I want to write it, but not speak it.

<I didn't say that was in fact the case. I said that's what they want. They want to know what people say, how they say it, and the best time to say it.

I understand textbook language is not always language used in real life.>

Not often, in many books.

<It's of no consequence whether the language they learn is a dialect in technical terms or not. The fact remains that ESL/EFL students want to learn how to speak the language in an authentic way which is acceptable to, and considered correct, by the vast majority of those whose first language is English.>

Yes, yes, but most teachers focus on what students will need to say. I'm saying that we should give students access to a wider usage than that found in most ESL books. They need to understand native speakers, not only speak to them.

<Even the most devoted speaker of an English "dialect" cannot deny what is correct and acceptable for any circumstance and what is correct and acceptable to any speaker.>

Again, I'm not speaking about dialect, but regionalisms. Maybe there is no distinction in the USA.

Originally Posted by tdol

Living in Asia, I see less demand for so-called real English and more for standard forms. Possibly because they find the differences difficult enough, standard forms have an attraction in their certainty.

Nice if they deal with people who also use only the standard form.

[Steven D]

Originally Posted by M56

<I didn't say that was in fact the case. I said that's what they want. They want to know what people say, how they say it, and the best time to say it.

I understand textbook language is not always language used in real life.>

Not often, in many books.

<It's of no consequence whether the language they learn is a dialect in technical terms or not. The fact remains that ESL/EFL students want to learn how to speak the language in an authentic way which is acceptable to, and considered correct, by the vast majority of those whose first language is English.>

Yes, yes, but most teachers focus on what students will need to say. I'm saying that we should give students access to a wider usage than that found in most ESL books. They need to understand native speakers, not only speak to them.

<Even the most devoted speaker of an English "dialect" cannot deny what is correct and acceptable for any circumstance and what is correct and acceptable to any speaker.>

Again, I'm not speaking about dialect, but regionalisms. Maybe there is no distinction in the USA.

I see.

What would be an example of "wider usage" to you in this context?


I would say it can be said that dialects at times might have part of their basis in regional speaking styles.

It depends on what is meant by dialect. I find that term rather ambiguous at times.

http://www.answers.com/dialect

1. A regional or social variety of a language distinguished by pronunciation, grammar, or vocabulary, especially a variety of speech differing from the standard literary language or speech pattern of the culture in which it exists: Cockney is a dialect of English.
2. A variety of language that with other varieties constitutes a single language of which no single variety is standard: the dialects of Ancient Greek.

If the overall structure of a "dialect" is extremely removed from that of standard language, then it just might be better to call it another language.

[QUOTE=X Mode]...

<What would be an example of "wider usage" to you in this context?>

Certain regional use.

<I would say it can be said that dialects at times might have part of their basis in regional speaking styles. >

Or the other way around.

<It depends on what is meant by dialect. I find that term rather ambiguous at times.>

Many do.

You missed this one:

http://www.putlearningfirst.com/lang.../standard.html

Standard English dialect (remember we are referring to patterns of grammar and vocabulary but not to pronunciation) has no local base. On the contrary it is accepted throughout the English-using world. And it is spoken with any accent. Consequently it is the only dialect which is neither localised in its currency nor paired solely with its local accent . . .

[Steven D]

[QUOTE=M56]

Originally Posted by X Mode

...

<What would be an example of "wider usage" to you in this context?>

Certain regional use.

<I would say it can be said that dialects at times might have part of their basis in regional speaking styles. >

Or the other way around.

<It depends on what is meant by dialect. I find that term rather ambiguous at times.>

Many do.

You missed this one:

http://www.putlearningfirst.com/lang.../standard.html

Standard English dialect (remember we are referring to patterns of grammar and vocabulary but not to pronunciation) has no local base. On the contrary it is accepted throughout the English-using world. And it is spoken with any accent. Consequently it is the only dialect which is neither localised in its currency nor paired solely with its local accent . . .

And?

What would be an example of "wider usage" to you in this context?

<What would be an example of "wider usage" to you in this context?>

I thought I'd answered that. Oh well... I would bring my NW England reginal use, as I'm not an expert user of any other. You might begin with this:

"I just love the food at Kelly's." "Oh, so don't I!"
.....................

"We've got a standout at the Holy Name rotary from 4:45 to 6 on Thursday."

Do you see those as dialect use, or regional use?

[Steven D]

Originally Posted by M56

<What would be an example of "wider usage" to you in this context?>

I thought I'd answered that. Oh well... I would bring my NW England reginal use, as I'm not an expert user of any other. You might begin with this:

"I just love the food at Kelly's." "Oh, so don't I!"
.....................

"We've got a standout at the Holy Name rotary from 4:45 to 6 on Thursday."

Do you see those as dialect use, or regional use?

The second one is unfamiliar to me. I would call that a regional expression given that this statement is from your NW England regional use. I'd call it regional, but dialects can be regional.

An idiom or expression in your neck of woods is not necessarily an idiom or expression elsewhere in the English speaking world. And, of course, the same goes for anyone else as well.

Originally Posted by X Mode

The second one is unfamiliar to me. I would call that a regional expression given that this statement is from your NW England regional use. I'd call it regional, but dialects can be regional.

An idiom or expression in your neck of woods is not necessarily an idiom or expression elsewhere in the English speaking world. And, of course, the same goes for anyone else as well.

Not sure why you even thought you had to make that last statement. And this, is supposed to be a Bostonian regionalism:


"We've got a standout at the Holy Name rotary from 4:45 to 6 on Thursday."

[Tdol]

What's a standout?

Originally Posted by tdol

What's a standout?

Standout

An assemblage of human billboards: "We've got a standout at the Holy Name rotary from 4:45 to 6 on Thursday."

Human billboards

People who stand at rotaries or on overpasses with campaign signs, sometimes causing gahkablahkas. The candidate's the one who doesn't have a sign in his hand.

http://www.bu.edu/mfeldman/Boston/wicked.html

Here it it used with a different meaning:

Maron's first book "Booklegger's Daughter" is still a standout for me, and I'd moved away from this series. But, while lighter than I usually read, although not really a cozy, I very much enjoyed this book.