Received Pronunciation

Topics which don't quite fit into any other category

Re: Received Pronunciation

Postby Keith » 26 Oct 2013, 01:16

Caleb,

Wow, Krashen rang the vaguest of vague bells in my mind, almost as if it were a bell ringing from beyond the Great Divide. I remember trying to get to grips with teaching theory while I was doing my teacher training twenty years ago. I was so nervous that nothing would go into my head. It was like the time in the 1980s I tried to teach my granny how to use a video recorder. I could see from her face that the internal machinery in her head had ground to a halt. And in Lolita, Humbert describes his love of chess as seeing all the pieces beautiful laid out at the bottom of a limpid pool like so much coral. His playing partner on the other hand sees only murk and gloom and consequently always loses. That's how things were for me with teaching theory. I can just about remember quite liking the sound of Cognitive Theory (?) but I no longer know what it is or why I liked it.

Once again I agree with you on pretty much everything you wrote. I have quite a lot of experience of Germans, not in the classroom but in normal life, and what you say of them is true. It's no coincidence that so many great philosophers and engineers were German. I sometimes wonder where they have all gone. Doesn't Germany produce them any more? Is the Anglophone world very protective of its own? Are translators rubbish nowadays? Either way, Germans seem to be driven, clever, have bags of confidence and have little time for the niceties of classroom etiquette like turn-taking.

On the other hand, most of my Japanese students appear to believe that English should enter them by some form of osmosis and that simply by physically being in the classroom is enough to make them improve. Yet they know they are passive and they know they are rubbish at English compared to other nations and they occasionally try to be less so: they are not complaisant in their passivity. They too sense that there is something rotten in the state of Japan.

I also used to be a very shy child (I told my mother that this was reason enough for me to be excused from ever attending school) but living life has made me less so. This movement from shy to outgoing is always portrayed as positive, but I quite like shy people. When I watch BBC Question Time I long to see a shy person in amongst all those self-confident, belligerent people.

Other teachers find Japanese people's passivity infuriating and want to shake them by the shoulders, but somehow I don't - though I used to. In my non-teaching life I am a bit of a Victor Meldrew figure in my intolerance and irascibility so I really don't understand where this uncharacteristic acceptance of mine is coming from. I think perhaps it has to do with seeing the Japanese (and Germans) as packages and realising that you can't have the good without the bad.

By the way, I learned a couple of years ago that Japanese mothers spend the first 4 years of their child's life sleeping with them. This is probably only possible because of the much talked about weak sex drive of the Japanese. I'm not sure most western men (or women) would put up with not sharing the marital bed for so long. After all, why are you married? Just for the benefit of the kids?

I think many Japanese people would answer the above question in the affirmative. It is indeed for the children that they are, and stay, married. And they manage to do this without spoiling the children. The relationship that Japanese children have to their mothers is visibly very close. The children are calm and happy if their mum is around but when she moves out of sight they panic. Mothers are always quietly teaching children and it is clear who is the adult and who is the child. With some western parents it's sometimes difficult to see. The children are morose, taciturn and cynical while their parents are as bubbly as children's TV presenters and try to entertain their children. In Japan things are different. The children ask all the questions and the mothers gently answer them. The children sometimes get over-excited and then their mothers bend down to their level so that their faces are almost touching and they whisper something, either an explanation that they are not at home now but in a public place, or some kind of threat, I can't tell. Either way it works. The child suddenly becomes quiet, takes his mother's hand and walks docilely round the supermarket with her. It is really lovely to watch and there is none of the horribly affected way some westerners have adopted while talking to their children (they seem afraid of them and perhaps don't even like them). Nor is there the pathetic, 'Now don't do that, Josh' repeated over and over again to absolutely no effect. Neither is there any shouting. There is no need. However I did recently see a Japanese mother who was clearly at the end of her tether roughly carry her very young child out to the car in the driveway, strap it into the child seat, shut the door and disappear back into the house with the child still bawling and whining. Whether this constitutes good parenting I have no idea. However, I prefer it to simply giving in to the child. I also like the way that Japanese people have a word for parents who think their children are angels and are always ready to blame teachers and other children for the waywardness of their own children. They call them 'monster parents'. In Britain they are simply called 'parents'.

