Are younger students even being taught English grammar in school?

[gsdx]

They could be applying the grammatical rules from whatever language they predominantly use/mother tongue to English, and we see this in their postings.

It's easy to tell those for whom English is a second language, and it's even easier to excuse the errors in it. I'm thinking more about English-speaking students who don't know when to use 'have' or when to use 'has'. They don't know whether or not they should follow a question or exclamation mark with a period in order to end their sentence. They don't know what an apostrophe is or when to use it. They don't know the difference between past or present tense, and they don't know how to make present tense into past tense. They don't know how to conjugate verbs. They don't even know what 'conjugate' means'.

These are simple, basic rules of language. Without them, communication becomes difficult if not impossible. For many of them, if they created a resumé, it wouldn't even get them a job in McDonald's. I understand that grammar is difficult for some people, but it baffles my mind to see someone as confused about when to use 'colour' or when to use 'color' as they are about when to use 'a' or 'an'. It's a frightening future if nobody can understand each other.

 

[oakpope]

to see someone as confused about when to use 'colour' or when to use 'color' as they are about when to use 'a' or 'an'. It's a frightening future if nobody can understand each other.

That interests me . I thought 'colour' was the British way and 'color' was the American way. Was I wrong ? (from French 'couleur')

 

[pat grimshaw]

^ No, you are correct.

 

[kindabikindagay]

They're being taught obviously but it isn't like they give a fuck.. it's a popular thing nowadays to be a dumb motherfucker so they're sticking to the trend by dumbing themselves more and more.

 

[gsdx]

That interests me . I thought 'colour' was the British way and 'color' was the American way. Was I wrong ? (from French 'couleur')

No, you are correct. I was commenting on the younger people who think that they are 2 entirely different words with 2 entirely different usages, sort of like has, have, and had being different tenses of the same verb. Many younger people don't know which one to use, and it's not uncommon to see them mix up tenses within a single sentence. I don't know if they talk that way, but the way they write seems to be a result of a lack of basic English grammar.

 

[bankside]

The best teacher I had photocopied out the full curriculum for the subject he was teaching for each of us and said "This is what we're supposed to cover. When I know that you know these things, you're done."

Students enjoyed knowing where we were going.

 

[rareboy]

^ I think this is brilliant strategy.

 

[Kulindahr]

It's easy to tell those for whom English is a second language, and it's even easier to excuse the errors in it. I'm thinking more about English-speaking students who don't know when to use 'have' or when to use 'has'. They don't know whether or not they should follow a question or exclamation mark with a period in order to end their sentence. They don't know what an apostrophe is or when to use it. They don't know the difference between past or present tense, and they don't know how to make present tense into past tense. They don't know how to conjugate verbs. They don't even know what 'conjugate' means'.

These are simple, basic rules of language. Without them, communication becomes difficult if not impossible. For many of them, if they created a resumé, it wouldn't even get them a job in McDonald's. I understand that grammar is difficult for some people, but it baffles my mind to see someone as confused about when to use 'colour' or when to use 'color' as they are about when to use 'a' or 'an'. It's a frightening future if nobody can understand each other.

Sadly, the local McDonald's manager isn't much more literate than a high school dropout.

 

[Kulindahr]

The best teacher I had photocopied out the full curriculum for the subject he was teaching for each of us and said "This is what we're supposed to cover. When I know that you know these things, you're done."

Students enjoyed knowing where we were going.

Interesting approach.

Today, in most schools in the U.S., the teacher would have to pay for the paper and printing out of her own pocket.

 

[80KGold]

Either they're not learning, or it's not being taught.

"Rarely is the question asked, 'Is our children learning!'"

However...

"Childrens do learn when standards are high and results are measured!"

Thus spake the graduate of Yale and Harvard.

 

[youfiad]

The fact that a superlative was incorrectly used in the title of this thread is amusing

 

[pat grimshaw]

^ I thought young was an adjective, younger was a Comparative and youngest a superlative adjective

 

[bankside]

Interesting approach.

Today, in most schools in the U.S., the teacher would have to pay for the paper and printing out of her own pocket.

Back in my day (ahem) the teacher did not have the option of emailing a PDF to his students. Yes, I also walked both ways up-hill in the snow. I still have scars on one hand from the time I was stubborn enough to walk through the snow with no gloves.

Anyway, as I was saying, that's the trouble with kids these days, they probably wouldn't even have the sense to wear a pair of gloves on a cold day.

 

[gsdx]

Yes, I also walked both ways up-hill in the snow.

I did, too, but it was 5 times as far as any distance you post here. (Never had frostbite, though.)

 

[frankfrank]

...also principle/principal. (I even saw "principle" in a prospectus of a mutual fund company!! When used as a noun, "principal" is always a tangible object; "principle" is intangible - and principle can be used only as a noun.)

Just for the halibut (sounds fishy to me...), I should start looking at public school websites, and see how many I have to look at until I see the head person (at a particular school building) listed as the PRINCIPLE, lol.

 

[Kulindahr]

The fact that a superlative was incorrectly used in the title of this thread is amusing

There's no superlative, though there is a comparative, and it is in fact used correctly: when differentiating among members of a set, the comparative may be used to specify a portion of that set without specific reference to the rest of the group; that is implied.

So just as one can say that "K-10 is one of the higher mountains", thus including it in a subgroup of "mountains", one can speak of "younger students", indicating the lower portion of the category "student" in terms of age.

- - - Updated - - -

Anyway, as I was saying, that's the trouble with kids these days, they probably wouldn't even have the sense to wear a pair of gloves on a cold day.

Sure they would. But they'd be quite fashionable, and they'd tweet about it and put pictures on Facebook.

 

[Kulindahr]

Yes, I also walked both ways up-hill in the snow.

I never walked to school -- biked, ran, yes, but never walked.

Though I did miss the bus once because it was raining so hard it was invisible fifteen feet away.


BTW, the only reason for walking uphill in the snow is to slide back down.

 

[chrisrobin]

.
Every time I meet someone from overseas, I compliment him on his English. Reason? He was taught English by competent school systems.

Teacher training has a low priority in the U.S.

 

[maxpowr9]

I remember sitting in the DMV to renew my license and a high school English teacher was grading papers on Romeo & Juliet. I butted into her grading and just started talking about the play. I eventually released the pearl that Shakespeare didn't base the play off some Italian couple as typically indicated but rather off the Greek tragedy Pyramus and Thisbe in Ovid's Metamorphoses. She looked at me like I was some crazy person and I basically concluded that she probably got her degree from some "paper mill".

I never even liked English/Literature in school and I know a lot more than the teachers. I may bitch about how I endured 12 years of Catholic education but I at least felt I learned something. I feel bad for the public school children, especially in poor districts.

One grammar solecism I am still shocked to this very day that people think the plural of "person" is "people". It's "persons". People should be a collective singular noun with "peoples" as its plural form but tautology changed that overtime. Another similar example is "data". Data is also a plural noun [in Latin] and the singular form is "datum". The pleonasm is that people use the term "data point" instead of datum. "Data set" is another pleonasm as it is redundant.

I thank my Brit Lit teacher senior year for introducing me to the pleonasms.

 

[bankside]

One grammar solecism I am still shocked to this very day that people think the plural of "person" is "people". It's "persons". People should be a collective singular noun with "peoples" as its plural form but tautology changed that overtime.

The plural of "person" being "people" passed into standard usage before my time, thus it is congenial and constant and a barometer of correct English, and to revert to "persons" and "peoples" is poncing nonsense that grates on the ears. Hideous affectations.