Am I the only one, or are there other teachers who have to correct their textbooks at school? Just wondering.
Every textbook has errors. You just can’t proofread errors out of a book. It’s like some mysterious spontaneous generation thing.
But Taiwanese English textbooks suffer both from spontaneous generation type errors and errors of Superior Grammatical Knowledge, where there is either no native speaking proofreader or the opinion of said native speaking proofreader is utterly ignored.
We used to get some amazingly bad textbooks and video scripts when I did voiceover work in Taiwan, and many times we had to record them verbatim. They’d been approved and “could not be changed”.
If the English is written in a textbook, or part of a test, you have to stand back and accept your shortcomings.
If the book or test wasn’t constructed by your boss or someone senior to you in your organisation, it was probably approved by him/her based on the fact that it was made or recommended by someone who went to NTU or another prestigious university.
Therefore you should not question its veracity.
In traditional Chinese culture, if it’s worthy enough to be put in the form of a Book, it must be the Truth.
T’was same in the west when there were few books and few who could read them. Remember the Bible?
To my eternal shame, I spent a week teaching children the following question/answer pattern:
“What do you do?”
“I build a snowman.”
“I make a christmas card.”
“I bake cookies.”
It was some time within the first 6 months of my Taiwan adventure. I explained the error to my co-teacher who shrugged non-commitally. I explained the error to my manager who said it couldn’t be changed because it was on the test. I explained the error to my boss who looked at me like I was way more trouble than I was worth.
Then I taught the sentence pattern, praised the children for getting it “right” and made my plans to escape Hess.
[quote=“NonTocareLeTete”]To my eternal shame, I spent a week teaching children the following question/answer pattern:
“What do you do?”
“I build a snowman.”
“I make a christmas card.”
“I bake cookies.”
It was some time within the first 6 months of my Taiwan adventure. I explained the error to my co-teacher who shrugged non-commitally. I explained the error to my manager who said it couldn’t be changed because it was on the test. I explained the error to my boss who looked at me like I was way more trouble than I was worth.
Then I taught the sentence pattern, praised the children for getting it “right” and made my plans to escape Hess.[/quote]
Imagine you walk out of your front door on the second day of Chinese New Year and it is snowing.
What do you do? I build a snowman.
Imagine your mother is angry at you for not cleaning your room and not helping with the dishes. It is her birthday and she doesn’t have a cake and she is sad. She loves cookies.
What do you do?
I bake cookies.
Let’s talk about winter vacation in countries where it snows.
John, what do you do?
I build a snowman.
Peter what do you do if it is snowing outside.
I stay inside.
What do you do?
I make a Christmas card or I bake cookies.
With context, something language teacher who love prescriptive grammar often ignore, those examples are not wrong.
What do you do?
I am a doctor or a teacher has a lot to do with pragmatism.
What did you do?
I made a Christmas card has everything to do with context.
A worthy effort, Teacher Lin, but you’re missing the forest for the trees.
Sure, sometimes that question is asked in that way, but the vast (vast vast) majority of the time, it’s “What would you do?” when you are using an “if” situation. When I’m imagining a situation that could happen, and asking about the response, I use “would.” (and I think most native speakers would agree if you asked them)
“What would you do if it were snowing outside?” “I would build a snowman.”
And, if I hear the question “What do you do?” 98% of the time, it’s to do with occupation.
Pair that with the fact that these kids are looking at pictures of children performing the actions as a prompt for answering, and “ing” should absolutely be used- as the pictures were supposed to suggest that the children were in the act of doing the action now.
“What are you doing?” “I am building a snowman.”
Pounding this sentence structure into the heads of those children under those circumstances was absolutely doing them a disservice. I don’t want to be a part of that.
I’m more aghast about the clear violation of child labor laws. The snowman building industry has a lot to answer for!
Sent from my fingers using the internet.
That’s the WORST. I’m so sorry for you. 
I’d just like to say, as a former textbook editor, if the pictures are not upside down, I count that as a victory.
I teach at a university in Australia and not only are the books full of errors but so too the tests.
It’s embarrassingly bad.
[quote=“Fox”]I teach at a university in Australia and not only are the books full of errors but so too the tests.
It’s embarrassingly bad.[/quote]
Tests are a ball ache to edit. Universities never send them out to be edited, they just give them to teachers to do because are very good Englush, rite? Cheapness and ‘anyone can edit’ attitudes. Chabuduo da West Country.
[quote=“NonTocareLeTete”]A worthy effort, Teacher Lin, but you’re missing the forest for the trees.
Sure, sometimes that question is asked in that way, but the vast (vast vast) majority of the time, it’s “What would you do?” when you are using an “if” situation. When I’m imagining a situation that could happen, and asking about the response, I use “would.” (and I think most native speakers would agree if you asked them)
“What would you do if it were snowing outside?” “I would build a snowman.”
And, if I hear the question “What do you do?” 98% of the time, it’s to do with occupation.
Pair that with the fact that these kids are looking at pictures of children performing the actions as a prompt for answering, and “ing” should absolutely be used- as the pictures were supposed to suggest that the children were in the act of doing the action now.
“What are you doing?” “I am building a snowman.”
Pounding this sentence structure into the heads of those children under those circumstances was absolutely doing them a disservice. I don’t want to be a part of that.[/quote]
I agree it’s an awkward construction, but the kids are just not yet ready for conditional and present progressive. It’s not in and of itself a wrong thing to say in English, even if we would never say it. If it gets kids practicing talking and increases their vocabulary to boot (knowing full well as I do that they will have to wrestle with the conditional anyway within two years), I don’t think it’s that terrible.