The reverse side of Japanese children's reliance on their mothers is that they are often not very independent and get homesick when they leave home. At first I found this a bit pathetic. 20-years-old and still home sick? But now I find it unsurprising. If you are really attached to people and places then you will miss them when you go away and you will want to be with them. If you don't, you won't. I have never felt homesick, not even when I went away as a young boy and looking back I don't think this was necessarily just a sign of inner strength. I think it was more a kind of indifference to people and places and an uncaring lack of attachment. Nowadays I would be more than happy to give up some independence of mind in exchange for the feeling of actually missing absent family and friends.
Keith
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 21 Sep 2013, 12:23

Re: Received Pronunciation

Postby Yessica » 26 Oct 2013, 07:13

Caleb wrote:I suspect that Germans are probably good at learning languages (English) for a whole lot of other reasons too. Firstly, English and German are related. All of those cognates make a massive difference. Secondly, it seems that they are perfectionists and really want to master things. They really engage with what they do, and being engaged is a massive part of learning. They seem to genuinely want to understand things, from what I can tell (though I have had no direct experience with them). My experiences with Taiwanese, at least, suggest that they want to pass a test. They often get by through sheer force of memorisation. I have heard plenty of similar things about other East Asians. Thirdly, Germans seem to have a very analytic approach to things, which is probably quite necessary to becoming a very advanced language student. At lower levels, I'd say that it's probably somewhat of a hindrance (a la Krashen), but at higher levels, it's absolutely fundamental. The trouble with the famous English tests is that the participants are self-selecting. I'd be interested to see how average school students (under compulsory requirements) did around the world.


English is very much like German so that it is easy for us to learn but I think the main reason for many Germans being fluent in English is that we learn by listening to our teachers talk English. We learn by reading English texts.

We do not learn that much by grammar lessons (I hardly remember any) or vocabulary books. I think what drives many Germans is that they want to know something about the world and that this is not possible without reading what other people have written in their language.

Re turn-taking: The German teaching style is a little different. German students basically do not discuss as much in class as students from other nations do. The problem of turn-taking does not arise that much and students might not be used to it.
If depends on the school. If I had started a discussion with my fellow students in class without the teachers permission I would have gotten reprimed... no matter how great the turn-taking.

Also German style of politeness is different from that practiced in other cultures. In Germany it is not seen as polite when you softly mumble to yourself.
It is seen as polite if you are saucy, snappy, zippy... however one might call it and shout answers back at your teacher or at another person asking a question... especially if you are male. In other nations it might be polite when you spend some time refelcting before you answer a question. Many of our teachers were like "Make it snappy. Did you fall asleep? Everybody is waiting for your answer. Okay, you did not answer. Melanie, answer the question for her".
Are Germans more driven or confident than other people? I do not know but what I do know is that in Germany it is seen as polite when you appear to be snappy and always ready for the job - "always ready"* of course also was the motto of the young pioneers which have shaped older generation and indirectly shaped the younger.

I hope that this was not to long and wordsy. I sometimes feel the need to explain my culture to others as it is difficult to understand without having grown up in it.

* this of course had a political component
Yessica
 
Posts: 426
Joined: 22 Mar 2013, 17:11

Re: Received Pronunciation

Postby Caleb » 27 Oct 2013, 03:40

Keith: Nice post.

Keith wrote:On the other hand, most of my Japanese students appear to believe that English should enter them by some form of osmosis and that simply by physically being in the classroom is enough to make them improve. Yet they know they are passive and they know they are rubbish at English compared to other nations and they occasionally try to be less so: they are not complaisant in their passivity. They too sense that there is something rotten in the state of Japan.


One does not need to speak to learn a language, but one does need to listen. Listening is actually an active skill. It's the first thing I have to teach almost all of my students. They don't learn it from their other teachers, in the main.

I think perhaps it has to do with seeing the Japanese (and Germans) as packages and realising that you can't have the good without the bad.


Certainly. There are things that drive me up the wall about the place where I live. Yet there are also many things I appreciate greatly. It's a package deal.

By the way, I learned a couple of years ago that Japanese mothers spend the first 4 years of their child's life sleeping with them. This is probably only possible because of the much talked about weak sex drive of the Japanese. I'm not sure most western men (or women) would put up with not sharing the marital bed for so long. After all, why are you married? Just for the benefit of the kids?


I remember a friend of mine telling me about this many years ago and thinking it was quite strange. He told me it in reference to his older brother, who had married a Japanese woman. His older brother was quite a blokey Australian guy and he didn't think he'd be able to handle the whole situation. The guy who told me later ended up marrying a Japanese woman also, though he was much more culturally attuned to the Japanese (and his wife was a lot more westernised). I wonder if their kids slept with them.

