English drama, Novel, poetry, linguistics and phonetics, English grammar and teaching of English as a foreign language (TEFL).During this study work I explored the world of English literature. I at once fell in love with a work of CHAUCER, SHAKESPEARE and BERTRAND RUSSEL which are the most humanistic writers of the world. This course has greatly improved my language skills. Now a days, I am teaching English and science in Govt middle school.

My hobbies are reading literature, watching English movies and listening English programmes of radio(like BBC,VOA ).i am also a good player of basket ball .i love to read about the history and culture of different nations and like to discuss and solve educational problems of teachers and students. But my ultimate aim is to improve and develop myself first then works for human beings at higher level in the field of education. My independence and full responsibility for myself have driven me to a higher level of maturity than many of my peers, a quality that differentiates me form many other applicants.

I have studied all about your program of studies, course content really attract me to join this master level program. This will develop in me different skills and broaden my perspective of life in the light of alternative points of views. Also on the completion of this master level program I will be able to analyze and assess the change process in education and may examine all these from a number of perspective

I am highly aware of the superb reputation of your current program. Course contents have served to deepen my interest in attending; I know that, in addition to your excellent faculty, your facilities like libraries are among the best. I hope u will give me the privilege of continuing my studies at the fine institutions of Europe

Self-Evaluation Essay

Super Sonic — Sat, 19 May 2007 22:54:48 GMT

Hi,

I had my final exam from the writing course as a home take-in, but the type of the essay sounded a little bit weird to me. Here is what my lecturer gave as information:

Writing FINAL

Write an evaluation essay on the following topic

The Self-Evaluation essay is a reflective essay assessing and describing your learning experiences. Write a self evaluation essay considering the guidelines below.
The following are guidelines for your Self-Evaluation Essay:

Include each of your learning objectives,
Describe how the learning objectives were accomplished and the steps used to complete objectives,
For objectives you did not meet, state why not. What did you learn from the failure to meet objectives? (Is this even proper English? )
What else did you learn that was not in your initial objective? Specific examples should be cited. The student should review the learning objectives set at the beginning of the term and assess what growth he or she has achieved during the term."

And here is what I have written (Could you please proofread it considering the notes above?):

This Is Only the Beginning

This is my first year in the Linguistics department of Hacettepe University. I can easily say that this university is not quite what I expected it to be. I was hoping to improve myself in many fields, but this did not happen in the first year, since I had to deal with my courses more than anything else. However, my English dramatically improved thanks to the courses. I would like to evaluate this year in terms of how I improved my English skills (speaking, writing, reading and listening), while doing nothing about the other fields I was interested in (arts and sports).

First of all, I have been able to improve my expressive English skills thanks to a native speakerâs being our lecturer, and having courses on how to express ourselves better in English. Margaret was the lecturer of our writing course. I learned many new words, idioms, grammar structures and expressions in her classes, which would have me state my thoughts in a more comprehensible way in written language. Also, both in our writing and reading classes we had discussions about various controversial subjects that helped me improve my speaking skills. We were having phonetics at the same time, and as a student trying to attend all the classes, I improved my pronunciation. So, I can say that I am grateful for my department to help me meet my objectives in expressing myself both in spoken and written language.

Secondly, my receptive skills have also improved with the help of the courses like reading, literature, and listening comprehension. Even though I did not have much difficulty in reading and understanding course books, articles, reading passages and the like, I was rather poor at literal texts, or in other words, the figurative use of English language. By the help of our literature classes, I got over this problem, and now I can mostly understand what Shakespeare or Hemingway says. My listening skills, likewise, improved remarkably after having taken the listening comprehension courses. I was unable to differentiate between the words that resemble each other like âmateâ and âmadeâ before I took those courses. I can say that listening to someone speaking English has become one of the easiest tasks ever with the help of my lecturers.

Thirdly, even though there has been a big improvement in my English skills, I have not been able to deal with arts or sports, both of which are my main interests. I was hoping to have art lessons such as painting and music. However, all the courses are academic ones. Another deficit of my department âor of the university in general- is that there are not many sports activities going on. Because of these reasons, I felt rather âantisocialâ in my first year in the university. As a result, not having done anything in these two areas is the only objective that I missed this year, but I am thinking of taking piano and karate courses next year from another university. If only my university gave more importance to these two areas!

Consequently, although I was not very content with the overall situation of the university this year, I must admit that my English skills have improved drastically within this year. I, however, still feel sad about not being able to take any courses from my areas of interest. Who knows, maybe this was only the beginning. Maybe, I am going to like this university better. Only time will show!