Now what did really get to me about Hess textbooks is “in back of” as a preposition. I have never met a native speaker who say: “The supermarket is in back of the post office.” I guess they figured there needs to be an equivalent for “in front of…”
[quote=“Hokwongwei”][quote=“NonTocareLeTete”]A worthy effort, Teacher Lin, but you’re missing the forest for the trees.
Sure, sometimes that question is asked in that way, but the vast (vast vast) majority of the time, it’s “What would you do?” when you are using an “if” situation. When I’m imagining a situation that could happen, and asking about the response, I use “would.” (and I think most native speakers would agree if you asked them)
“What would you do if it were snowing outside?” “I would build a snowman.”
And, if I hear the question “What do you do?” 98% of the time, it’s to do with occupation.
Pair that with the fact that these kids are looking at pictures of children performing the actions as a prompt for answering, and “ing” should absolutely be used- as the pictures were supposed to suggest that the children were in the act of doing the action now.
“What are you doing?” “I am building a snowman.”
Pounding this sentence structure into the heads of those children under those circumstances was absolutely doing them a disservice. I don’t want to be a part of that.[/quote]
I agree it’s an awkward construction, but the kids are just not yet ready for conditional and present progressive. It’s not in and of itself a wrong thing to say in English, even if we would never say it. If it gets kids practicing talking and increases their vocabulary to boot (knowing full well as I do that they will have to wrestle with the conditional anyway within two years), I don’t think it’s that terrible.
Now what did really get to me about Hess textbooks is “in back of” as a preposition. I have never met a native speaker who say: “The supermarket is in back of the post office.” I guess they figured there needs to be an equivalent for “in front of…”[/quote]
Ease of learning is important, but it causes a world of problems when students ‘learn’ present tense first. In terms of frequency, it’s not a commonly used tense, and it has very distinct usages, but language teachers teach that ‘this is how we talk about the present!!!’ which is nonsense. Reason 758 why language classes for kids are bad for language learning. Ditto ‘will’.
There are no errors in the textbook. There are no errors in the textbook. There are no errors in the textbook.
Repeat after me. “There are no errors in the textbook”.
“There is no error in book-uh.”
Teacher, give me all pass?
[quote=“Hokwongwei”]
I agree it’s an awkward construction, but the kids are just not yet ready for conditional and present progressive. [/quote]
Why? Surely their cognitive development has already passed the point where they can handle conditionals and continuing actions in the present. Of course, if this is how the present is handled, I can’t wait to see what blooper party they put forth for the conditional.
We managed to accumulate seven pages on “in back of” a couple of years back, beginning here: forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopi … 98&t=94317
Here’s one of my contributions:
[quote=“I”][quote]The variants, at the back of, from about 1400, and in back of, from the early 1900s, also can be used both literally and figuratively. . . .[/quote]–The American Heritage Dictionary of Idioms, Christine Ammer, ed.
[Please note that the above link no longer leads to the quotation above. I hope the following link will be a satisfactory substitute: http://books.google.com/books?id=l_LxuR1jMVgC&lpg=PA25&dq=%22in+back+of%22+intitle:heritage+intitle:idioms&pg=PA25#v=onepage&q=%22in%20back%20of%22%20intitle:heritage%20intitle:idioms&f=false ]
Please see also Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage: [quote]Both back of and in back of are standard in American English.[/quote]
[Please note again that the above link no longer leads to the quotation above. I hope the following link will be a satisfactory substitute: http://books.google.com.tw/books?id=nfyosJzLVvgC&q=%22in+back+of%22+intitle:usage+intitle:merriam&dq=%22in+back+of%22+intitle:usage+intitle:merriam&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Qu3LUqDOJMXXkAWlvYCACg&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAQ ]
The following stage directions are from Eugene O’Neill, The Iceman Cometh:
[quote]In back of this table are three empty chairs.
. . . gets to the chair in back of CAPTAIN LEWIS.
. . . moves away to take a chair in back of the left end of the table. . . .
ROCKY stands in back of them, a hand on each of their shoulders. . . .
. . . disgustedly putting the key on the shelf in back of the bar.
[/quote]
[quote]The Nobel Prize in Literature 1936 was awarded to Eugene O’Neill “for the power, honesty and deep-felt emotions of his dramatic works, which embody an original concept of tragedy”.[/quote] nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/lite … ates/1936/
[quote]Though Hurston claimed as an adult that she was born in Eatonville, Florida in 1901, she was actually born in Notasulga, Alabama in 1891, where her father grew up and her grandfather was the preacher of a Baptist church. Her family moved to Eatonville, the first all-Black town to be incorporated in the United States, when she was three. Her father later became mayor of the town, which Hurston would glorify in her stories as a place black Americans could live as they desired, independent of white society. Hurston spent the remainder of her childhood in Eatonville, and describes the experience of growing up in Eatonville in her 1928 essay “How It Feels to Be Colored Me”.[/quote]–Wikipedia, “Zora Neale Hurston”[/quote] forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopi … 1#p1243901
Thanks for the executive summary.
However, “in back of” still sounds very, very wrong to me. At the time, I told students that they can write it on tests, but don’t say it because it isn’t good English.