I think many Japanese people would answer the above question in the affirmative. It is indeed for the children that they are, and stay, married.


The idea that marriage is for anything other than very personal reasons is anathema to many Westerners now.

And they manage to do this without spoiling the children. The relationship that Japanese children have to their mothers is visibly very close. The children are calm and happy if their mum is around but when she moves out of sight they panic. Mothers are always quietly teaching children and it is clear who is the adult and who is the child. With some western parents it's sometimes difficult to see. The children are morose, taciturn and cynical while their parents are as bubbly as children's TV presenters and try to entertain their children. In Japan things are different. The children ask all the questions and the mothers gently answer them. The children sometimes get over-excited and then their mothers bend down to their level so that their faces are almost touching and they whisper something, either an explanation that they are not at home now but in a public place, or some kind of threat, I can't tell. Either way it works. The child suddenly becomes quiet, takes his mother's hand and walks docilely round the supermarket with her. It is really lovely to watch and there is none of the horribly affected way some westerners have adopted while talking to their children (they seem afraid of them and perhaps don't even like them). Nor is there the pathetic, 'Now don't do that, Josh' repeated over and over again to absolutely no effect. Neither is there any shouting. There is no need. However I did recently see a Japanese mother who was clearly at the end of her tether roughly carry her very young child out to the car in the driveway, strap it into the child seat, shut the door and disappear back into the house with the child still bawling and whining. Whether this constitutes good parenting I have no idea. However, I prefer it to simply giving in to the child. I also like the way that Japanese people have a word for parents who think their children are angels and are always ready to blame teachers and other children for the waywardness of their own children. They call them 'monster parents'. In Britain they are simply called 'parents'.


Interesting observations and reflections.

The reverse side of Japanese children's reliance on their mothers is that they are often not very independent and get homesick when they leave home. At first I found this a bit pathetic. 20-years-old and still home sick? But now I find it unsurprising. If you are really attached to people and places then you will miss them when you go away and you will want to be with them. If you don't, you won't. I have never felt homesick, not even when I went away as a young boy and looking back I don't think this was necessarily just a sign of inner strength. I think it was more a kind of indifference to people and places and an uncaring lack of attachment. Nowadays I would be more than happy to give up some independence of mind in exchange for the feeling of actually missing absent family and friends.


My wife and her family are quite close and actually do a lot of stuff together, though they're not even as close as many families here. I still laugh when I see entire families dressed in matching clothes. They miss each other greatly when they don't see each other (and we live on the other side of the country). They're also a lot more tolerant of each other, though I think that also gives some people (such as my wife's eldest sister who is serially late and disorganised to the point of ridiculousness and whose kids are unholy little terrors) licence to do whatever they like. I think that sometimes, people put up with a little too much here. I personally don't know how they do it. Whenever I go back to Australia to visit my family, we all get on each other's nerves within a few days.
Caleb
 
Posts: 865
Joined: 20 Oct 2011, 04:44

Re: Received Pronunciation

Postby Keith » 27 Oct 2013, 13:14

Hi Caleb,

One does not need to speak to learn a language, but one does need to listen. Listening is actually an active skill. It's the first thing I have to teach almost all of my students. They don't learn it from their other teachers, in the main.


I read a while back that listening is exhausting and after thinking for a while I agreed with this. I had lazily assumed that it was talking that tired people out but when I thought of myself sitting in lectures, stifling yawns, I realised that speaking is actually quite a relaxing activity while listening isn't. I'm sure you're right that listening, when done well, is an active skill but can you really teach such a thing? People who are interested in stuff are good listeners, so it seems to me that what you are trying to teach them is to be interested. Can that be done?

In one of my previous schools we had lessons called 'Learning to learn' in which we taught students how to listen and read properly. I just couldn't make them work, probably because I remained unconvinced by the whole idea. The students were so busy concentrating on listening in the correct way that they forgot all about the content of the listening!

My students spend most of their day listening to lectures and since my conversation classes are optional extras I make sure that the students are talking most of the time. This way they don't fall asleep. Apart from that, talking is especially useful for Japanese students who are naturally quiet and are used to just sitting and listening (or pretending to listen). The idea that brains are like sponges still reigns here and while I see the need to get information into their heads somehow, listening to 90 minute lectures from a teacher who is merely reading from his papers strikes me as being a particularly boring and ineffectual way of doing it.

I think I understand what you mean about talking not being necessary for learning a language and if we were robots we could just absorb the info that flows in through our ears. However, from a human point of view, surely it is only the desire to actually say something that makes you want to listen in the first place. Conversations flow easily, like a game of tennis, but listening just makes my students eyes glaze over.

