Wow KL! Here is a classic case in point. I have focused on the content of my argument to support my position in a long-running debate. You, instead of recognising the essence of my position, picked out a there/their mistake.KL&fool wrote:If you're having a dig at me, I did it to make a point as I always feel a bit hurt when people (such as DC) slag off EFL teachers. I also do that to prats who try to pass themselves off as EFL teachers, such as some posters on this forum who can't write for proverbial toffee. The fact is that if people constantly make silly mistakes when posting, it is likely that they will do the same when writing on the white board. You have defended such mistakes before against me. That is your prerogative, just as it's mine to defend my position. If anything's sad, it's the constant stream of mistakes from people who claim to be teachers of English.violet wrote:1. I totally agree with Dengchao about the nitpicking re. grammar/typos/brain temporarily switched off that results in a rogue "there" instead of "their", or forgotten commas, or commas out of place, or even a rouge instead of a rogue. I never really understand the mentality of the people expecting 100% perfect writing on this web forum. Guess they have little else to make themselves feel top of the English writing game and little else to try to bring others down to a level that allows them to feel superior
I'm old-fashioned and expect people who call themselves English teachers to be able to write (and post) in good English. Sorry if that's not trendy enough in today's modern, hip, PC world, but that's the way (ah ha, ah ha) I like it.
I'm not going to start insulting and slagging people off, though, as we're all different.
It would be lovely to do a Dengchao and say something like: 'I don't think I'm superior; I AM superior. ' But I won't! What a pity some posters resort to personal insults. But, that's the nature of a discussion forum, I dare say.
Have a nice evening!
You then use this to draw some very long bows indeed.
Please go back and focus on my content rather than picking on a couple of grammar errors (that wouldn't affect the grade of a kid sitting his final exams for a IB Diploma to any degree of <2%, if at all); you may make a cognitive shift that will allow you to perceive writers' intent, for eg:
1. Poor Violet did not 'have a dig at you,' she concurred with me on a point of this debate. That she disagreed with you in so doing should certainly not be taken personally!
2. I've qualified myself on numerous occasions on this matter: I am not slagging off the EFL industry. Instead of using a microscope to find grammar mistakes, please count the times I have paid my respects to EFLers. I also apologised when I realised my vitriol (which was aimed at one individual's preposterous comments) may have caused offence.
3. I'm going to attempt an interpretation of what you meant by the whiteboard comment: because of the grammar errors I've made (go and count them if you want mate, Baccalaureate Lang A teachers would not), I might make frequent errors on the whiteboard, ergo, myself and all those who've made a grammar error on K440 are, in some degree, deficient in their job as an Efler or profession as a Teacher. Am I right?
Mate, I witness quite a few grammar errors you've made. I am looking beyond them. Your content is flawed in my opinion.
I've previously paid my respects to you and acknowledged your qualifications do indeed surpass mine. In fact, the lowliest Tefler who got High Achievement in Grade 12 English and then got a Tefl cert (even the really basic one that you can get online on a weekend), would actually have greater tertiary qualifications in English than I.
So the crux of my respects to you were: I don't think you're superior to me in English, you are superior... but your history does need a bit of attention.
My studies have always been in the Humanities. I have only had English classes in Australia where I had some G8-10 classes. While G 11-12 History and Legal Studies were open to me, G 11-12 English was firmly closed, quite rightly so. The teachers allowed access to those crucial final years were those with tertiary studies in English Lit. I would have dis-served senior students if I took such a class; this is something I would never do.
I know you are well qualified in Lit, but I wonder why you seem to be misunderstanding fundamental elements of argument and picking out silly grammar errors.
I too decry the decline of grammar in the English - speaking world. But there is a difference in an isolated grammar error (eg: there/their) and an ongoing misunderstanding (eg: belief that one must use an apostrophe to denote plurality - a personal pet hatred of mine as it appears so ubiquitously).
I second your sentiments KL, but I question your idea (if I read your intent correctly) that people should write with perfect adherence to English grammar on a site such as this. I know you have made some grammar errors yourself with the briefest of glances at your former post. I will not point them out as I don't believe they matter in this case.
I think your content suggests that you have failed to comprehend the heart of posts that both Violet and I made... like completely misunderstood.
Of more importance than strict adherence to elementary conventions, the communication of the true essence of content is of far greater importance; whether you be a teacher of language or a humanity.
I agree with Violet that Eflers must necessarily focus on grammar as ESLers need these building blocks to get to that level I speak of, ie: that level that we are using now. But the native proficiency of Violet's, yours and mine is clear.
KL, you know better than to be picking silly grammar errors (that form no pattern of repetition) in order to impugn me (if that were your intent as I perceive it to be) seemingly in retaliation to what you perceive as an attack I have made on you.
I know that your mastery of English is beyond refutation; I've said so before more than once. Why then are you resorting a silly base-level Tefler tactic of picking on grammar burps in response to a recurring and legitimate debate? I reckon you're better than that.