3 hours ago, tumama said:

"The studies focus on enabling the students to communicate rather than on the grammar, the teacher said."

 

That's how all languages ought to be taught. Learning grammar is mostly counter-productive. You can tell when people learn by grammar because they speak really slow and with a heavy accent. 

 

"Today go Big C"

"Yesterday  go Big C"

"Tomorrow go Big C"

 

When you teach them to say:

"Today I am going to Big C."

"Yesterday I went to Big C."

"Tomorrow I will go to Big C."

Then you are teaching them grammar - simple present continuous, simple past and simple future tenses, in the first person singular.

It's not the teaching of grammar which is the problem, it is how you teach that grammar. Most of us are familiar with the phenomenon of the M6 (18 year old) class, who have been learning English for 12 years, and can recite (in Thai) the rules of the most arcane grammatical constructions, but when asked how long the bus journey to Chiang Mai takes, will gaze at you blankly as if you have just beamed down from the planet Zarg!

 

That is the problem - how it is taught!

 

Maybe this young man is fortunate to have been taught well.

Edited July 5, 20188 yr by JAG
If posting about grammar, one should really get the grammar right! ?

24 minutes ago, JAG said:

"Today go Big C"

"Yesterday  go Big C"

"Tomorrow go Big C"

 

When you teach them to say:

"Today I am going to Big C."

"Yesterday I went to Big C."

"Tomorrow I will go to Big C."

Then you are teaching them grammar - simple present continuous, simple past and simple future tenses, in the first person singular.

It's not the teaching of grammar which is the problem, it is how you teach that grammar. Most of us are familiar with the phenomenon of the M6 (18 year old) class, who have been learning English for 12 years, and can recite (in Thai) the rules of the most arcane grammatical constructions, but when asked how long the bus journey to Chiang Mai takes, will gaze at you blankly as if you have just beamed down from the planet Zarg!

 

That is the problem - how it is taught!

 

Maybe this young man is fortunate to have been taught well.

 

Or you just learn by listening, like kids always do without a teacher. I've met a handful of people in my life that are not native and that speak american English without any accent. And all of them learned by listening. Your example just proves my point. 

28 minutes ago, JAG said:

"Today go Big C"

"Yesterday  go Big C"

"Tomorrow go Big C"

 

When you teach them to say:

"Today I am going to Big C."

"Yesterday I went to Big C."

"Tomorrow I will go to Big C."

Then you are teaching them grammar - simple present continuous, simple past and simple future tenses, in the first person singular.

Or, to spare breath, just say 

 

"Today BigC"
"Yesterday BigC"

"Tomorrow BigC"

 

Works, it's BigC every bloody day.

2 hours ago, vogie said:

I didn't realise untill today that I wasn't a polymath, I had to google it. ??

 

Somehow, the The Nation/ThaiVisa headline notwithstanding, I doubt very much this kid's Thai teacher tossed out the term "polymath" in describing him.  More than likely, it instead was some fancy pants headline writer.

 

But frankly, someone having skills in multiple language doesn't necessarily make them a "polymath" based on the definition I'm aware of for the term. It's more meant in terms of someone with knowledge in a lot of different subject areas, not just speaking/understanding a lot of different languages.

 

In this kid's case, probably "polyglot" or "quadrilingual" or "multilingual" would be more apropos.

 

Edited July 5, 20188 yr by TallGuyJohninBKK

 

hopefully, the BBC will get a hold of him for an interview, in English, as to what really happened?

 

 

the why? the kids went down the cave on their own after footy!

 

how far in were they? before the Teacher caught up with them; only for him to realise it was by then too late to get them out before the waters rose to it's level

 

and for the kid, in English; tell the world that their teacher is a hero for responding to their parents' call for help, and come after them. And didn't give up on them.

 

 

Oh! and for him to declare that he wants to be a Navy SEAL when he grows up

4 hours ago, overherebc said:

I like the the statement concentrate on communication not grammar.