By the way, where do you live? What nationality is your wife?
Keith
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 21 Sep 2013, 12:23

Re: Received Pronunciation

Postby Caleb » 02 Nov 2013, 08:41

Keith: Your experiences might be very different from mine, so take what I have written below with a grain of salt. It's a point I came to after several years of finding that other things neither made sense nor worked.

Keith wrote:I read a while back that listening is exhausting and after thinking for a while I agreed with this. I had lazily assumed that it was talking that tired people out but when I thought of myself sitting in lectures, stifling yawns, I realised that speaking is actually quite a relaxing activity while listening isn't. I'm sure you're right that listening, when done well, is an active skill but can you really teach such a thing? People who are interested in stuff are good listeners, so it seems to me that what you are trying to teach them is to be interested. Can that be done?


I am perhaps talking about something slightly different to what you think, which you may or may not have encountered. The first problem my students have with listening is that they've done drill and kill to death. Normally, it goes like this:

Teacher: Dog.
Class: Dog.
Teacher: Dog.
Class: Dog.

Do the kids even know what they're saying? Are they even saying it correctly? The problem that follows from that is that the kids want to parrot me, half the time before I have even finished saying what I'm saying, because that's how they've been conditioned by their other teachers.

The second problem that somewhat follows on from that is that (those) kids (who actually speak) anticipate any question I am going to ask. So, imagine there are three animals: a black cat, a brown dog and a white rabbit.

Q1: What colour is the cat?
A kid answers "black".
Q2: Which animal is white?
A kid answers "brown".

The kids just throw out random answers all over the place, often before I've even finished asking the question. An analogy might be that you're in a room with ten doors. There's a noise behind one door. You want to find that noise. You could run noisily about the room, stomping and opening and slamming doors shut. Or, you could just stop and listen, and then go straight to the door with the noise.

The real life example of that is that every kid in this country learns:
Q: How are you?
A: I'm fine thanks, and you?

A real person comes up to a kid here and asks the kid how old he is. The kid answers, "I'm fine thanks, and you?" Or, the kid asks the other person and he replies, "I'm a bit tired." The kid looks at him blankly, because there is only one "correct" answer to that question.

I have met so-called English teachers here or so-called advanced students who still approach English as they would calculating the area of a rectangle. They can score 100% on a test dealing with all sorts of obscure stuff like the passive voice or the past perfect continuous tense, but so what?

So, I have to de-condition all of that in them before anything else can take place.

In one of my previous schools we had lessons called 'Learning to learn' in which we taught students how to listen and read properly. I just couldn't make them work, probably because I remained unconvinced by the whole idea. The students were so busy concentrating on listening in the correct way that they forgot all about the content of the listening!


Again, that's part of the same English as mathematics approach a lot of my students have.

My students spend most of their day listening to lectures and since my conversation classes are optional extras I make sure that the students are talking most of the time. This way they don't fall asleep. Apart from that, talking is especially useful for Japanese students who are naturally quiet and are used to just sitting and listening (or pretending to listen). The idea that brains are like sponges still reigns here and while I see the need to get information into their heads somehow, listening to 90 minute lectures from a teacher who is merely reading from his papers strikes me as being a particularly boring and ineffectual way of doing it.

I think I understand what you mean about talking not being necessary for learning a language and if we were robots we could just absorb the info that flows in through our ears. However, from a human point of view, surely it is only the desire to actually say something that makes you want to listen in the first place. Conversations flow easily, like a game of tennis, but listening just makes my students eyes glaze over.


I agree that a guy out the front rambling on is boring. However, getting them speaking for its own sake becomes busy work. There are several problems with just getting people to speak for the sake of it.

The first is that they may not even understand what they're saying, even if they say it. That's what the whole drill and kill thing above is all about. The second is that they may either say what they think you want them to say or the only correct answer that they know, even if it's not really what they want to say. If I ask any kid in my first year classes what his favourite subject is, he will say P.E. because it's the easiest thing he knows how to say. If I ask the kids in Chinese, then I get a range of answers. After a while of going back and forth between Chinese to English. a kid will tell me (in English) that his favourite subject is music. I don't force the English out of him though. That's like putting a gun to someone's head and saying, "Speak Swahili!" or my father's theory that everyone in the world is called Boris based upon field testing it by going up to random people and calling them Boris and then them responding with "hello".

