Talk:English as a second or foreign language/Archive 2

Diffficulties for learners
I have some serious problems with this section of the article. The difficulties of English phonology are okay - the voiced and unvoiced th are relatively rare globally, much of the world finds complex consonant clusters hard to work with, and English has an inordinate number of vowel distinctions - but the idea that English has more words than other languages, or that the number of words has anything to do with difficulties learning English is pure superstition unbased in any sort of linguistics or cross-linguistic study. The dialect vocabulary section is off the mark - it's not different word meanings that pose the biggest problems, it's the diversity of vowel sounds across English dialects that is the real killer. The rhythmic qualities of English are strange to speakers of Spanish and French, among other languages, but rarely troubling for Germanic and Slavic language speakers. And the way English uses articles is a barrier to everyone who speaks a language that uses them differently, varying from French which requires articles practically everywhere to Chinese which has no articles whatsoever.

English, lke all other languages, is a more difficult language for people whose native tongues are more radically different and an easier language for those with less different native structures. The enunciation part hints at but completely misses what is often the most objectively difficult part of English: spelling. English as we like to pretend we speak it is unlike English as actually spoken because we have such a messed up spelling scheme. For pre-literate children, this is no big deal, but for adult learners for whom literacy is as important as fluency if not more so, it is the biggest real challenge. --Diderot 10:55, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Diffficulties for learners
The style of this whole article is poor, and it appears to have been written by someone who has learnt English as a second language. In the section on shortening and informal speech, I wouldn't say that ESL teachers do their students a disservice in stressing enunciation. Saying "gonna" etc. is a clear sign of poor education, at least in England. Also, the section on consonant clusters implies that English has a higher proportion of consonant clusters than most other languages. I don't believe this to be true.
 * Anyone who says "going to" to express a near future action in any context other than reading a text, or perhaps in a very formal speech, in American speech is thought something of a "stuffed shirt." Also, if you don't think English has impressive consonant clusters, try comparing it to Italian, Japanese, or Spanish.  &mdash;Casey J. Morris 07:15, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Responses to the above
Gailtb 00:11, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I've just done a very major edit on the difficulties section and hope I have addressed most of the concerns raised above. I made heavy use of the word relatively without saying relative to what!
 * The point above about "gonna" perhaps need addressing. The point about stressing enunciation remains true, but "gonna" is not a good example.
 * I didn't include articles as a significant grammatical point. They might make it difficult for some to reach truly native competence, but the small differences from French, for example, aren't going to inhibit communication. They are certainly difficult for someone whose language doesn't have them, but that is covered by the point about the degree of difference between the L1 and English, and would apply to many other languages they try to learn - nothing special about English.
 * EAL is a common and useful abbreviation in the profession, at least here in Britain. And where the article refers to usage in Britain, Canada, etc, those terms are carefully chosen. For example, ESL is certainly the normal term in the US, Canada and Australia.

Unstressed vowels

 * For example, from has a distinctly pronounced short 'o' sound when it is stressed (e.g., Where is your dog?), but when it is unstressed, the short 'o' reduces to a schwa (e.g., I'm from London.).

This doesn't make sense to me. Why is it that the first e.g. does not contain the word from? It seems to me the examples should be chosen to illustrate the pronunciation of from. --Dforest 06:29, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * When I wrote it originally, it said:
 * Native English speakers frequently replace a long or short vowel with an unstressed vowel, often schwa, in an unstressed syllable. For example, from has a distinctly pronounced short 'o' sound when it is stressed (eg Where are you from?), but when it is unstressed, the short 'o' reduces to a schwa (eg I'm from London.).
 * Someone changed it because they said it wasn't true in their accent. Please feel free to write something more meaningful. Gailtb 08:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * "The?" &mdash;Casey J. Morris 07:17, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Easy Parts of Learning English
Yes there are difficult parts of English, but there are some parts of English that are nicely simple. Mostly verbs. Check out this present tense verb: to eat
 * I eat
 * you eat
 * they eat
 * we eat
 * he eats
 * she eats
 * it eats


 * Now check Spanish equivelant: comer


 * yo como
 * tu comes
 * el come
 * ella come
 * Usted come
 * nosotros comemos
 * nosotras comemos
 * ellos comen
 * ellas comen
 * Ustedes comen
 * vosotros comeis
 * vosotras comeis


 * We have two versions where Spanish has six, we have one form of you where Spanish has five, the list goes on and on. Dont make it sound like English is tremedously difficult language.  Dont even get me started on Japanese.Cameron Nedland 04:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)