Thanks in advance

Re: should of/would of

Philip — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 15:40:54 GMT

Marius Hancu wrote:
Yes, they don't know grammar.

And, they are phonetic spellers. This problem is best solved by reading good literature or commentary.

Have a good day, all.

Re: Linguistics not science

julielai — Tue, 20 Dec 2005 01:48:07 GMT

Yes, Hong Kongers adopt a rather utilitarian, if shortsighted, approach to learning. Sadly, the longest distance between two points is often a shortcut.

A-level shouldn't take up that much time. Active listening, thinking, and participation in class all minimize the need for revision. My elder sibling became é«èçå without burning that much midnight oil. (I did okay in my mock exams, though I didn't take the real thing.). Just goes to show you: in HK, quantity trumps quality--students put in more time to make up for their increasingly passive learning style (writing 50 essays with the same mistakes instead of doing one right, for instance) You've just proven my point.

etymons (... um... I mean the root of a lexical item. I don't really remember the English jargon for it):

Why use jargons when simple words will do?

Looking at dictionaries for meanings, phonetic representations whatever does not mean you are forming rules of some sort.

Didn't I say we would be spinning around our own definitions of "prescriptivism"? Your understanding of the term is framed by grammar; mine by the outcome.

In any case, the example proves we shouldn't make assumptions as to what native speakers use dictionaries for.

Language is of course not a science, but the STUDY into it can be, just as one may well argue whether translatology is an art or a science.

Last time I checked, linguistics is still in the Faculty of Arts. Never seen it listed among the sciences.

CUHK translation majors told me all they do is practise; no theories. Beijing U.'s foreign lang. institute (???) does the same thing: language labs all day long. They are not elite programmes for no reason.

I am not really sure whether university English courses lay more stress on the scientific side of languages than on the cultural side thereof.

You're mixing up English and Lang. Ed. programmes (Yes, Lingnan has both in the same dept., with IED components as an add-on) But most TEFL-like programmes cover mostly linguistic and educational theories, including sociolinguistics. Mandatory cultural literacy coverage, including literature, are kept to a max. of five courses. (Lingnan's has four; some have fewer or none.) No wonder my CUHK friend says "Lang. Ed." depts aren't real English programmes (sorry!). My TEFL friends tell me themselves how little they are learning (there's more, but I won't leave specifics here).

My IELTS suggestion isn't about cultural literacy; I'd like the incompetent English teachers screened out. I've nothing against exams, as long as they are only part of the requirement.

If these programmes have a common core curriculum, we won't need a benchmark. As it stands, many TEFL majors aren't learning the same thing; exams will help measure everybody against one standard.

even if the government has declared equal legal status of Chinese and English. Discriminations of this sort conduce to English being >treated the utilitarian way.

Beg to differ. English used to be the medium of instruction for many secondary schoolers, so cultural literacy wasn't a big problem. We were exposed to English vocab. in every core subject. After 97, HK lost its linguistic identity, as is epitomized in the ever-changing language education policy.

But the 'study' was halted by the profs, on the grounds that I am but a yr1 student, so that I should leave the topic to my yr 3 (actually yr 4) final paper.

Your prof. is right to keep your project in hiatus. Students should be well-rounded before they become specialized--there's plenty of time for that yet! Again, going back to what I've said about a lopsided education.

Your suggestion relative to the English curriculum is good... but I wonder if it would be possible even in the university, as the topics suggested are each already a large topic.

Many of these courses I've seen in curriculum outside of HK. Eng. teachers don't have to be experts in any of these areas; a basic course in each will suffice (except for writing and lit.--we are making up for lost ground)

This is a fairly typical Eng. teacher curriculum in the states: http://www.tamiu.edu/catalog/current/ba-engl8th-12th.shtml (and this is not even a top program. See how much a HK student is missing, both in English and general education)

I love linguistics not really because I treat language in a parochial scientific way. I am limiting 'language' to the 'essence' (leaving >this undefined) because I am more interested in the common traits shared by ALL human languages.

Linguistics is like åµæ³. Too much strategems on paper will turn anybody into a é¦¬è¬.

am therefore applying by non - JUPAS for CU linguistics... to see if I have a chance.

Good luck. You have a great shot given your passion for the subject--but won't non-jupas disqualify you from student aid? (I have no clue)

PS. I've written to the local papers on these subjects, so some of my comments are nothing new.

Re: Inferior dialects?

