Thais and English: Stop the rote learning, be brave to speak, get better jobs and be happy!

[Kieran00001]

4 minutes ago, timkeen08 said:

NO. And NO.  Try proofreading.  Sorry if I got you all riled up.  End of post as far as I am concerned.  Fire away, no reply from me.  I have got more important things to do than trying to prove who is right.  It reakly doesn't matter to me.  Have a good night,  I will.

 

There is only one question and the sentence is good, try reading again before calling out on proof reading next time.  As for me bring riled up, try reading your little outburst back to yourself.  I called your claim ironic which to you equalled me being riled up and so you responded by telling me essentially the same thing four times, clearly riled up and pretty hilarious!

[Kieran00001]

7 minutes ago, timkeen08 said:

 

 

Is this the silent treatment, from the one who is keeping his cool?

[Rhys]

  ...World Englishes.. buds...

[Dumbastheycome]

3 hours ago, Jonah Tenner said:

I learned Oxford English in school more than fifty years ago, starting when I was 12, I never got around to learning English grammar, because when I was 14 I was dumped into a class in a local English language school in Petaling Jaya - learn, swim or sink. 18 months of this and I was yanked out of that school, shipped to my home country, dumped in school with my old classmates, who had had another curriculum than me (girls for one, english grammar for another), failed at everything in school. Three months of this and I was moved to Colombo and told: You have to read on your own for one year...

In  terms  of  communicative  language seems  to  have  been  to  an advantage !  ? 

[Dumbastheycome]

Ok. I am  going  to  stick   my   oar in.

English as a  language  has evolved  to  be what  it  is from  composite origins . The  Grammar  of it is contrary . 

But  its origins are  from   England as based /derived from Germanic/Anglo  Saxon etc .

"American"   English is  derivation  of that.

Formulated  by  semi educated immigrant  escapees from  Europe due   to  various  reasons  including   famine.

Perhaps  to some credit  superfluous vowels became omitted from  words  such  as  honour, colour  and  others.

But rather than deliberately as a consequence of  reduced educational conventions of  English spelling.

Not  dissimilar  to  the  the  reduction  of  the  Imperial  "gallon" in   volume to  the  now  accepted  US   gallon which  could be  accorded to best  guess in setting  the  standard  rather  than a deliberate and  blatant deception. ?

That   any  American  could/can/does  attempt  to argue  some superiority in  defence of  Ameriglish  could  be seen as a  demonstration  of the  basic inferiority   complex so   many  have.

Why  not  accept  the  concept  of  " International"  English ? It   just   might  add to some  advantageous  communication  rather  than   arguementation.  lol

Ok.  Nucular Me  ! 

 

.

 

 

[Catoni]

On 6/16/2018 at 7:18 AM, KiwiKiwi said:

 

 

Mandarin, but my opinion is mere hearsay, I think I know because that's what I was told by someone who I should have learned not to trust.

 

Agree your point about rote learning. I have no probnlem with 13*12=156. because when I was a lad I had to repeat the times tables ad nauseam.

 

But I do remember them and that puts me streets ahead of a Thai, with or without a calculator.

     I'm the same way.....  learned lots of things by "rote" learning in school in the 1950's and 1960's.  The "Times Tables" being one...  repetition after repetition... drilled into our heads...I'm still good with the "Times Table" today because of it.  Knowing the "Times Table" is also a great aid to doing fast division in your head. 

    If we lose our smart phone or iPod Touch or calculator we aren't lost if we need to work out some basic math in our heads quickly.  I find that to be a great benefit. 

        Really comes in handy quite often.  Same with spelling and grammar and important dates in history.  History is still one of my great interests all my life...  I love having that knowledge..  

      I'm not saying that other ways of learning are no good.  I'm sure they are good.

  BUT ! !  Rote learning works really well... no doubt about that.  

[Dumbastheycome]

15 minutes ago, Catoni said:

     I'm the same way.....  learned lots of things by "rote" learning in school in the 1950's and 1960's.  The "Times Tables" being one...  repetition after repetition... drilled into our heads...I'm still good with the "Times Table" today because of it.  Knowing the "Times Table" is also a great aid to doing fast division in your head. 

    If we lose our smart phone or iPod Touch or calculator we aren't lost if we need to work out some basic math in our heads quickly.  I find that to be a great benefit. 

        Really comes in handy quite often.  Same with spelling and grammar and important dates in history.  History is still one of my great interests all my life...  I love having that knowledge..  

      I'm not saying that other ways of learning are no good.  I'm sure they are good.

  BUT ! !  Rote learning works really well... no doubt about that.  

