Current Events > I'm an English teacher, and I think my co-teacher can't read.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Ok, so I am an EsL (English Second Language teacher). So is my coworker. Our students are Japanese. Ive been doing this for nearly 10 years, and have certification on top of that, so I feel I do know what Im doing.

Anyway, our students keep a journal, and we correct them over the week. I have been noticing that she has not been correcting them properly, and has been leaving out glaring omissions, like run-on sentences and fractures. One particular sentence really bothered me.

I ate many foods in the camping. (The student was talking about her camping trip).

My coworker says that this is grammatically correct because the camping is a noun changed into a verb. However, even if that was the case, it is still wrong. It should read, I ate a lot of food while camping,. OR I ate a lot of food at the campsite , depending on her context.

She comes from a linguistic background, so I CAN see where her reasoning comes from, in a logical way. It makes sense linguistically. But there is absolutely no way it is grammatically correct, and she has done this many times when I bring up grammar. Grammar is insanely important for these kids, as testing is dire here.

So just in case, Id like to know if Ive been misguided, or if she is trying to gaslight me.

---

Maybe she's just blind

---

Is there any way this is correct at all?

Because my boss isnt a native English speaker, and Im sure my coworker is telling her that this is correct.

---

It actually is grammatically correct, although extremely strange

---

Going with not correct.

---

DarkRoast posted...

It actually is grammatically correct, although extremely strange

Explain. I can see the direction she is coming from. It can be correct in a very bizarre way, but it would never fly on tests, documents, or literature.

---

If someone said that to me I'd instantly know they don't speak fluent English

Camping can be a noun but I think you would need to use "during the" for it to become one. "In" wouldn't be enough.

I teach English in Korea and when it comes to that, just tell them it may be grammatically correct but that it sounds more natural in x-y-and-z ways because "people back home are dumb and we don't know how to speak our language"

I hate doing it but it's what I have to do to fix their mistakes while also allowing them to save face.

---

Kastrada posted...

Camping can be a noun but I think you would need to use "during the" for it to become one. "In" wouldn't be enough.

I teach English in Korea and when it comes to that, just tell them it may be grammatically correct but that it sounds more natural in x-y-and-z ways because "people back home are dumb and we don't know how to speak our language"

I hate doing it but it's what I have to do to fix their mistakes while also allowing them to save face.

Yeah, I feel this. The point is to be clear, not be grammatically correct. However, this phrase is neither, and drives me up the wall as a professional.

Im fairly lenient when it comes to conversational English, but written is very strict for me.

---

It's correct only in the most technical of terms.

ESL though shouldn't be teaching people to be technically correct. A native speaker wouldn't talk or write like that.

Think of it in terms of translating. If you directly translate something from Japanese to English if your translation is 1:1 it's technically correct as a translation, but that doesn't mean it's going to be understandable to an English reader. So even though it's a correct it's a bad translation.
---

harley2280 posted...

It's correct only in the most technical of terms.

ESL though shouldn't be teaching people to be technically correct. A native speaker wouldn't talk or write like that.

Think of it in terms of translating. If you directly translate something from Japanese to English if your translation is 1:1 it's technically correct as a translation, but that doesn't mean it's going to be understandable to an English reader. So even though it's a correct it's a bad translation.

Exactly. Thats where I can see where she is coming from, but I dont understand why she is letting it slide. It is almost as if she doesnt understand it herself. Or perhaps, she is cutting the kids some slack.

Im wondering if I should mention this to my boss, because it has come up many times, and Ive seen her teach really unnatural English to students.

Like using Because at the beginning of a sentence, such as Because my school gave me a lot of homework. Isnt this a fragment?

---

_____Cait posted...

Like using Because at the beginning of a sentence, such as Because my school gave me a lot of homework. Isnt this a fragment?

Starting sentences with and/because/etc can be alright if you're still making a proper sentence with it. When it's fragmented it can be a bit weird sounding, but just need to avoid using it in that way.

---

A lot is grammatically incorrect, if youre choosing to be this petty

---

harley2280 posted...

It's correct only in the most technical of terms.

ESL though shouldn't be teaching people to be technically correct. A native speaker wouldn't talk or write like that.

Think of it in terms of translating. If you directly translate something from Japanese to English if your translation is 1:1 it's technically correct as a translation, but that doesn't mean it's going to be understandable to an English reader. So even though it's a correct it's a bad translation.

