Legend has it that none other than George Bernard Shaw, prestigious playwright and überfamous wit, first suggested the notion that, if one follows certain spelling rules, the nonexistent term ghoti might be pronounced just like fish. The reasons for such an outlandish claim are spelled out in this stimulating 2015 article. Whatever the merits of that specific losing battle may be, the truth is that the English spelling system is objectively impractical. Not as impractical as Arabic or (worse still) Chinese, but clearly more so than Italian or Esperanto. That said, when it comes to teaching ESL, I don't particularly care about orthographic issues, mainly because spelling is not my students' number one problem. Today I would like to make something abundantly clear. Orthography should only affect your pronunciation if you decide to be an English reader. I believe that this is not your case. You are, primarily, a speaker of English. Speaker. You want to speak better, don't you? Speaking comes first, right? So let me repeat my old mantra: orthography and pronunciation run in very different lanes. If you should be curious about my old effort to convert students to the pronunciation cause, you can check out some of the podcasts I edited some time ago. You may have some fun and, while you're at it, find out what I used to look like ten years ago.
In my classes I have often mentioned how challenging it can be for students to break down the (B2) barrier that prevents them from keeping opinions and emotions out of their conversations. It is undeniable that expressing a personal view is an essential part of many verbal exchanges. It is also true that some debates call for a radically different approach. When things get technical, personal opinions may become quite irrelevant. Think about the description of the protocols designed to handle an outbreak of novel coronavirus disease. How necessary is it to "get personal"?
Nevertheless, at the intermediate level, there is a common tendency to use personal subjects (when people celebrate) instead of a less personal phrase (e.g. long-standing traditions). Granted. In a conversation about national celebrations "people" will eventually come up, but a versatile speaker should be able to dispense with constant references to... "people". The first sentence of this paragraph may actually be an example of the detachment I'm refering to. Notice that I wrote "there is a common tendency to use...". I could have chosen something like "students tend to use...", but I didn't. Do you see the difference? Enough said.
In the video below I discuss some simple tricks that might help you overcome that particular B2 obstacle.
N.B. The deadline for the essay writing assignment is March 4.
C1.1 students. You can still send me your essay explaining why some historic figure deserves global recognition.
C1.2 Castro: a review of a book or film.
C1.2 Laredo: the essay about a day in the life of an ASL interpreter (based on those three different sources we worked on in class).
You cut it out, you excise it, you extirpate it, right? Indeed, you can ask a surgeon to do all those things but, statistically, most native speakers will not hesitate to use a different verb: remove. They will have the growth surgically removed. Yes, remove-tumor is a natural lexical connection. At this point in your learning process you should be aware of the differences between the abovementioned verbs. Each and every one of them elicits a distinct reaction. Cut out feels informal, excise is quite technical, extirpate sounds even more formal (if only because it is longer). Now, in Spanish we would doubtlessly go with extirpar. Are we better educated? No. That's just a case in which we, speakers of a romance language, have agreed to use a latinate term. Big surprise. My point is... we may want to think twice before we do some extrapolating and decide to pronounce that word in English. Our usage is different even if the words share the same obvious origin. Similarly, we Spaniards prefer rinoplastia when most English speakers will choose nose job. Remember? In English rhinoplasty is a medical term with limited street cred.
Another example: from the beginning is a straightforward simple expression, isn't it? Now check out these alternatives:
from the get-go
right off the bat
right out the gate
Ideally, you should feel the punchy quality of right off the bat as opposed to the blandness of from the start. In a perfect world your reaction to we got off to a bad start would be different to the one you get after hearing we didn't start well. Think about the difference between these two phrases:
Empezamos con mal pie
No empezamos bien
Feel it? So, we have two issues here. Number one, an advanced student ought to perceive the differences. Number two, an advanced student should feel the need to express those nuances. When a learner is happy with "getting the message across" by means of a simple unnuanced phrase s/he is in trouble. Progress is compromised because we seldom eat when you are not hungry and we rarely learn if we are not interested.
In case you are still not convinced, there is quite a compelling argument to be made about the need for specific verbs. More often than not, English speakers will prefer the word that describes not only what happens but also how it happens. So, when we Spaniards pick a generic word (the hypernym) many native speakers favor the accurate term (the hyponym). Think about it. Let's say a table is dirty. What do you do about it? Well, in Spanish we will probably think of one verb: limpiar. Most of you will automatically translate it into clean. There's nothing wrong with the verb to clean. Hey that's what Google Translate will suggest. However, in real life most English speakers won't use the verb clean. They will want to specify just how you are going to clean it: are you going to wash it, scrub it, wipe it?
I would like you to feel that need to be specific. Not because it sounds cool. Not because it can help you pass the exam but because it's the done thing.
Anyhow, all this is learnable stuff. It may take some time to integrate it into your system but, unlike growing an extra finger, it is feasible. You can't say the same thing about many other things in life, which is the reason why I would like you to watch the clip below. I know it's an obvious choice. It just so happens that, in the C1.2 course, we're dealing with the old "nurture vs. nature debate" and I believe that professor Irene Gallego Romero has boiled it all down (not dumbed it down) to an engaging, articulate, informative presentation that will help you acquire the necessary vocabulary to discuss this topic with rigor and that C1 accuracy you're after. Enjoy.