For  sure  rote  learning  the  Times  Table  and  the letters of the  alphabet are instances where it  has  some  advantage.

Maybe in individual instance also.

However I  can  not understand  how mimic  or parroting a  language provides  any real comprehension.

To learn to  sing a song  or say a poem in an unknown  language simply  by  memorising  it  does  not  require  any  understanding  of the words.

I can happily  sing along  to a kareoke song in Thai  but  little  comprehension  of  what I am singing. lol

[newatthis]

12 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Ok. I am  going  to  stick   my   oar in.

English as a  language  has evolved  to  be what  it  is from  composite origins . The  Grammar  of it is contrary . 

But  its origins are  from   England as based /derived from Germanic/Anglo  Saxon etc .

"American"   English is  derivation  of that.

Formulated  by  semi educated immigrant  escapees from  Europe due   to  various  reasons  including   famine.

Perhaps  to some credit  superfluous vowels became omitted from  words  such  as  honour, colour  and  others.

But rather than deliberately as a consequence of  reduced educational conventions of  English spelling.

Not  dissimilar  to  the  the  reduction  of  the  Imperial  "gallon" in   volume to  the  now  accepted  US   gallon which  could be  accorded to best  guess in setting  the  standard  rather  than a deliberate and  blatant deception. ?

That   any  American  could/can/does  attempt  to argue  some superiority in  defence of  Ameriglish  could  be seen as a  demonstration  of the  basic inferiority   complex so   many  have.

Why  not  accept  the  concept  of  " International"  English ? It   just   might  add to some  advantageous  communication  rather  than   arguementation.  lol

Ok.  Nucular Me  ! 

 

.

 

 

 This is the way to go {many thanks to David Brown}:

 

The European Commission

 

The European Commission has announced an agreement whereby English will be the official language of the EU, rather than German, which was the other contender. Her Majesty's Government conceded that English spelling had room for improvement and has therefore accepted a five-year phasing in of "Euro-English".

In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c". Sertainly, this will make sivil servants jump for joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in favour of the "k", Which should klear up some konfusion and allow one key less on keyboards.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f", making words like "fotograf" 20% shorter.

In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of the silent "e" is disgrasful.

By the fourth yer, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v".

During ze fifz yer, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou" and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters. After zis fifz yer, ve vil hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubls or difikultis and everivun vil find it ezi to understand ech ozer. ZE DREM VIL FINALI COM TRU!

Herr Schmidt

[jayboy]

13 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Ok. I am  going  to  stick   my   oar in.

English as a  language  has evolved  to  be what  it  is from  composite origins . The  Grammar  of it is contrary . 

But  its origins are  from   England as based /derived from Germanic/Anglo  Saxon etc .

"American"   English is  derivation  of that.

Formulated  by  semi educated immigrant  escapees from  Europe due   to  various  reasons  including   famine.

Perhaps  to some credit  superfluous vowels became omitted from  words  such  as  honour, colour  and  others.

But rather than deliberately as a consequence of  reduced educational conventions of  English spelling.

Not  dissimilar  to  the  the  reduction  of  the  Imperial  "gallon" in   volume to  the  now  accepted  US   gallon which  could be  accorded to best  guess in setting  the  standard  rather  than a deliberate and  blatant deception. ?

That   any  American  could/can/does  attempt  to argue  some superiority in  defence of  Ameriglish  could  be seen as a  demonstration  of the  basic inferiority   complex so   many  have.

Why  not  accept  the  concept  of  " International"  English ? It   just   might  add to some  advantageous  communication  rather  than   arguementation.  lol

Ok.  Nucular Me  ! 

 

.

 

 

You forget that in the early days of colonial and independent America (say 1650 - 1800) immigrants were motivated as much by the wish for religious freedom as anything else and were not escaping from extreme poverty.That came later in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries.It's misleading to stress the "semi educated" aspect of the earlier settlers.If you study the social history of America at this time it's very clear this was a well educated and intellectually vibrant society.The founding fathers of the Revolution were astonishing accomplished men with Thomas Jefferson for example - but not uniquely - a near genius.What is sometimes characterized as debased American English is in many cases the vocabulary and  accent of their English ancestors.Language moved on in England as it does everywhere but with the interesting consequence that in many cases current American colloquial English is in fact close to the language of their seventeenth century English ancestors.

[Somchai Logic]

Wait!!!

What???

Didn't Gen. Cha Cha Cha say that Thai was going to be the new English???

This kid better pull his head in 

[timkeen08]

17 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Is this the silent treatment, from the one who is keeping his cool?

