Danger of learning English from TV

[emsr2d2]

Whilst it can be very helpful for English learners to watch TV in English in order to help their comprehension, it's important to remember that TV shows and movies are not always grammatically correct.

So far today, I've heard:

You're going to have to choose between one of them.
There's many reasons why I don't like pasta.
What are you going to do about them friends of yours?

 

[nyota]

You're going to have to choose between one of them. --> :loling:

There's many reasons why I don't like pasta.

Isn't it so that you might hear there's many reasons in colloquial English but not so much there is many reasons...?

 

[emsr2d2]

Isn't it so that you might hear there's many reasons in colloquial English but not so much there is many reasons...?

The problem is that it should be "There are many reasons..."

 

[SoothingDave]

Isn't it so that you might hear there's many reasons in colloquial English but not so much there is many reasons...?

Yes. I think most natives would not say "there is..." with a plural object, but "there's" rolls off the tongue so easily in casual conversation.

 

[Tdol]

There's two/many, etc is common enough in colloquial speech in the UK too, but it would be marked wrong in exams.

 

[konungursvia]

Everyone makes errors but you can regard spoken English as seen on TV as a valid grammar for today's speech. What old farts say about what is "incorrect" based on fifty year old textbooks just demonstrates they don't know what 'grammar' means.

 

[Rover_KE]

Everyone makes errors but you can regard spoken English as seen on TV as a valid grammar for today's speech. What old farts say about what is "incorrect" based on fifty year old textbooks just demonstrates they don't know what 'grammar' means.

Are you saying here, konungursvia, that the examples quoted by emsr2d2 can be accepted by students as grammatical?

Rover

 

[Allen165]

Whilst it can be very helpful for English learners to watch TV in English in order to help their comprehension, it's important to remember that TV shows and movies are not always grammatically correct.

NOT A TEACHER.

I don't think that's news to the students who frequent this site. But I do think that, for most of them, learning conversational English is more important than striving for grammatical perfection, which is out of reach even for native speakers.

 

[konungursvia]

Are you saying here, konungursvia, that the examples quoted by emsr2d2 can be accepted by students as grammatical?

Rover

Not exactly; the first is a poor example, and merely illogical, but the second and third may reflect typical speech. Should we define grammar in a way that prohibits typical speech?

My point is that TV is a reliable medium for learning language, despite the fact that it reveals spoken grammar is evolving much faster than grammar class-- and perhaps even because of the fact.

With three carefully chosen examples anyone can make a point, but I believe his point is a false one.

 

[emsr2d2]

As I said, I think watching English TV and films is fantastic for comprehension and for picking up colloquialisms. As long as someone is also learning English "properly" so that they can recognise the difference, then great!

 

[sarah GREEK]

I think learning English from TV is a fantanstic way!you can enjoy the TV as well as do the listening!But you should also pay some attention in the grammer!

 

[Rover_KE]

But you should also pay some attention in the grammar!

. . . and be aware that a lot of spoken dialogue will be ungrammatical.

Rover

 

[Tdol]

Or that the grammar of spoken English is very different from that of written English. ;-)