There are a couple of other issues also with speaking for the sake of speaking. The first is that the students may just reinforce their own or each other's errors. The second is that the teacher may just reinforce the students' errors in an effort to reward them for speaking and to encourage future speech. When I first came here, part of my job was teaching kindergarten students. I also taught some other students who had previously been through such a kindergarten. They could get their points across, but their English grammar was garbled beyond belief. The trouble was that those speech patterns had fossilised really badly and it was pretty difficult to change their speech. There was a certain amount of L1 interference, but the two main reasons, in my opinion, were that they had been rewarded for saying anything in the past, and also that sometimes, native teachers here dumb down their own speech to make it easier to understand.

After a few years of noticing these kinds of issues (and more), I became convinced that the way English is taught here is extremely flawed. I then encountered Krashen. I would recommend that you read about the input hypothesis if you are interested and also look at his website. There is somewhat of a cult of personality around him, and he's also been involved in politically charged topics such as bilingual education in America, but I think that a lot of what he says makes sense, both theoretically and also based upon my experiences.

These days, I largely do TPR or TPRS with my students. They are active in that they participate in the process of what goes on (even if in their first language at times), though it's also fine if they just listen (there's a concept called the silent period). For the younger kids, especially, they can communicate through performing an action or drawing a picture. For more advanced students, I do things that are more "academic".

Another thing that is interesting, albeit a hardcore interpretation of Krashen's ideas, is Automatic Language Growth, which is practised in one school in Thailand. They actively discourage their students from trying to speak Thai for something like the first 800 hours. It's entirely input based. I'd be interested to know what their retention rates are like (then again, the retention rates for normal language schools are pretty atrocious), but those who come out the other end of it apparently sound like native speakers. You can see their videos on Youtube, both practical demonstrations and the theory behind it.

Of course, TPRS is not a panacea with every student because there are some kids who are truly turned off for a whole lot of factors before they even enter the classroom. Proponents of TPRS tend to oversell it a lot of the time, but I'm less zealous about its effects. Never the less, I have seen reasonable results so far (I test kids at the beginning of the semester and the end of the semester). A lot of kids eventually come out of their shells. They do want to speak, but they just need time and space to do so (the silent period) and they need to be able to understand (without stopping to think) before they can speak. Even those that still don't want to speak a lot can understand just as much as the others. Those kids are probably the kids who don't voluntarily speak much in their Chinese, history or science classes either, so it might not be reasonable to expect them to suddenly become complete extroverts in English (though I do expect them to have a pulse and occasionally blink).

The other interesting effect of TPRS is that I have seen my own Chinese go through the roof. Prior to teaching TPRS, I studied Chinese from a book, so I could read a fair number of characters, but my listening and speaking lagged way behind. Various people I know, especially my wife, would always tell me that I should try to speak Chinese. I'd always tell them that it doesn't work like that. That's an exercise in frustration for everyone involved. The other guy wants to have a conversation, not give you a language lesson on a brown dog running in the park, with you consulting a dictionary every second word. It also requires that the learner be extremely gregarious and willing to look like a buffoon for a long time.

Instead, I just spent a couple of years reverse engineering my English curriculum with my students by checking if they understood what I'd said by asking them to translate what I'd just said into Chinese and listening really carefully again and again and again. A few months ago, I was alone with my in-laws and I had several in depth conversations with them. I know my Chinese wasn't perfect, and I didn't understand 100% of what they said, but everyone later asked my wife, "Where'd this guy learn to speak Chinese?" I don't think I'm that good really (maybe low intermediate), but the point is that I got there only by listening, not speaking at every opportunity as is usually advocated, and then speaking when I had something to say and felt comfortable saying it.

By the way, where do you live? What nationality is your wife?


I live in Taiwan. My wife is Taiwanese.
Caleb
 
Posts: 865
Joined: 20 Oct 2011, 04:44

Re: Received Pronunciation

Postby Keith » 03 Nov 2013, 09:12

Hi Caleb,

Thanks for the long and interesting reply. Re drilling, I rarely do it because I only teach university age students nowadays and the kind of sentences they learn are so long that drilling isn't really feasible. However, I am a bit of a fan of drilling. My guess is that babies learn to talk this way and just copy what their mothers say without any real idea of what the words refer to in the world. I have absolutely no evidence that this approach works but I have learned two other languages and I liked it when the teacher made me repeat something over and over again. Of course it's better if I understood what I was saying.