Thai students and more especially Thai/English teachers please take note.

Correct, not only teachers take note, how about the education minister take note. 

23 minutes ago, tifino said:

 

hopefully, the BBC will get a hold of him for an interview, in English, as to what really happened?

 

 

the why? the kids went down the cave on their own after footy!

 

how far in were they? before the Teacher caught up with them; only for him to realise it was by then too late to get them out before the waters rose to it's level

 

and for the kid, in English; tell the world that their teacher is a hero for responding to their parents' call for help, and come after them. And didn't give up on them.

 

 

Oh! and for him to declare that he wants to be a Navy SEAL when he grows up

Wouldn't be much of an interview following that line as they didn't go into the cave by themselves. 

10 hours ago, JAG said:

Maybe this young man is fortunate to have been taught well.

Yes agreed but additionally I note he has some musical talent which is a great help with language learning.

"When children start studying music before the age of seven, they develop bigger vocabularies, a better sense of grammar and a higher verbal IQ. These advantages benefit both the development of their mother tongue and the learning of foreign languages. During these crucial years, the brain is at its sensitive development phase, with 95% of the brain's growth occurring now. Music training started during this period also boosts the brain's ability to process subtle differences between sounds and assist in the pronunciation of languages – and this gift lasts for life, as it has been found that adults who had musical training in childhood still retain this ability to learn foreign languages quicker and more efficiently than adults who did not have early childhood music training."

13 hours ago, tumama said:

 

Worserer, lol. Never heard that before. Had to google it. You learn something new everyday. 

 

The biggest howler I've heard here came from an expat when I was trying to give him directions to a shop.

I said there's a very large sign just before the shop, bright yellow with the company logo on it, you can't miss it.

The answer I got was, 'if it's that big how have I not saw it before.'

He's teaching his wife english as well.

???

 

13 hours ago, ratcatcher said:

But of all those expats, which nationality comes across as the worstest.

I have to admit that quite a few of them are 'sweaties' like me.

???

Then again it all depends on your brungupness.

Edited July 6, 20188 yr by overherebc

13 hours ago, overherebc said:

And most of the time it's wrong, meaning you have to question them a couple of times to work out what they are trying to say to you.

English has it's roots in five major languages, each one with different grammar rules/roots.

It confuses native speakers a lot of the time.

Quite a few expats I know use grammar much more worserer than I.

??

You mean English as she is spoke proper like!  

5 minutes ago, masuk said:

You mean English as she is spoke proper like!  

Eeh bygoom thats reet yorkshir

I praise everyone, who is able to speak more than just his/her mother- tongue.

Let alone someone from such a background..let alone in Thailand!

 

This doesn't surprise me as,i know quite a few Burmese and thai women that have many skills and talents.Just that they don't have the chance to get the schooling or a decent chance to show their talent as they (as we all know) have to at a early age take care of their families and are not in a position to get the education and schooling they need to be able to show their talent.Same with the phillipino people.Lots of wasted and undiscovered talent in the third  world and developing countries being wasted.

13 hours ago, tumama said:

 

Or you just learn by listening, like kids always do without a teacher. I've met a handful of people in my life that are not native and that speak american English without any accent. And all of them learned by listening. Your example just proves my point. 

American english without an accent. 

Lesson 1

I wanna go to Noo York.

Sorry mate I'm 'avin a giggle.

???

18 hours ago, wirat69 said:

Maybe I am a bit of a softie, but it made me cry!!

Me too wirat69 I never used to but these boys and their ordeal is very 'umbling.

I was asked about 8 years ago to teach the Burmese girl next door English , I wasn't keen but she was such a good pupil , was the best in her school and now doing well in a C/Rai college .  I had forgotten it but the other day she came out with  ' Cor blimey gov.' She remembered that , I had long forgotten. Me bad teacher , her first class pupil.