Randy_Tam — Mon, 19 Dec 2005 09:36:48 GMT

I am not quite close to 'homeless'. I am living at my aunt's home because my granny invited 3 of her siplings to stay... aiya, according to my parents this is going to last 2 weeks or more. I am currently using my uncle's PC just to get here and take a look at what you say. Though I cannot come here as frequently as I used to.

Looking at dictionaries for meanings, phonetic representations whatever does not mean you are forming rules of some sort. I am sorry I didn't include this in describing what a native speaker's going to do with a dictionary... lol. This is especially true with languages belonging to the Sino family, the orthography of which is ideographic, for which reason the phonological form can hardly be guessed just from its shape (I remember I read a passage during my F3 Chinese lessons called <æ¼¢åççµæ§>, in which the author asserted that there's a kind of Chinese letters, the å½¢è²å, whose pronunciations could be guessed. I can hardly agree with this. Even an L1 speaker of Chinese, without prior training, can hardly succeed in this.). This is also true, to a certain extent, of English because of its hybrid source of etymons (... um... I mean the root of a lexical item. I don't really remember the English jargon for it): French, Old English, German, Irish, Greek, Latin... all contribute to the English language as it is today, leading to the lack of consistency between the orthographical and phonological forms of English words. These little 'cracks' of course can not be formulated by the human cognitive system (simply by means of conjecture, etc).

Language is of course not a science, but the STUDY into it can be, just as one may well argue whether translatology is an art or a science.

I am not really sure whether university English courses lay more stress on the scientific side of languages than on the cultural side thereof. To the best of my knowledge, this is not the case. Both are given equal stress. I come to this conclusion from information available to me. Lingnan University, where I am taking my undergraduate yr1 course in Contemporary English and Education, and Chinese University, where a friend of mine is currently a yr2 student in English, both have introductory courses into 'English Grammar', as well as introductory courses into literature in English. The workload is virtually the same for the 2 parts, at least in yr 1. But as the course goes on, more such courses as 'language and culture' or 'sociolinguistics' are available, making the curriculum more relevant to the relationship between language and social factors.

But your statement is true in that Hong Kongers are culturally more and more illiterate, being ignorant not only in foreign cultures but also in their own. Their ignorance in local culture being irrelevant here, I'd like to suggest some plausible reasons why language education from a cultural perspective is losing its ground.

1. It appears students are less motivated (in their learning) these days. What I mean by this is that days at school become more and more dreary: schooling is more or less a long toil, against which students devise one of the most primitive countermeasures known to man --- go have some sleep and look for your Juliet in your dream, handsome Romeo.

But this 'countermeasure' has its roots in that at night students have to attend tutorial classes, which they deem even more useful than classes at school. They having had such classes head back home have their dinner, do some homework and perhaps some reading as well, and, hey mama, I need time to play and relax a while. Voila, time to sleep puppy, it's already 0300 in the midnight. Frankly last year when I was having my A Level, I spent almost 7 hours everyday after school just to revise and read something more (I didn't take tutorial classes, save for economics), it was already 1200 when I returned home from the self - study facilities. It was hell. All this lead to a persistent fatigue in students.

So, the consequence is that, even if the cultural side of language is come across at school, there could hardly be anyone listening (lol.... reminds me of my UE class. Almost 2 / 3 of our class were sleeping if no assignments were given).

2. One may well ask an old question, 'why do students opt for tutorial classes instead of school?' To this old question I give an old answer, 'because students think tutorial classes are more useful, in that they cut the craps and just get straight to the point.' ---> I didn't take tutorials so don't blame me for that. But from what I hear, from my ex - gf (...), my friends, and my classmates, this is the case.

What is meant, then, by 'craps'? ie. anything that is not relevant to the examinations ahead. Examinations, strangely enough, dominate students' minds. My classmates may well think that I am good at linguistics, and so they will immediately conclude, without exception, 'so you must score a high GPA'... Sadly, the thing that is immediately associated with 'good or bad' is a score.

Your suggestion about IELTS (that I took 2 years ago lol without attending any tutorial classes or doing preparations of any sort... just fulfilling your 'minimum requirement' when I was a 6th former) therefore, in this context, does not really render any use in determining the (always abtract) 'language standard' of English teachers. IELTS has nothing about 'culture'. Given that absurd formula (good / bad = score), and given the fact that actually there are tutorial classes given on this test available in Hong Kong, IELTS is simply another UE.