It is the next day and I have a few minutes.  Did you not read my last comments "End of post as far as I am concerned." Or "Fire away, no reply from me." or "Have a good night,  I will." or just not understand them.  You kept commenting with some foolish silent treatment remark.

 

 

 

17 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Is this the silent treatment, from the one who is keeping his cool?

When Americans pronounce as 'learnt' but spell as 'learned,'  would have made a more proper partial sentence if you had instead used - What Americans pronounce as ....

 

But as I stated, most Americans do not use learnt so your whole sentence is way out of context from what I did say anyway.

 

Please read carefully.  I am signing off on this discussion. It has become boring.  Bait all you want I have stopped.

[overherebc]

21 minutes ago, timkeen08 said:

It is the next day and I have a few minutes.  Did you not read my last comments "End of post as far as I am concerned." Or "Fire away, no reply from me." or "Have a good night,  I will." or just not understand them.  You kept commenting with some foolish silent treatment remark.

 

 

 

When Americans pronounce as 'learnt' but spell as 'learned,'  would have made a more proper partial sentence if you had instead used - What Americans pronounce as ....

 

But as I stated, most Americans do not use learnt so your whole sentence is way out of context from what I did say anyway.

 

Please read carefully.  I am signing off on this discussion. It has become boring.  Bait all you want I have stopped.

Just say the two words

Past

Passed.

Two sound exactly the same but mean different things.

Why can't one word have two different spellings, depending on 'side of the pond' and mean the same thing?

Only asking.

Edit.

Smelt,  a kind of small fish. ???

Edited June 18, 2018 by overherebc

[Kieran00001]

1 hour ago, timkeen08 said:

It is the next day and I have a few minutes.  Did you not read my last comments "End of post as far as I am concerned." Or "Fire away, no reply from me." or "Have a good night,  I will." or just not understand them.  You kept commenting with some foolish silent treatment remark.

 

 

 

When Americans pronounce as 'learnt' but spell as 'learned,'  would have made a more proper partial sentence if you had instead used - What Americans pronounce as ....

 

But as I stated, most Americans do not use learnt so your whole sentence is way out of context from what I did say anyway.

 

Please read carefully.  I am signing off on this discussion. It has become boring.  Bait all you want I have stopped.

 

Engage with what is being said rather than how it is being said, it make you look less of a tit.

[timkeen08]

2 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Just say the two words

Past

Passed.

Two sound exactly the same but mean different things.

Why can't one word have two different spellings, depending on 'side of the pond' and mean the same thing?

Only asking.

I don't have to be across from any pond to explain your error.  The two do not sound exactly the same, similar maybe, but I do get your drift.  I say past with a definate "T" sound ending and passed with a definate "ed" sound ending like I was taught in America schools but maybe that is the British way of pronouncing these two similar sounding but actually quite different sounding words.  That is yet another example of why I will stick to my American way of pronouncing words as so many in the world do.

 

I am so glad that I have never had or heard of a British sounding English teacher in all my school years, in any subjects I attended and I changed schools every three years moving with my Dad from US Army post to army post.  And, I never ran across a British sounding teacher during tech school and college even as I "passed" by people in the hallways.  That is quite a few schools and teachers.

 

Boring, and an easy answer.  I am going.

[overherebc]

1 minute ago, timkeen08 said:

I don't have to be across from any pond to explain your error.  The two do not sound exactly the same, similar maybe, but I do get your drift.  I say past with a definate "T" sound ending and passed with a definate "ed" sound ending like I was taught in America schools but maybe that is the British way of pronouncing these two similar sounding but actually quite different sounding words.  That is yet another example of why I will stick to my American way of pronouncing words as so many in the world do.

 

I am so glad that I have never had or heard of a British sounding English teacher in all my school years, in any subjects I attended and I changed schools every three years moving with my Dad from US Army post to army post.  And, I never ran across a British sounding teacher during tech school and college even as I "passed" by people in the hallways.  That is quite a few schools and teachers.

 

Boring, and an easy answer.  I am going.

So you say pass-'ed' not pass'd?

Sounds odd to me.

[timkeen08]

7 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Engage with what is being said rather than how it is being said, it make you look less of a tit.

tit for tat, bye

[HAKAPALITA]

I still find Alooominum one of Yanks worst abortions of English. Are they deaf.?..

[overherebc]

16 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

I still find Alooominum one of Yanks worst abortions of English. Are they deaf.?..

Stangely enough it may have been us Brits that corrupted the name. Not sure though.