I can see how children anticipating wrongly what the next question is going to be could be annoying. Perhaps giving them more time to let the question sink in and then form a correct reply would be best. Obviously they seem to be answering automatically when they should be engaging their non-automatic brain, but the former is simpler and takes less mental energy. So I agree with you on this.

I think I may have been influenced by one of the first schools I worked in. From some classes you walked past you would hear the sound of lots of choral chanting and repetition while others were as quiet as graveyard. As one of my bosses opined, it's like going to a music school and not hearing any music being played. I have experimented so little with other styles of teaching to see which ones work and which ones don't that I really couldn't say which I find best. However, getting students to talk without much regard to the quality of what they produce seems silly to me. So again, I think we agree.

The example you give of a student hearing a slightly different answer to the one he has learnt in class and being completely baffled put me in mind of a scene in 'Brave New World' where children were taught school subjects during their sleep (I think they wore some kind of headphones). They ended up being able to answer lots of questions provided the question was asked in precisely the same way as in the Q and A in their sleep. If not, they were completely stumped. I find this just about plausible but am not convinced it's a big problem in the real world. You have to be pretty stupid not to be able to make a leap of imagination that takes you to the intended meaning. After all, communication is a very approximate business. People are not voice recognition machines that have absolutely no idea what you are saying unless your sentence matches precisely the model in its data bank. And if someone really is that unimaginative then my guess is that there isn't a teaching method on earth that will help them.

I try not to get students speaking 'for its own sake'. The one method that made a difference to my teaching was the discovery of Task Based Learning. This felt right to me because I have always loved playing sports but disliked training and going to the gym, no matter how someone tried to convince me of the benefits. Gyms always feel like work while play feels like, well, play.

So if I can make a game of something then that is great. Simply telling the students that they are doing the following exercise because it will improve their English may be enough to motive the already keen and those who are inspired by the long term goal of becoming a great English speaker. Yet for most students the idea of talking to their partner 'just for the sake of their English' isn't enough. Guessing games are my favourite activities since I myself love quizzes and I have always weirdly assumed that everyone is like me. At the start of each lesson I hand out lists of nouns to the students and they have to describe every one to their partners ASAP. Their partners have to guess the words. It sounds dull but the students never tire of this. Somehow describing something well enough for their partner to guess, and listening intently enough to be able to guess correctly in return is an exercise enjoyable enough in itself. Add to this the race aspect of trying to be quicker than the other pairs and it doesn't feel like they are practising English 'for the sake of it'. I think they would even be happy to do it in their own language.

Re TPR my guess is that it is more suited to children than to the nominal adults I teach (Japanese university students never think of, or refer to, themselves as adults). I can confirm your experience of learning lots of Chinese simply by listening to the Chinese spoken in your classroom. The same thing happened to my Spanish and to a far lesser extent Japanese. Through listening in class I now know obscure words in Japanese like 'noun' 'meteorite', 'duvet' and 'cactus' while still being only barely able to say, 'I don't understand' and 'Good morning'. So I agree that listening is useful. It's just that my Japanese students already do so much listening during their day that I am loathe to make them listen even more to my beautiful voice banging on and on.

I agree with you about being sceptical when your wife told you to try to speak more Chinese. My Spanish friends did the same. It used to take me so long to get a correct sentence out that they used to say, 'Keith, just speak! It doesn't matter if it's 100% correct'. So I would just speak and my Spanish friends would then realise why I had never 'just spoken' before. My Spanish was all over the place and they could hardly understand me. Unless I could take the time to arrange a sentence in my head first it just didn't work. Naturally with time I speeded up and I realised that my friends had been trying to make me run before I could walk.

I won't go on because this is supposed to be a thread about RP and it could be that we would totally agree on how to teach if we both found ourselves in the same teaching situations - which we don't!
Keith
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 21 Sep 2013, 12:23

Re: Received Pronunciation

Postby Mike » 03 Nov 2013, 09:39

I don't mind the thread digression, it's been an interesting read!
Mike
 
Posts: 402
Joined: 01 Aug 2011, 11:08
Location: Australia

Re: Received Pronunciation

Postby Keith » 03 Nov 2013, 10:16

Thanks, Mike. Nice of you to say so.
Keith
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 21 Sep 2013, 12:23

Previous

Return to Other Topics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests

User Menu

Login Form

This site costs £100 per year to run and makes no money.

If you would like to make a small contribution to help pay for the web hosting, you can do so here.

Who is online

In total there are 5 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 4 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 175 on 12 Jan 2015, 18:23

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests
Copyright © Western Defence. All Rights Reserved.