Why are phoneticians so confident?

Previous page Pages: 1 2 3 Next page

MR. Mxsmanic

>>Koreans are no different from any other ESL students, irrespective of what they might like to believe.

Not Koreans but professionals can find/understand the difference..... Do you think that you are professional?

>>Phoneticians and linguists do not usually teach ESL, - - -.

Then, what do they do?

>>However, - - - any native speaker who has an ability to teach and has some reasonable knowledge of grammar.

Most USA ESL teachers say that East Asians know more on English grammar than themselves.

It's no coincidence that - - -.

No comment.

Koreans can mimic sounds based on CDs just as anyone else can; Koreans who refuse to believe this, however, are likely to never acquire fluency in English.

I (and most people, I think, frankly speaking) do not want fluency.

When I mentioned describing how to produce sounds, though, - - - .

Do you know how to produce sounds using the vocal tract? What do you mean by the vocal tract? I think that the word of vocal mechanism is better than the vocal tract.

>>This requires a teacher who knows how she is producing various sounds though, and so it's not always an option. You can read books to find descriptions, if you cannot find a teacher who knows them. From what I've read, it seems that Koreans have a mountain of preconceived ideas concerning ESL, and that these ideas cripple them in their attempts to learn English.

As you say, when the so-called phoneticians with research experience can not suggest an effective way, what do you mean by “teacher” and how can we find an able teacher? Rather, it will be better that Korean myself find the ultimate method on how to produce voice.

mr. garans

>>Is "lingistic" a word for "linguistics" or this spelling reflect your phonetic interpretation? :)

http://www.academici.com/net/lingistics.
http://www.academici.com/hp/YoungWon_Kim

The person who made/wrote the above URL is an English of “academici”, not me, though I and many other gentlepersons often misspell, which most people (except you) do not mind so much when discussing seriously with knowledge.

<<Then, what do they do? >>

Well, the purpose of linguistics (in general) is not inhererently one of producing research and information to improve teaching of languages. However, some of the research and knowledge lingusitics has yielded over the past century or so has been very helpful in helping people learn languages. One excellent example of this is phonetic transcription. As much as Mxsmanic refuses to acknowledge it (for somewhat unclear reasons), the advances that linguistics has been behind have greatly increased the knowledge and information base available to ESL students and teachers alike (this also applies to other languages).

Mr. Kirk

<<Then, what do they do? >>

>>Well, the purpose of linguistics (in general) is not inhererently one of producing research and information to improve teaching of languages.

Even though they do not intend to teach others, we read/practice their studies.

>>However, some of the research and knowledge lingusitics has yielded over the past century or so has been very helpful - - - .

Fully agreed, in spite of the fact that the present phonetics theories still have many problems..... I am trying/discussing/writing the perfection of phonetics.... And I think I myself have found the (near-) perfection, which I am writing on “acdemici”..... I am inviting review/comments on my study.

Kirk has explained what phoneticians and linguists do, although I disagree with him about the degree to which their work has advanced ESL teaching and the other methods of teaching languages. Teaching languages is in pretty much the same state today as it has been for many decades; there have been no significant breakthroughs, although advancing audio and video technology have opened a few opportunities.

I don't know which "professionals" find Koreans to be different from anyone else. I do find that students who claim they have a special difficulty in learning a language because of their nationality or native language are often just making excuses for being unmotivated or less than diligent in their studies.

In language learning I like to say that if you think you can learn a language, you're right; and if you think you can't learn a language, you're right.

If you don't want fluency, I'm not sure what it is that you want. You need fluency for communication. If you don't want to use English to communicate, I suppose the standard ways of teaching may not be suitable. For example, if you wish only to cite chapter and verse concerning arcane rules of English grammar, standard ESL courses probably won't be very useful to you. Academic English courses can be useful if you want credentials rather than fluency.

It's called the vocal tract, not the vocal mechanism, because speech is not produced solely by a mechanism but also by the inherent acoustic properties of the chamber formed by the vocal tract.

Phoneticians study speech, but they may or may not teach it. Those who don't teach it don't necessarily have any ways of teaching it to suggest. Indeed, nobody has really come up with any miracle methods for teaching languages. Some things seem to work better than others, but the differences are not usually that great.

The most important factors influencing the outcome of language teacher are the motivation and intelligence of the students. They are important enough that they can override all other considerations.

Gentlemen;

You seem to know what phonetics/etc. is like..... Then, since I have written something about (English or general) phonetics on “academici” at all, please visit/read the following site, and then let’s continue the discussion.

http://www.academici.com/net/lingistics.
http://www.academici.com/hp/YoungWon_Kim

Young-Won Kim,

I wasn't able to get there following the first link (I'm not smart enough).
On the second I've found the adverticement of your book.

Why should I follow you links?

Are you sexist and not inviting Women too?

Thanks <garans>

>>I wasn't able to get there following the first link (I'm not smart enough).

I have prepared two for emergency..... If URL http://www.academici.com/net/lingistics. does not work. then use http://www.academici.com/hp/YoungWon_Kim.

>>On the second I've found the adverticement of your book.
Why should I follow you links?

See below and you will find Groups “comparative phonetics”. If you click “comparative phonetics”, then the next page will appear.

See below again and you will find Board/description “comparative phonetics?”. If you click “comparative phonetics?”, then the next page will appear and you will see subjects.

If you click the subject of (e,g,) “liaison”, you will see articles..... Click the articles and read the contents..... The bottom subject is usually older.

Dear <Guest>

>>Are you sexist and not inviting Women too?

I eagerly invite ladies, only I do not know who is a lady or a man.

Use

http://www.academici.com/net/lingistics
http://www.academici.com/hp/YoungWon_Kim

<>>Are you sexist and not inviting Women too?

I eagerly invite ladies, only I do not know who is a lady or a man. >

Thankyou

Or click the below:

http://www.academici.com/cgi-bin/forum.fpl?op=showforum&id=7681

Why no comment?

Still no comment?

Say something.

<<When I browse internet, American (IPA) phoneticians like John Wells & Peter Ladefoged of <http://hctv.humnet.ucla.edu/departments/linguistics/VowelsandConsonants/course/chapter1/wells/wells.html> seem to have the world (including Europeans) at IPA’s beck and call.... But I think IPA’s phonetics theories have great errors.>>

American?? John Wells is very English. He was born in Bootle, Lancashire.
http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/wells/cv.htm

Previous page Pages: 1 2 3 Next page