[HAKAPALITA]

It was easier to learn English for me years 75 ago. We only had BBC News, crisp and concise. Now its all Ekky Thump, Jordy, Cockney, all hard to understand dialects for beginners today.Just to annoy the Yanks, my Ancestors who are in Alaska speak easy clear English when sober, well the old ones do !.,the Kids talk filthy  Rap Rubbish like most kids today.

[Eligius]

4 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Stangely enough it may have been us Brits that corrupted the name. Not sure though.

It seems (according to the Free Dictionary online) that the word was coined around 1812 and was an alteration of the earlier word, 'alumium'. So - it would appear that the Brits are closer to the original form.

[timkeen08]

21 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

I still find Alooominum one of Yanks worst abortions of English. Are they deaf.?..

There are two different recognized words for element 13.  The American Chemical Society ACS designated that aluminum be used in America?  The IUPAC determined that both are acceptable and the use of either word is an abomination.

 

Two German chemists actually are credited as the first to isolate aluminum.  It has nothing to do with Britain or America. They could not decide who was first.

 

It should be called Orstedium or Wohleralum.

[Eligius]

12 minutes ago, timkeen08 said:

 

 

Two German chemists actually are credited as the first to isolate aluminum.  It has nothing to do with Britain or America. They could not decide who was first.

 

 

Interestingly, the German word for aluminium is 'Aluminium', the Spanish word is 'aluminio', and the French word is also 'aluminium' - the same as the British version. In fact, all the major European languages have what is basically the British form. It appears that the American version is the odd-man out (not that that makes it wrong, of course).

 

 

Edited June 18, 2018 by Eligius

[timkeen08]

Just now, Eligius said:

Interestingly, the German word for aluminium is 'Aluminium' - the same as the British version.

Actually the Germans adopted it from the British.  They were just too embarrassed about their past indecission to choose between the two German chemists.

 

Either way the IUPAC determined that both the American/Canadian and British words are acceptable 

 

End of discussion and quit quibbling over punctuation marks and such.  And who did what.  It has l ready been established.  Anyone else is trolling or baiting for their limited fun.

[HAKAPALITA]

7 minutes ago, timkeen08 said:

There are two different recognized words for element 13.  The American Chemical Society ACS designated that aluminum be used in America?  The IUPAC determined that both are acceptable and the use of either word is an abomination.

 

Two German chemists actually are credited as the first to isolate aluminum.  It has nothing to do with Britain or America. They could not decide who was first.

 

It should be called Orstedium or Wohleralum.

It was an Englander Davey who found the Salt/ Mineral, and a Danish who made the first specimen. After that Canada  Alcan cornered the market, not America, they invented Chewing Gum and Coke and the word Modesty..

[timkeen08]

3 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

It was an Englander Davey who found the Salt/ Mineral, and a Danish who made the first specimen. After that Canada  Alcan cornered the market, not America, they invented Chewing Gum and Coke and the word Modesty..

But the Germans were the first who isolated the 13th element.  If the decission was made which one did islolate 13 first then he would have been the one who named the element as is tradition.  All the other names,

 

8 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

It was an Englander Davey who found the Salt/ Mineral, and a Danish who made the first specimen. After that Canada  Alcan cornered the market, not America, they invented Chewing Gum and Coke and the word Modesty..

Troll or baiter?

[overherebc]

28 minutes ago, timkeen08 said:

There are two different recognized words for element 13.  The American Chemical Society ACS designated that aluminum be used in America?  The IUPAC determined that both are acceptable and the use of either word is an abomination.

 

Two German chemists actually are credited as the first to isolate aluminum.  It has nothing to do with Britain or America. They could not decide who was first.

 

It should be called Orstedium or Wohleralum.

Orstedium sounds like Glaswegian for Hampden Park.

 

???

[overherebc]

Artifacts from chinese tombs dated 3rd century AD have been found consisting of 85% alumxxxxxxxxx . You finish the word. ????

[HAKAPALITA]

14 minutes ago, timkeen08 said:

But the Germans were the first who isolated the 13th element.  If the decission was made which one did islolate 13 first then he would have been the one who named the element as is tradition.  All the other names,

 

Troll or baiter?

QED.

[timkeen08]

27 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Artifacts from chinese tombs dated 3rd century AD have been found consisting of 85% alumxxxxxxxxx . You finish the word. ????

I remember but only 85% pure, it was not an isolated element.  I would rather find out what they called it back then but there probably was no CAPITALISED ABC organization for the approval. So it must have been named by that current emperor.  We will never know it's true name.

 

Since the Chinese came first, I WILL finish it - aluminko so we can all agree on something for a change.  I'm open for suggestions but I really did not like aluminese or alumchinium.

[timkeen08]

54 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

QED.

Then that's OK with me.