Here’s a simple truth. Some people like grammar, and other’s don’t. Also, grammar can be learned directly or indirectly. So, should we teach it? Should students watch a grammar video or study a chart in a textbook? I’m all for learning a language through through conversation and authentic sources, including movies and books. They provide a meaningful context in which exposure to grammar patterns takes place. However, not every learner has an easy time making sense of the structures on their own. A direct explanation can confirm an understanding, erase a doubt, or sharpen one’s ability to apply the grammar.Every student can shape their language learning journey to include as much direct explanation as they see fit. Hopefully, though, they all understand the need to test out what they learn and produce in the target language beyond focused practice. Some can mistakenly perceive grammar lessons as a safe harbor where they can stay indefinitely, but the goal of any kind of direct grammar instruction is to equip the learner for sailing out on their own. Since I offer video lessons for all levels, I like when old viewers come back after a long hiatus and realize they can pick up some more advanced instructional tidbits from me before heading out to sea again. Personally, I can say that the longer I teach, the more I learn. Teaching a grammar topic always helps me sort out details and gain clarity. Furthermore, I occasionally come to the shocking discovery that what I had previously understood about English grammar was inaccurate. I’ve admitted this in the past, for instance, with my use of the term “indirect object.” (See 2022 post.)Recently, I experienced another Oh no!/Aha! moment when I understood that I may have been using the term “embedded question” too loosely. It seems most are in agreement that the term “wh-clause” is the broad category of noun clauses that start with wh-words (question words). Many seem to view embedded questions (a type of wh-clause) primarily as objects of verbs like know and explain with the purpose of indirectly asking a question:a. I’d really like to know what you think. (Compare: What do you think?)b. Could you explain what this means? (Compare: What does this mean?)I previously saw embedded questions functioning in other roles, namely as a subject or a complement, but I’m aware now that some sources don’t go so far. The compromise between our different definitions may be to use “wh-clause.” c. How we label structures is less important than how we use them. (subject and object of preposition)d. One source of frustration is how we use different terms for the same thing. (subject complement)I’ve also noted that some use the terms “embedded questions” and “indirect questions” interchangeably, and yet I’m among those who associate indirect questions with indirect (i.e. reported) speech. To me, this kind of wh-clause serves a different purpose:e. The man next to me asked what time it was. (Reporting a question.) I decided to edit some older posts to avoid any confusion and use the broader and more inclusive “wh-clause,” but in truth, all these noun clauses have the same structure within; they simply serve different purposes: polite questions, reported questions, clefts, and more. Quite some time ago, I decided to fret a lot less over terminology as long as we’re all using the same structures for the same purpose and our intentions are understood. Here’s another example. Do you see “should have been” as should followed by the present perfect? Or do you like to explain that perfect modals use [modal verb + have + past participle]? There’s also a third camp that doesn’t use any terminology and simply reproduces the pattern for past certainty or necessity: should have been, could have been, may have been, etc. Again, the more I teach, the more I learn. I’m learning to be more flexible and adaptable. I certainly don’t have a monopoly on flexibility and evolution. Language changes, and perceptions do as well. I’m excited to make even more discoveries in my twenty-eighth year of teaching!
Featured image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay
Recent comments