Grammar website

[riverkid]

Casiopea: No argument here, riverkid. Thank you for finally explaining your initial statement. It's always a good idea to provide examples or evidence, wouldn't you agree? Not only does it provide your reader with something to work from and with, the dialogue, itself, makes for great discussion.

Casiopea, you are most welcome.

You are an English teacher, are you not? If you so readily agree, why, in such a short segment from that website, could you not have figured this out for yourself?

Psst. It's also a good idea to discuss the issue, not the author.

The authors, [one is now deceased] who purport[ed] to have some level of expertize in this area, ie. English, should be ashamed to put up such nonsense. It should be made clear to ESLs [and ENLs for that matter, including English teachers] that they avoid such sites.

All the best.

And to you to, Casiopea.

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by riverkid

You are an English teacher, are you not? If you so readily agree, why, in such a short segment from that website, could you not have figured this out for yourself?

There's more to it than meets the mind's eye, riverkid.

Originally Posted by riverkid

The authors, [one is now deceased] who purport[ed] to have some level of expertize in this area, ie. English, should be ashamed to put up such nonsense. It should be made clear to ESLs [ad ENLs for that matter, including English teachers] that they avoid such sites.

Throwing the baby out with the bath water serves no purpose.

On a serious note, I appreciate your candour but it would be beneficial to the person who started this thread if you could contribute in a more meaningful way. As things stand, your posts address not the question but the help provided by other posters. If you feel the information provided is incorrect that's OK, but try giving evidence to back up your claims, with clear examples. Don't make the original poster do all the work. Make it easier on them and for them. After all, communication is the point, right? Try looking at this forum as a way to help students understand what it is that you see that's wrong with what's already out there (be it a book, a site, or a contributing member's response). Most importantly, consider acknowledging the contribution of others, even if those contributions stem from opinions that differ from your own. Knowledge is power, in all its shapes and irregular forms. Given your present knowledge and enthusiasm I believe you would be a great asset. However, given your style of expressing that knowledge, your intentions come across as serving only to perpetuate the destruction of human diginity and spirit on this Forum.

[Red5]

Why don't you put a poll up and see what the UsingEnglish.com members think of the topic? It would be good to widen the debate, and an interesting discussion too.

[Casiopea]

Agreed.

[riverkid]

Casiopea:
Throwing the baby out with the bath water serves no purpose.

A recommendation to use such dirty bath water helps no one, Casiopea. I think you now agree that putting babies, ESL or ENL students [even teachers], into such water is hardly beneficial.

On a serious note, I appreciate your candour but it would be beneficial to the person who started this thread if you could contribute in a more meaningful way. As things stand, your posts address not the question but the help provided by other posters.

Excuse me, Casi. Here's what the person who started the thread asked;

"I'm a working professional and want to polish my grammar. I'd like to know if anyone has any experiences with online grammar learning websites and which ones are good."

I provided explicit help warning, not only the poster, but everyone else, from using that site as a grammar reference/help. After walking you through some of the egregious errors found on that site, something I shouldn't have to have done, you're suggesting, below,

If you feel the information provided is incorrect that's OK, but try giving evidence to back up your claims, with clear examples. Don't make the original poster do all the work. Make it easier on them and for them. After all, communication is the point, right?

that it is my responsibility to explain all the errors at a site you recommended. Really, here we are, two teachers; what's wrong with this picture?


Try looking at this forum as a way to help students understand what it is that you see that's wrong with what's already out there (be it a book, a site, or a contributing member's response).

That's what I did and that's what I do here. I speak candidly but fairly, and with all due respect, I don't think you are being fair here. Again, why should a responsibility that rests on your shoulders be shifted to mine.

Most importantly, consider acknowledging the contribution of others, even if those contributions stem from opinions that differ from your own. Knowledge is power, in all its shapes and irregular forms. Given your present knowledge and enthusiasm I believe you would be a great asset. However, given your style of expressing that knowledge, your intentions come across as serving only to perpetuate the destruction of human diginity and spirit on this Forum.

I may well be wrong, but you seem to have taken this personally. Any "scorn" on my part was directed at the authors of those sites.

If this discussion has knocked your spirit for a loop, I say, pick yourself up by the bootstraps and get going again. You too have a lot to offer.

But why have you turned this into a "riverkid is bad" routine instead of simply acknowledging you provided someone else's bad info and move on? Now you know better; avoid those websites. They both stand as excellent examples of studies in confusion.

As I said, I speak my mind but I take no offense from your words and I hold no grudges.

[DavyBCN]

Just a tentative suggestion Riverkid. You have made a lot of really good posts during the short time I have been using this forum - but there are times when you have been too dismissive of other views. So, while I agree with you totally about the website in question, perhaps you could review some of the ways you have worded your responses? As a bystander in this discussion I have winced at times.

If others have a different view I may disagree totally but, for example, I would not use words such as "prescriptive" too often.

[Red5]

Originally Posted by DavyBCN

I have winced at times

Indeed.

[riverkid]

Point taken, Gentlemen.

Now, have you noticed how very little there has been in response to my "knocking" prescriptive rules? Doesn't that raise any flags for you?

As the not so old saying goes; "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but they're not entitled to their own set of facts".

If a personal favorite prescription gets swacked, please, by all means, leap to its defence. Surely these rules have something behind them that would sustain such a defence.

[Tdol]

I can't see that much wrong with their version of the lie/lay distiction, though i am fully aware of regional variations that break the pattern, though it is the standard form as described there that still gets tested by many exam boards and, therefore, likely to be of use to learners. I shudder at the thought of people teaching 'it is I', however.

Most of these rules do have some sort of backing behind them and it is often a question of whether people accept the backing or not- I see the two negatives in maths make a positive, when multiplied, so two negatives must make a positive, even though people know that is not the speaker's intention, another example of prescriptive pettiness.

However, I do think the thread could have stayed at the level of a discussion if some of the phrasing that made Davy whince and so much red ink had not been used.