drawing articulators

I never was much good at drawing these things..

Honestly, look at them - looks like coils of bacon. The first one is meant to show the position of the articulators during nasal plosion and the second during lateral plosion.

ambiguous language spotting

..from 'Mary, Queen of Shops' last night, while describing discerning shoppers in York:
'...she needs to understand what the thirty-something fashionable women of York want...'
Is she talking about women in their thirties, or is she implying that there are only thirty or so fashionable women in York?

bloody plosions. Especially nasal and lateral ones. It's not that it's difficult, it's just tedious.

Roles of speaker and listener

Just a short post, based on a conversation last night. Do different language groups place different responsibilities on the speaker and listener in a conversation to ensure that any given communication has been understood? In English, if I want to make sure that the other person is following me, I might say 'Understand?', '..if you get me..', '...did you get that?', and so forth. In Turkish, however, you say, 'Anlatabildim mi?', which means 'Have I made myself clear?'
Another feature of Turkish is the tendency to repeat information, especially important information, three times, often in subtly different ways. So what's going on? It seems to me that in English, the responsibility on understanding the message is on the listener, hence the reason why I say the things above. In other words, it's down to the decoder to ensure the successful transmission of a message. In Turkish, however, the responsibility for the successful transmission of the message lies with the speaker, or encoder. This means that, in English, listening is a far more active role: There is an expectation that the message will be understood. In contrast, in Turkish the listener is far more passive. Speaking from experience, I would say that this explains why Turkish language students tend not to hear instructions in class, as well as explaining why they can get so frustrated in conversation - it's because the role they are expected to play is at variance with what they do in L1. When they speak, this tendency to repeat and emphasise comes out, which to the English listener is frustrating: When it happens to me, I want to say ,'Yes, yes, I understand!', which is rather rude in Turkish culture. When the Turkish student listens, the expectation is that all the work of making the message clear lies with the speaker.
This phenomenon possibly also has something to do with the turn-taking periods in the two languages. In English, generally the first person will speak, then the next person will speak afterwards. In Turkish, there is a tendency to overlap, hence possibly the reason why it is necessary to convey information several times.
Now, there may be some research out there into this, but I don't have the time at the moment to look; However, I think I'm on to something. Ideas, anyone?

My eyes are feeling a bit fried up from reading for the past three hours, and I'm about to call it a day - well, at least for the time being: I'll probably do some more work this evening at some stage. A question about methodologies: why are they all aimed at beginners? OK, so lots of research has been done about acquisition and learning, but what about the fine-tuning, improving and expanding phase, once students get past intermediate level? I don't know if much research has been done, but my impressions based on my teaching experiences are that there's a big drop-off in the numbers of students who want to learn English once they get to an intermediate level, or thereabouts - in other words, once they reach a basic level of linguistic competency. Now, the fact that tens of thousands of people take the FCE and CAE, and that the number of students taking IELTS has exploded over the past year, may belie that fact, but there it is. What turns basic competency into fluency and eventually mastery? What are the motivators?

Suggestopedia

In my ongoing travails, I have to read about the various theories and methodologies that pervade the world of language teaching, and have spent most of today making notes and reading about the damn things. One of the more looney ones has to be Suggestopedia, which quite frankly appears to be madder than a betting shop full of scousers who've just found that a) their giro's been stopped and b) they've had their last 50p nicked.
I can't begin to describe how ridiculous this theory is, nor the demented self-aggrandisement and egotism of its proponent. Suffice it to say that part of it involves letting the students sit in recliners, listening to baroque music while listen to the teacher, who projects an aura of believing in what he's doing while being simulataneously enthusiastic and grave of deportment, intone a relevant text, before the whole lot get up and bugger off without discussing a thing. Utter nuts.

Dipping away.

working away on the dip. Currently, I'm having a deeply exciting time looking at theories and methodologies - right at the moment, Krashen's Natural Approach, TPR and the Silent Way. Why do none of these seem to have much to say about higher level English Learners? They're all focused at getting beginners competent to a certain degree. Since I generally teach the other end of the spectrum, I'd be interested in the work done regarding theories and methodologies for those who already have higher levels of L2.