3. These lead to the 3rd possible cause: All that Hong Kong (as a physiological identity separated from its people) wants about English is to make it a little utility: the current English curriculum is concerned with how to use English (as the name of the subject suggests: Use of English), not how to appreciate English as a language or, as Sapir - Whorf's hypothesis suggests, a fruit of a culture. Think about the writing assignments: Letter to the editor, Letter of complaint, Informal letter to a friend (sharing students' own experience perhaps), and essays (on the sheer knowledge on some current social issues). Listening is more or less to make students a 'phono - type', write whatever you hear. (of course, that needs some thought... but what is needed in a real dialogue: any puns suggested? the attitude of the speaker? 'slips of tongue'? all these are absent). Oral~ haha, that's a joke. Just keep talking and make your points understandable to your partners to score high. If this is not enough, sham having some 'foreign accents'. What is the most 'important part' in English exams in Hong Kong, as an interviewee in a programme produced by TVB (name really forgotten, but the programme is great!) pointed out, is 'comprehension', not how to express oneself, accounting for the 'deteriorating English language standard' these days.

4. What makes the situation even worse is the availability of such 'lures' as PC games, movies, and the Internet (-_-... am I not surfing the net?). Students 20 years ago may take pleasure in reading fictions: Le Docteur Pascal, Women in Love, the God of Small Things (I didn't take AL E. Lit.; I really read it for pleasure), Sybil (by Benjamin Disraeli), these are all fictions that I like. But as other forms of leisure can be more easily reached today, reading (to learn from the 'experience of another person': a 'function' of literature) becomes a hefty burden from which every students wants to escape.

So... the entire 'English pedagogic machine' becomes a miserable thing brewing students who treat English as nothing more than a tool to show their 'erudition', as is observed from the fact that complaint letters written in English to the Government or to such other authorities as concerned are paid more attention to, even if the author thereof is a Hong Konger. I do not mean Hong Kongers are in their nature 'inferior' to non - Hong Kongers. What I am trying to bring out is that there exists a sort of 'linguistic discrimination', even if the government has declared equal legal status of Chinese and English. Discriminations of this sort conduce to English being treated the utilitarian way. Actually I was writing an essay on this attitude toward English when the semester started. But the 'study' was halted by the profs, on the grounds that I am but a yr1 student, so that I should leave the topic to my yr 3 (actually yr 4) final paper. Anyway, I don't give a damn anymore.

Your suggestion relative to the English curriculum is good... but I wonder if it would be possible even in the university, as the topics suggested are each already a large topic. Or are you actually suggesting it as a framework that is to be followed through during the 16 years (university years inclusive) of schooling?

I love linguistics not really because I treat language in a parochial scientific way. I am limiting 'language' to the 'essence' (leaving this undefined) because I am more interested in the common traits shared by ALL human languages. Culture... yes, that sounds great, and in my literature studies I remember I once looked into the relationship between 'gender roles' and why Alice Munro's <Boys and Girls> is written that way. But still, linguistics studied in the way I mentioned before is what I am most interested in, for which reason I am not really ok with the course I am taking and am therefore applying by non - JUPAS for CU linguistics... to see if I have a chance.

Language study being too much like science?

julielai — Sat, 17 Dec 2005 11:12:37 GMT

Randy_Tam wrote:
As I said earlier, what a native speaker looks more on is the meaning (which, if broadly defined, can be regarded as a 'rule'. After all, language as a whole can be defined as a 'social institution'.) instead of the structural rules which constitute the language, as it is something 'inside'.

Not quite. I look up pronunciations in Chinese dictionaries. (I won't speak for other languages--inadequate sample. I'd infer incorrectly. I suspect Japanese native speakers look up pronunciations too, with their on and kun readings)

In this case the term is an include - all word, which has virtually no meaning, and resembles 'All human beings have a physiological brain.'

The laws of science aren't arbitrary; but the rules of human institutions could be argued as such. Language is not science (unlike "earth as a cube", which isn't common sense either).

Your argument has a local flavor to it. Hong Kongers hang on to the bones because they are getting less meat (cultural literacy). Had they done more "immersion", they'd have had more "instinctive"/native-speaking feel of Eng. The diff. between L1s and 2s here is perhaps sheer exposure.

I see the impact of the exposure problem even on university research. English students prefer linguistics because it's more tangible than cultural literacy. Local research is now lopsided--too much on structures and theories; not enough on literature/etymology--hence my criticism on learners treating language like science. I see the influence even on their writing. If they become profs, the Eng. ed. curriculum and research will be even more unbalanced. Hence my jab at Chomsky (though I'm not picking on him per se.).

