How can you explain grammar, sentence structure, different meanings of words etc with pictures and pointing? I get how you can learn vocabulary that way but don't see how the rest would work.

'Teaching' grammar is industrial era thinking roz, there are very good arguments that (except for uni students) grammar should be given the least focus in ESL, it should be learned by exposure and immersion to language and not taught as rules.

StroppyChops wrote:'Teaching' grammar is industrial era thinking roz, there are very good arguments that (except for uni students) grammar should be given the least focus in ESL, it should be learned by exposure and immersion to language and not taught as rules.

Both agree and disagree. The problem with Cambodian teachers of English is that they have little or no experience speaking English because their teachers had the same lack of opportunity. So, they taught grammar, grammar, grammar because anyone can understand the rules even if they can't pronounce them correctly. Then their students become teachers and perpetuate the system. All of this is fine if you want to read and write a language, but it is a kind of straitjacket for those who want to achieve a reasonable degree pf fluency, especially in Cambodia where students are afraid of making mistakes.

On the other hand English has a more complicated system of grammar and is certainly less linked to the culture than Cambodian. Some grammar must be taught, but it should be related to speaking assignments. Also, pronunciation plays a big part in English. Take for example a final "s" or "z" sound which is frequently found in 3rd person singular verbs and plural nouns. You can even notice on posts here where it should appear in the written form, but doesn't. It is simply alien to the Cambodian ear and is either not heard or ignored. And if a native speaker hears someone say, "he go" we think that they do not understand grammar not that there interference from the mother tongue. So, a teacher's job is to encourage their students to forge ahead errors and all. Time alone can cure some problems, but patience will help too.

Good post, taa

made a start at trying to learn how to read khmer last night,
so far ive realised ive not only got to learn the vowels and consonants, but which ones are strong and weak ones, as this effects the sound when adding vowel sounds to the consonants.. right?
any help and tips that will help with learning to read khmer will be a great help if anyone has any,
learning a whole new different alphabet is a bit more difficult than just learning how to re-spell words in Romany English like it is in most of European countries haha

taabarang wrote:

StroppyChops wrote:'Teaching' grammar is industrial era thinking roz, there are very good arguments that (except for uni students) grammar should be given the least focus in ESL, it should be learned by exposure and immersion to language and not taught as rules.

Both agree and disagree. The problem with Cambodian teachers of English is that they have little or no experience speaking English because their teachers had the same lack of opportunity. So, they taught grammar, grammar, grammar because anyone can understand the rules even if they can't pronounce them correctly. Then their students become teachers and perpetuate the system. All of this is fine if you want to read and write a language, but it is a kind of straitjacket for those who want to achieve a reasonable degree pf fluency, especially in Cambodia where students are afraid of making mistakes.

On the other hand English has a more complicated system of grammar and is certainly less linked to the culture than Cambodian. Some grammar must be taught, but it should be related to speaking assignments. Also, pronunciation plays a big part in English. Take for example a final "s" or "z" sound which is frequently found in 3rd person singular verbs and plural nouns. You can even notice on posts here where it should appear in the written form, but doesn't. It is simply alien to the Cambodian ear and is either not heard or ignored. And if a native speaker hears someone say, "he go" we think that they do not understand grammar not that there interference from the mother tongue. So, a teacher's job is to encourage their students to forge ahead errors and all. Time alone can cure some problems, but patience will help too.

I agree that most of Cambodian teachers of English are really good in grammar. I have never studied English with native speaker, most of my teachers were Cambodian. I learned a lot about English grammar. I can give a really good explanation for the usage of type of sentences and also tenses. A part from speaking, i believe that grammar is also really important. I agree that speaking is absolutely important and most of native speaker urge their student to speak more without bother to care about grammatical errors they might make, but you can't ignore with grammar. Without the knowledge of grammar, i don't think you can speak well, as in order to form a sentence or question you need grammar rule and also to fully comprehend what people are talking about.

For example.

1. I go to school.

2. I wen to school yesterday.

3. I am going to school tomorrow or I will go to school to morrow.

Without the knowledge of grammar, one will never be able to differentiate above sentences. Moreover, the knowledge of grammar is really important for those who are working as a translator. To be able to translate the article or any documents, you have to know grammar otherwise you will never be able to translate them in to a targeted language.

Grammar is absolutely essential - but new teaching methods say it should rarely be taught as a series of rules, it should be learned by exposure to a lot of good language. It is now thought that children learn grammar automatically and as long as they have good language modeled to them, they adopt proper grammar. This is different and more complex in adult ESL learners but the same principles apply. It should be noted that many teaching methods still in use today were outdated in the late 1970s... but we have language teachers teaching what they learned from their language teachers, who taught what they learned from...

Username Taken wrote:

Samouth wrote: Without the knowledge of grammar, i don't think you can speak well, as in order to form a sentence or question you need grammar rule and also to fully comprehend what people are talking about.

I don't agree with that (and shortly the English teachers will be on here to attack me. Oh, well.)

Samouth, don't confuse Listening/Speaking skills with Reading/Writing skills.

Most native English speakers wouldn't have a clue about grammar rules. They can speak because they have a vast vocabulary of what they have already heard, giving them the ability to speak without the need for rules.

Grammar rules are for writing proper English. It's a product called ESL which is marketed all around the world so that English teachers have employment opportunities.

Username Taken, Holding a degree in TEFL, i do know the different between the four main skills. The reason that native speaker can speak English without requiring to know grammar rule, because they acquired it naturally as it is their mother tongue. I also don't have to learn khmer grammar to speak flawless khmer. I think i might know more about English grammar than khmer grammar. I still believe that in order to speak English well, one has to have knowledge of grammar, word choices, clear pronunciation and intonation.

If you want to say, I am having dinner. This is present continuous tense. We use it to demonstrate the activity that is currently happening. In order to form this type of sentence, you need S + Verb to be (am, is, are) + Verb + ing + object. Without knowing the rule i don't think you can speak well and be able to really express what you want to say.