This is a very good answer. I used to have to work on policy documents in languages I didn't speak and sometimes I'd get a translation and sometimes an interpreter's statement. As I became more senior I requested the interpreter's statement every time. The translation gives equivalence. The interpreter's statement gives the meaning as a native speaker would put it.

To my mind, a language learner should be seeking to speak as a native speaker and their instruction should help them achieve that.


---

_____Cait posted...

Explain. I can see the direction she is coming from. It can be correct in a very bizarre way, but it would never fly on tests, documents, or literature.

"The camping" is a singular event. For example, I fell asleep in the Super Bowl. Personally, I would use "at" or "during" but it is nevertheless technically correct.

But like others have said, there's more to teaching a language than just allowing technically correct statements.

---

_____Cait posted...

Is there any way this is correct at all?

Because my boss isnt a native English speaker, and Im sure my coworker is telling her that this is correct.

Basically there is no way to correct this. With ESL you can't just bombard the student with every little detail, it's too much to process. You need to make targeted comments.

Run-ons and fragments aren't even a problem. Don't believe the lies of the standardized testing complex.

---

A) its grammatically correct. Grammatical correctness has nothing to do with sensibility.

B)

Robot2600 posted...

With ESL you can't just bombard the student with every little detail, it's too much to process. You need to make targeted comments.

C)
this is why it bugs me when people without a pedagogical background go teach esl overseas and call themselves teachers

---

SothaSil posted...

A) its grammatically correct. Grammatical correctness has nothing to do with sensibility.

B)

C)
this is why it bugs me when people without a pedagogical background go teach esl overseas and call themselves teachers

We need to teach them native sounding English, as well as English for their standardized testing. The tests are awful and rigid, but they matter here, unfortunately.

And even if it is technically correct, it sounds awful, and I feel we should at LEAST teach them to sound slightly native while speaking, within reason, as to not stress them out.

There is a fine line we need to walk between native speaking and test English. This, however, is pretty glaring and unnatural. I can let i proper plurals, tenses, and conjugation by on occasion, but this just sounds bad.

---

You asked if it was grammatical. It is. Obviously grammaticality is not the metric by which language is taught, no.

---

Im trying to think of an example in which a gerund like that can be the object of a preposition, and Im coming up blank.

correct: Camping is fun.
correct: I had fun (while) camping.
incorrect: I ate many foods in the camping.

correct: Running is good exercise.
correct: I hurt my foot (while) running after my kids.
incorrect: I hurt my foot in the running.

Notwithstanding the colloquial to be in the running for something, and other figures of speech, we dont use gerunds as objects of prepositions.

ETA: Okay, I thought of a possible example:
Being a women is challenging on CE.
There is no shame in being a woman.

So technically being a woman is the object of the preposition in, but note the absence of the word the.

---

I had a sub in high school for English. Everyone thought he was hot but dude could not read the book. He would stutter and stumble so many times.

---

Touch posted...

I had a sub in high school for English. Everyone thought he was hot but dude could not read the book. He would stutter and stumble so many times.

Some people have dyslexia or other impairments that interfere with reading and have no bearing on their intellect or ability to parse language. Today you learned

---

Tell her to look up subject-verb agreement (I__food) and then slam dunk the journal in the trash.

SothaSil posted...

Some people have dyslexia or other impairments that interfere with reading and have no bearing on their intellect or ability to parse language. Today you learned

Didn't say anything about his intellect lol. I was just stating what happened.

---

Cocytus posted...

Tell her to look up subject-verb agreement (I__food) and then slam dunk the journal in the trash.

Im going to tell you to learn about the subject youre posting about before posting

---

The only way that make sense is if the other teacher is trying to cut the students some slack. Which is the wrong thing to do if the students need to take a very strict test where this kind of nonsense won't get a passing grade. It has been a long time since I studied English in college (even then, it was just a couple of classes) but there is no way this is correct--or if it is somehow correct under arcane grammar rules--correct in the sense that anyone would write this way.

One thing that bothers me is the fact that your boss isn't a native English speaker. I've heard that office politics in Asian countries is even more brutal than what we have here, so I'd be a little concerned that maybe your coworker is trying to build the case that you don't know English well to gain favor with the boss or even to maybe get you fired. I'd worry about this even more if the coworker is new and you've been there for a while.