An excellent lang. ed. curriculum should cover:
1. Three writing courses at least 2. literature (7-8 courses, covering poetry, drama, fiction and prose) 3. Greek and Latin roots of Eng. 4. English and American civilization 5. child psychology 6. Children's lit. (for primary school teachers) 7. Juvenile lit. (for sec. school teachers) 8. Two years of foreign lang. 9. Public speaking 10. phonetics and syntax 11. History of English 12. Intensive listening lab 13 music (for primary teachers)

Save pedagogy for the last year. Make IELTS (with a minimum of 7.5) a graduation requirement. Bump up teachers' salary for those who make the cut.

Many people, like myself, form their own theories based on life experiences. Instead of talking about love, I want a real love affair with English. I'd pick an Ishiguro novel over Chomsky's papers any given day.

There, I feel better now.

Hope you're not homeless (hey, the library has internet access!) Merry X'mas [:-)]

Re: Inferior dialects?

Crux_online — Sun, 11 Dec 2005 00:50:03 GMT

Randy_Tam wrote:
I am only taking Mandarin as a complusory second language credit course, my L1 being Cantonese Chinese, now considered a 'dialect' for no justifiable reasons, as there has never been a clear distinction drawn between a 'dialect' and a 'language': do the 2 not share the very same traits of a 'language' (a consistent grammar embedded so that an L1 speaker can tell whether an expression is acceptable in his language)?

The distinction between a 'language' and a 'dialect' seems to me to be so wide and so gray as to be almost arbitrary. In the case of Chinese, it is my understanding that Cantonese is considered a dialect of Mandarin because of the "Official Status" of Mandarin as the official language of the PRC. Such a governmental promulgation automatically relegates any other variants as either undesirable, or at the very least, secondary to the preferred variant.

Of course Cantonese is a language and has all the halmarks of a language. Perhaps if the capitol of the PRC were in Hong Kong, Cantonese would be the language and Mandarin would be the dialect.

Depending on your view of the role of prescriptivism in language, it may be good or bad that one variant is chosen over another as the primary, base, standard, or official language, leaving all others to languish in their subordinate status. Often, it seems to be either the literary class--those looked upon as authorities on the subject--who don the mantle of setting the rules, or it is the language of the area in which the capitol or cultural center lies. As an example, I submit that American English--spoken by far more people than Oxford English (I believe this to be the generally accepted standard)--is considered my many to be the dialect, so to a great extent geography and time (among other things) have roles in this as well.

I personally consider Cantonese to be a separate language from Mandarin because of the enourmous differences in the tone model, the pronunciation of the words, and the phonetics (mind you, I am not an authority on such things). Clarify something for me: if one were not to have been taught Mandarin in school, would Mandarain and Cantonese be mutually intelligible?

Randy_Tam wrote:

...Putonghua was 'designed and standardized (by a committee of linguists... sadly enough), where the lexicon and pronunciations are fabricated according to the dialects spoken around the northern provinces, to be the common language of the entire Chinese population'....

Case in point, perhaps. The word 'fabricated' is actually used!? Wow.

Randy_Tam wrote:

As a language is used in daily discourse, deviations related to 1. the phonemic form 2. syntactic constructions 3. pragmatic uses 4. stylistic variations 5. logical interpretations and the like, make language change inevitable. I quote again the examples I came across earlier: 1. the use of 'er' being more flexible these days (as more non - L1 speakers of Putonghua now communicate in that language, whereas the use of 'er' is simply insane in their native language, Cantonese for example) 2. the more flexible use of the '5th tone' (probably brought about by intercourse between Mainlander Chinese and Taiwanese Chinese) 3. words borrowed from other Chinese 'dialects'. All these blur, if not make impossible, the precise definition of the shape of a language. It is for this reason that even though Putonghua was intended as a prescribed language for the entire population, speech variations nevertheless take place (Though asserted as 'wrongs', Chinese linguists have devoted much effort in addressing 'common errors' of a particular group of speaker, a prelude to 'language variations') and eventually prevail over such prescriptions.

Absolutely right! I can see that you are very passionate about your view! And maybe a little offended, as well.

All this begs the question: What is the role of prescriptivism?

Well, as Julielai pointed out, such prescriptivism creates a framework for learning. But if that is all it does, then the inevitable change will render the framework useless. Fortunately, it is not all it does.

Prescribing rules for syntax, usage, and grammar is often required to conduct business on a meaningful level; the world economy is based on the ability to communicate effectively and efficiently. Without rules (read: communication protocols), such communication would be virtually impossible and the economy of the world (as an aggregate) would very likely falter or fail.