15 hours ago, DrTuner said:

Or, to spare breath, just say

 

"Today BigC"
"Yesterday BigC"

"Tomorrow BigC"

 

Works, it's BigC every bloody day.

While just about hanging on to this topic my wife will say after me saying I need to go to Lotus.  " For what "    Now I would of said  " What for ".  Tell me dudes which is correct.

So, I a bit confused. I would think the correct English term is "polyglot" as it pertains to languages. Or is it another case of my being an American English speaker?

On 7/5/2018 at 6:00 PM, snoop1130 said:

As a student of the school’s so-called “Buffer School”, Adul learnt foreign languages from native speakers. He is under the care of Hope Mae Sai Church as his Akha hilltribe family, who live in Myanmar, is very poor.

Good for him. 

4 hours ago, wwest5829 said:

So, I a bit confused. I would think the correct English term is "polyglot" as it pertains to languages. Or is it another case of my being an American English speaker?

No you're right. But I assume it refers to knowledge beyond languages. And if he knows four languages at fourteen, I have no doubt he is bright beyond those. 

4 hours ago, toofarnorth said:

While just about hanging on to this topic my wife will say after me saying I need to go to Lotus.  " For what "    Now I would of said  " What for ".  Tell me dudes which is correct.

For what, technically. But technicalities often get in the way of the obvious.

On 7/5/2018 at 6:57 PM, tumama said:

"The studies focus on enabling the students to communicate rather than on the grammar, the teacher said."

 

That's how all languages ought to be taught. Learning grammar is mostly counter-productive. You can tell when people learn by grammar because they speak really slow and with a heavy accent. 

 

English teachers that cant speak English teach grammar.

 

and they write funny equations and a lot of stuff in Thai on the blackboard. 

Edited July 6, 20188 yr by tingtongtourist

4 hours ago, toofarnorth said:

While just about hanging on to this topic my wife will say after me saying I need to go to Lotus.  " For what "    Now I would of said  " What for ".  Tell me dudes which is correct.

This suggests that the notion of never ending a sentence with a preposition is a bit old-fashioned:

Is Ending a Sentence with a Preposition Acceptable?

 

So I didn't dream ? 1 Thai in this country can speak English !

He should become president !

 

 

3 minutes ago, gaff said:

So I didn't dream ? 1 Thai in this country can speak English !

He should become president !

 

 

Indeed Gaff. You did not dream. Many Thai speak enough English to "get by" even where I am in the provinces. I would doubt though, that the ability to speak English would qualify a person to become president in the absolute monarchy that is Thailand. However, in America? Anything goes..............or so it would seem.

10 hours ago, overherebc said:

Eeh bygoom thats reet yorkshir

can you translate that in to English

 

2 hours ago, Jonmarleesco said:

For what, technically. But technicalities often get in the way of the obvious.

Thanks ,  I would rather say ' For what ( do you need to go for ), but I have always said ' What for '. Odd though that my Thai wife is more correct than what I am.

A teacher about 60 years ago said a sentence should not start with 'And ..'  I said " And why not...... "   another clip round the ear.

6 hours ago, toofarnorth said:

While just about hanging on to this topic my wife will say after me saying I need to go to Lotus.  " For what "    Now I would of said  " What for ".  Tell me dudes which is correct.

Surely : You would HAVE said ?

On 7/5/2018 at 6:56 PM, wirat69 said:

Maybe I am a bit of a softie, but it made me cry!!

Don’ t worry “softie” i have spent many times over the last couple of weeks fighting back tears and anybody who can read of This terrible trajedy without feeling something inside must be a heartless soul  

On 7/5/2018 at 7:32 PM, ratcatcher said:

Indeed, very few Thais are truly fluent in English, even fewer farangs speak fluent Thai.

I wouldn't say fluent but basic English communication.

 

How many of you are there?

Can we go out today?

 

All these are taught in primary schools.

 

Surprisingly most Thai can't even reply to these questions.