If you're under pressure to help the students save face and not grade them too harshly, give it a passing mark but explain what she should have done instead. But that only holds if most of the students are writing things like that. If most of the class is doing better and this student doesn't merit special consideration, then mark it wrong and correct her.

I took a few english classes in college so I know what im talking about.

Again, it is not correct going by the conventions of native speakers but it is not ungrammatical

---

darkmaian23 posted...

The only way that make sense is if the other teacher is trying to cut the students some slack. Which is the wrong thing to do if the students need to take a very strict test where this kind of nonsense won't get a passing grade. It has been a long time since I studied English in college (even then, it was just a couple of classes) but there is no way this is correct--or if it is somehow correct under arcane grammar rules--correct in the sense that anyone would write this way.

One thing that bothers me is the fact that your boss isn't a native English speaker. I've heard that office politics in Asian countries is even more brutal than what we have here, so I'd be a little concerned that maybe your coworker is trying to build the case that you don't know English well to gain favor with the boss or even to maybe get you fired. I'd worry about this even more if the coworker is new and you've been there for a while.

If you're under pressure to help the students save face and not grade them too harshly, give it a passing mark but explain what she should have done instead. But that only holds if most of the students are writing things like that. If most of the class is doing better and this student doesn't merit special consideration, then mark it wrong and correct her.

+1

---

Sariana21 posted...

Im trying to think of an example in which a gerund like that can be the object of a preposition, and Im coming up blank.

correct: Camping is fun.
correct: I had fun (while) camping.
incorrect: I ate many foods in the camping.

correct: Running is good exercise.
correct: I hurt my foot (while) running after my kids.
incorrect: I hurt my foot in the running.

Notwithstanding the colloquial to be in the running for something, and other figures of speech, we dont use gerunds as objects of prepositions.

ETA: Okay, I thought of a possible example:
Being a women is challenging on CE.
There is no shame in being a woman.

So technically being a woman is the object of the preposition in, but note the absence of the word the.

+1

---

I dont think that other teacher is doing any students any favor by adamantly wanting to be technically right

the musical phrasing of that sentence leaves something to be desired imo

---

RedJackson posted...

I dont think that other teacher is doing any students any favor by adamantly wanting to be technically right

the musical phrasing of that sentence leaves something to be desired imo

It's not what a native speaker would say, which should be the goal of a language learner. Google translate can give you meaning, but you wouldn't want to speak that way.

---

darkmaian23 posted...

The only way that make sense is if the other teacher is trying to cut the students some slack. Which is the wrong thing to do if the students need to take a very strict test where this kind of nonsense won't get a passing grade. It has been a long time since I studied English in college (even then, it was just a couple of classes) but there is no way this is correct--or if it is somehow correct under arcane grammar rules--correct in the sense that anyone would write this way.

One thing that bothers me is the fact that your boss isn't a native English speaker. I've heard that office politics in Asian countries is even more brutal than what we have here, so I'd be a little concerned that maybe your coworker is trying to build the case that you don't know English well to gain favor with the boss or even to maybe get you fired. I'd worry about this even more if the coworker is new and you've been there for a while.

If you're under pressure to help the students save face and not grade them too harshly, give it a passing mark but explain what she should have done instead. But that only holds if most of the students are writing things like that. If most of the class is doing better and this student doesn't merit special consideration, then mark it wrong and correct her.

Boss is actually a sort of prodigy and is entirely self-taught, although not perfect. She is very capable though, and Im sure she could spot the mistake.

I do wonder if the coworker is trying to gaslight me and win favor. She has done this many, many times before, saying her mistakes are technically correct. I remember once, when she found out I was certified, she tried to convince me that my certification was the wrong type, as if it were for teaching English to people living in America. Ive caught her trying to manipulate others too. But I could also be overthinking this, and she just might be a narcissist who just doesn't like feeling inadequate.

Either way, our students are private and pay a lot of money for these classes, so Id be worried their parents would see these journals and complain. It has happened before, too.

---

You work with a chimp, sir!

---

Bump for the night crew

---

It all depends on what you mean by correct. There are multiple style guides used by writers; I dont think any of them would accept that construction. An editor would reject it, which in my mind makes it not correct.

English does not have one grand authority on what is grammatical or not. It does have rules, but most of our discourse is governed by conventions, which are defined by the various style guides.

---

Sariana21 posted...

English does not have one grand authority on what is grammatical or not.

There is pretty broad consensus about what constitutes grammaticality among people who actually know what the word means.

But the rest of your post is correct.

---