English language teachers should get to know to their students

English language teachers should get to know to their students

By Tim Drown

SEMARANG (JP): As an English teacher I have also been
attracted to Byron Black's column on English, "The Listening
Post." I have become disappointed, however, after reading the
column on some days.

One example is a recent issue that simply transcribed a
conversation about tire pressures between the two car mechanics
who are regularly featured on National Public Radio in the United
States. I enjoy listening to them when I am back in the U.S. but
it was not apparent to me why the conversation went off and on
over the past five years.

I think "The Listening Post" suffers from content and
language that is aimed at the wrong audience. A newspaper cannot
operate without an accurate idea of what kind of people are
reading it. Reporters must report to someone. The same is true
for English teachers.

I would like to know who Byron thinks is reading "The
Listening Post." What kind of readers does he think about when
he writes?

From the general content and level of English used, I would
assume that most of his readers are upper intermediate, advanced,
near native, or native speakers of English. "The Listening Post,"
however, is also a thinly veiled advertisement to encourage
people to learn more English by reading the Post, listening to
Radio Sonora, and taking English courses at American Language
Training. If I am not mistaken, I do not think that his readers
would therefore be the kind that would respond to the
advertisement. If they can read and understand his column, they
already know more than the average learner of English in
Indonesia.

I think the column would be better if the content was more
relevant to lower level English learners than he is currently
addressing. How many expats would read a similar type column in
Kompas, for example, if it existed? I've been here five years and
I still have difficulty reading an Indonesian newspaper. I assume
the same would be true for most Indonesians reading the Post. I
have had very little success in encouraging even my advanced
English students to read the Post on a regular basis. "The
Listening Post" could serve to attract lower level English
readers to read the Post more than they currently do. It could
function in a similar way that "The News in Special English"
functions to the Voice of America.

One way of doing this might be to review language usage in the
Post itself. In the Sept. 22 issue, for example, the lead article
was entitled, "BI to keep money policy prudent." Later on in the
same article, the writer used the alternative adjective
"prudential" to say "...the country's prudential monetary
system..." Why did the writer switch adjectives? The adjectives
"prudent" and "prudential" are not exactly interchangeable.
"Prudent" means `practical, exercising good judgment or common
sense.' "Prudential" on the other hand, can imply a misguided
notion of prudence. Whereas "prudent" has a positive meaning,
"prudential" has negative overtones. So it can be said: Someone
can make prudent preparations for an emergency; but His
prudential warnings stifled their sense of adventure (The Right
Word at the Right Time ).

Another suggestion that could be helpful to readers is for
Byron to feature typical Indonesian mistakes more often than
he already does. Many of these errors occur because of
transferring Indonesian thought patterns into English forms.
Often these direct translations from Indonesian into English
sound strange or amusing in English. These types of errors are
understandable. I often make the same kind of errors when
using Indonesian.

In sum, I would really like to know who Byron thinks is
reading his column and if he thinks they are the kind of people
who would be interested in taking English courses (at ALT or any
other good language school). Would he please justify his
column's content with concept of his audience?

I also think the use of boldface type column is odd. Usually
bold type is used to emphasize or attract attention. This it
does, but what does the bold type add that the bullet (*)
hasn't already contributed (or vice-versa)? I don't think
both are needed. One of them seems to me to be redundant. It
is also not obvious to me why some words are in bold letters
and others are not.

A more significant problem that finally prompted me to write
were his comments in the Sept. 30 issue. "The Listening Post"
tends to highlight the unusual, the odd, and the irregular
aspects of English too often. The column sometimes resembles a
"Ripley's Believe it or Not" for English. Although such items may
be interesting to more advanced English readers, I think too much
of this type of content could mislead lower level English readers
into thinking that English is uniquely strange, peculiar, and
random among the languages of the world.

I do not think it is very helpful to say as he did at the end
of Friday's column that, "...English is simply riddled with
uncertainties..." I hope this was meant to be an overstatement.

There are, without a doubt, many real and apparent
irregularities in English. I use the word "apparent" because some
"contradictions" and "inconsistencies" still need to be studied
and explained by linguists. Our current knowledge of the grammar
and usage is incomplete. An apparent exception may turn out to be
a key to understanding a more fundamental pattern that linguists
haven't understood yet. We do not have a complete understanding
of why we say everything we do. (Some of my former colleagues, I
am sure, would wholeheartedly agree -- especially as it applies
to me). The fact is, however, that in order to function as a
language and communicate meaning, English must be sufficiently
patterned to be predictable. Reading and listening skills depend
much on prediction. If English were really as uncertain as Byron
states it is, it would cease to function as a language.

For more on emphasizing the regularities of the English
language, I would like to suggest that Byron read a book by
Michael Lewis, entitled, The English Verb. (It is probably in the
library at the British Council). It does more than just explain
grammar. It also has much to say about the nature of language,
language learning, and language teaching.