As with anything, those in power make the rules and you likely will not hear street slang in the board room. Whether this is good or bad is a matter for debate, but rest assured that if street slang were to become the standard, something else would take its place as the variant considered contemptible or quaint among the new elite.

It is clear that languages change--constantly, inexorably, and in different simultaneous ways. There is no Language Tree, rather there is a Language Web (of sorts). The degree to which a language remains constant is in great part reliant on the liturature extant in that language. The more literature there is, the more stable the language, meaning that the language is more resistant to change. But again, liturature doesn't do this alone. What if no one reads? Education in reading such liturature stabilizes the language as well, but that means the prescription of rules.

All this circularity is simply meant to point out that--without sounding like a spineless egalitarian--both change and stability are required. Therefore, both prescription and innovation are required in order for a language (or dialect) to thrive. Linguistic genocide, as you put it, should be a crime against humanity because it restricts the degree to which people can communicate. Languages should never be deliberately extinguished, rather they should be more fully embraced within the context of the importing language. Where would English be without the Spanish word machismo? There's no English equivalent (it must be defined by a phrase rather than a word). What would you call the internet if you couldn't use new technical words? But then, how would you be able to make your case in this forum without rules of usage and grammar?

Re: American Accent Training!

Amboy — Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:56:10 GMT

Hi All,

I have been conducting Neutralized American Accent Training in Makati, Malate, Libis, and Quezon City for the last three months now. I have worked with Korean, Japanese, and Filipino executives, high school teachers, university students, and Filipino professionals. I utilize the book by Ann Cook, but I have developed my own module and literature, which I intend to have published here in the Philippines. I am a Fil-Am professional from Las Vegas, NV, and I attended elementary, high school, and college in the US. I was a university writing consultant for three years and won numerous awards in debate, forensics, public speaking, and dramatics. If anyone is interested in the training program, feel free to contact (email address removed, please add it to your profile) visit neofilipino.bravehost.com for more information...FYI, my module includes phonetics, blending, intonation, conversation, commonly mispronounced words, among many other things...

Chris

WEAKLY CONSTRAINED MODALS - "may" as expressing probability and possibility

Trentdougherty — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 03:18:47 GMT

Overview: outsiders seeks help of linguists
part one: the set up
part two: the questions

I am a graduate student in philosophy investigating what we call "epistemic possibility". Sentence express this modality when they assert that something is possible relative to some epistemic category such as belief, knowledge, or evidence. Standard examples would be such as the following.

(1) It might rain tomorrow.

(2) The package may contain a bomb.

(3) My answer could be wrong.

The standard philosophical account of epistemic possibility is formalized in a Kripke semantics. The basic idea behind one standard version is that a proposition is epistemically possible for me if it's negation is not entailed by anything that I know (technically this only covers contingent propositions; necessary propositions require a caveat). This has led to countless problems and misunderstandings.

II.

I think the most natural analysis of sentences one through three above is in terms of probability. I make probability the theoretical anchor and defined possibility in terms of it. Epistemic possibility is non-negligible probability. The threshold of negligibility will be sensitive to context. That is, it will vary depending upon the particulars of the situation.

I have been unable to find much on modals, but what I have found suggests that it is fairly well accepted in the linguistics community that the subjunctive often expresses probability judgments. So I have a few questions for you specialists out there.

1. Is my impression stated just above correct?

2. Do linguists sharply divide possibility in probability?

3. Could you please point me to some standard authoritative reference work which I could consult in this matter?

4. Are there any online resources which could provide me with a perspective of the state of the literature on modals and probability?

I would greatly appreciate any help anyone could offer in this matter. I'm afraid philosophers still aren't adequately in tune with empirical research in this matter. I'm seeking to correct that.

PS - I have a broken wrist, so I am dictating this with voice recognition software. I apologize in advance if I have missed any errors due to phonetic resemblance.

Teaching English to Second Language Users

Guest — Mon, 27 Jun 2005 19:45:02 GMT

I was wondering how useful it is to have school teaching experience to teach second language users the language. If one has been an English teacher in schools and has dealt with syllabi on literature and language - can it translate to the learning of phonetics and accent training to second language users? Can one teach others to 'communicate' in English by having been a teacher?

What is required to effectively bring an intermediate class of students to an advanced level in the language, and also to get them to speak better to an international audience?

Could you please prescribe syllabi, activities and important considerations to improve one's communication skills in English? Thanks in advance.