4 ms·

I find it fascinating how we can often consider our own native language the "obvious" way of doing things. I once had a frustrated student talk to me about a J

by laurieg 11y ago

I find it fascinating how we can often consider our own native language the "obvious" way of doing things. I once had a frustrated student talk to me about a Japanese colleagues pronunciation. He said words like "fight" with the stereotypical vowel tacked onto the end so they became "fighto". I explained that Japanese is divided up in units like ka, bu, to and so on. The student replies "Why doesn't he just say the first half of 'to'?" to which I replied "Try saying the first half of 'b'".

patio11 11y ago
A way which I frequently use to defuse that sort of objection is "Many people speak with accents [+], but that typically means they speak another entire language, so try to be a charitable listener." A blunter way of putting it is "I will accept any criticisms of Dr. Yamada's English ability if you're capable of articulating them in Japanese." or "How's your Japanese?", both of which I've had regrettable need to use in professional contexts before. [+] Fellow linguists will know this is an abuse of jargon but it's the easiest way to communicate the concept to someone who isn't a linguist.
thaumasiotes 11y ago
To be fair, what the student wants is physically possible, while your challenge in response isn't. I watched an english teacher once convince a (native english-speaking) student that "handbag" is always pronounced as "hambag". This is not entirely true, but close enough that I wouldn't really object to it. I objected quite strongly to the method of convincing, which was to make the following argument: 1. /m/ is pronounced by closing the lips, whereas /n/ is not 2. OK, watch this other student articulate "handbag". Other student, please say "handbag". Even if you articulate the word so carefully that you release the /d/ of handbag, your lips will close immediately afterwards when you pronounce /b/. This style of arguing, we're better off without.
white-flame 11y ago
Yet there's no problem for a Japanese person to say 'n' without trailing into a connected vowel sound, and even using it as its own syllable. Just not with any other consonant. This confuses my gaijin brain. (Also, the first half of "b" is "m'". :-P)
- thaumasiotes 11y ago
  /m/ involves air flow (out through your nose) which is no part of a /b/.
Grue3 11y ago
No, the problem is that Japanese who study english are taught to pronounce English using Japanese kana instead of something like IPA-like transcription. Not that they are physically unable to separately say "t" (this can be easily disproven by an example of Japanese person who speaks English fluently, which clearly exist). Moreover, spoken Japanese does contain individual consonants, for example the quoting particle って (t-te) in the beginning of the sentence, or stuttering "t-t-temee-e-e!".
- Nadya 11y ago
  My Japanese exchange partner cannot say "yeast" and "year" properly. She says "east" and "ear". She can hear the difference just fine and can distinguish "year" from "ear", even without context. I've spent 2 years off-and-on (it comes up every now and then) in an attempt to get her to say it properly. It's discouraging for her because she hasn't yet been able to do it. >(this can be easily disproven by an example of Japanese person who speaks English fluently, which clearly exist) All this proves is the individuals who can speak English fluently are capable. Not necessarily that others are also capable, thus this isn't a proof. I do agree they are physically capable of making the sound, but this argument isn't why and isn't convincing. Especially not to my teacher who maintains that others are capable but she is incapable. So this argument can also be considered potentially "harmful" for learners' self esteem and willingness to fall down 7 times, get up 8.

by laurieg 11y ago

patio11 11y ago

A way which I frequently use to defuse that sort of objection is "Many people speak with accents [+], but that typically means they speak another entire language, so try to be a charitable listener." A blunter way of putting it is "I will accept any criticisms of Dr. Yamada's English ability if you're capable of articulating them in Japanese." or "How's your Japanese?", both of which I've had regrettable need to use in professional contexts before. [+] Fellow linguists will know this is an abuse of jargon but it's the easiest way to communicate the concept to someone who isn't a linguist.

thaumasiotes 11y ago

To be fair, what the student wants is physically possible, while your challenge in response isn't. I watched an english teacher once convince a (native english-speaking) student that "handbag" is always pronounced as "hambag". This is not entirely true, but close enough that I wouldn't really object to it. I objected quite strongly to the method of convincing, which was to make the following argument: 1. /m/ is pronounced by closing the lips, whereas /n/ is not 2. OK, watch this other student articulate "handbag". Other student, please say "handbag". Even if you articulate the word so carefully that you release the /d/ of handbag, your lips will close immediately afterwards when you pronounce /b/. This style of arguing, we're better off without.

white-flame 11y ago

Yet there's no problem for a Japanese person to say 'n' without trailing into a connected vowel sound, and even using it as its own syllable. Just not with any other consonant. This confuses my gaijin brain. (Also, the first half of "b" is "m'". :-P)

thaumasiotes 11y ago
/m/ involves air flow (out through your nose) which is no part of a /b/.

Grue3 11y ago

No, the problem is that Japanese who study english are taught to pronounce English using Japanese kana instead of something like IPA-like transcription. Not that they are physically unable to separately say "t" (this can be easily disproven by an example of Japanese person who speaks English fluently, which clearly exist). Moreover, spoken Japanese does contain individual consonants, for example the quoting particle って (t-te) in the beginning of the sentence, or stuttering "t-t-temee-e-e!".

Nadya 11y ago
My Japanese exchange partner cannot say "yeast" and "year" properly. She says "east" and "ear". She can hear the difference just fine and can distinguish "year" from "ear", even without context. I've spent 2 years off-and-on (it comes up every now and then) in an attempt to get her to say it properly. It's discouraging for her because she hasn't yet been able to do it. >(this can be easily disproven by an example of Japanese person who speaks English fluently, which clearly exist) All this proves is the individuals who can speak English fluently are capable. Not necessarily that others are also capable, thus this isn't a proof. I do agree they are physically capable of making the sound, but this argument isn't why and isn't convincing. Especially not to my teacher who maintains that others are capable but she is incapable. So this argument can also be considered potentially "harmful" for learners' self esteem and willingness to fall down 7 times, get up 8.