New Horizon - grade 2, unit 2 - Emi Goes Abroad

[Otaku]

1. "Moai": I seriously do not like this word. I would argue the average English speaker couldn't pronounce this word. One more thing in the textboook proving it is not really an 'English' textbook but rather a travel guide. This particular word begs the question, what is the actual pronunciation for this word? I obviously only know the "moe-eye" or "mo-E" or "mo-eh"? And, I'm not talking about katakana pronunciation because quite frankly I don't care about that crapific way of bastardizing words.

I looked up on Wikipedia, and after I crossed referenced with it's IPA alphabet, it appears that "moe-eye" is the correct pronunciation. Can someone check this to make sure?

2. "1,500": Do you say...
a. one thousand five hundred?
b. one thousand and five hundred?
c. fifteen hundred?

Personally, I think all the ways are correct and everybody should simple choose their own liking. However, in the teacher's manual it says to teach the b-style from above, making sure to add it "and". Can you say unimportant need for analtivity?

3. "But": Don't start sentences with the word "but". But I've beaten this point to death already...

[jessen100]

i was though in 5th grade that 1500, as one thousand and five hundred is wrong. when reading numbers the word and represents a decimal point. si it would be 1000.500 (which is reasonably nonsensical)

so according to what i was taught in elementary school, the one this textbook says to use is the only one that is actually wrong.

and no way would i be able to read "moai"

[regardo]

1. "Moai": I seriously do not like this word. I would argue the average English speaker couldn't pronounce this word. One more thing in the textboook proving it is not really an 'English' textbook but rather a travel guide. This particular word begs the question, what is the actual pronunciation for this word? I obviously only know the "moe-eye" or "mo-E" or "mo-eh"? And, I'm not talking about katakana pronunciation because quite frankly I don't care about that crapific way of bastardizing words.

I looked up on Wikipedia, and after I crossed referenced with it's IPA alphabet, it appears that "moe-eye" is the correct pronunciation. Can someone check this to make sure?

how about you just listen to the cd?

[regardo]

i was though in 5th grade that 1500, as one thousand and five hundred is wrong. when reading numbers the word and represents a decimal point. si it would be 1000.500 (which is reasonably nonsensical)

as far as i know and can think of, this is only true if there is a kind of measurer in front of the AND: one METER and seventysix (centimeters),
i learned that one thousand AND five hundred is perfectly ok. BUT what do i know.

[Otaku]

how about you just listen to the cd?

First off, I'm a bit skeptical of anything stamped by the New Horizon maker, Tokyo Shoseki. And second, listening to the CD wouldn't do any good because the native English speaker, too, had probably never heard of the word either. Like me, they probably looked at the katakana pronunciation.

[regardo]

how about you just listen to the cd?

First off, I'm a bit skeptical of anything stamped by the New Horizon maker, Tokyo Shoseki. And second, listening to the CD wouldn't do any good because the native English speaker, too, had probably never heard of the word either. Like me, they probably looked at the katakana pronunciation.

honestly, i never thought about it and i never gave a fukc. i just repeated what my JTE said

[Meat]

1. "Moai": I seriously do not like this word. I would argue the average English speaker couldn't pronounce this word. One more thing in the textboook proving it is not really an 'English' textbook but rather a travel guide. This particular word begs the question, what is the actual pronunciation for this word? I obviously only know the "moe-eye" or "mo-E" or "mo-eh"? And, I'm not talking about katakana pronunciation because quite frankly I don't care about that crapific way of bastardizing words.

I've had the same problem with the Sunshine books. My 3rd year JTE asked me (during class) to pronounce Tok Pisin-- the name of an English creole language spoken in New Guinea. I'd never heard of it before. I'm pretty sure I said it differently both times she asked, and differently in each class too!

Same goes with "Bonobo" from the ichinensei book.

I looked up on Wikipedia, and after I crossed referenced with it's IPA alphabet, it appears that "moe-eye" is the correct pronunciation. Can someone check this to make sure?

2. "1,500": Do you say...
a. one thousand five hundred?
b. one thousand and five hundred?
c. fifteen hundred?

Personally, I think all the ways are correct and everybody should simple choose their own liking. However, in the teacher's manual it says to teach the b-style from above, making sure to add it "and". Can you say unimportant need for analtivity?

3. "But": Don't start sentences with the word "but". But I've beaten this point to death already...

All are alright. Wikipedia says B is commonly used in British English. A is what I would say unless it was a casual conversation, a year, or I was really lazy, in which case I might use C. That said, the students really should learn all three, since all three are commonly used.

[Paul]

I've had the same problem with the Sunshine books. My 3rd year JTE asked me (during class) to pronounce Tok Pisin-- the name of an English creole language spoken in New Guinea. I'd never heard of it before. I'm pretty sure I said it differently both times she asked, and differently in each class too!

Same goes with "Bonobo" from the ichinensei book.

One of my new JTE's this year was born and raised in Papua New Guinea, and Australia, he is a former pro-soccer player to boot, and I might add that I have lived in Japan longer than he has. I will ask him tomorrow for the pronunciation to Tok Pisin, although to me it sounds like "talk-pissin".

Moai is actually really easy to pronounce here in Okinawa, seeing as how there is a word in the local dialect that is pronounced "exactly" the same way.

"But" In regards to doesnt the HS entrance exam accept conjunctions at the beginning of sentences? I know when I was a kid my teachers would have slapped my tiny little fingers for starting a sentence with one, isnt it "acceptable" now a days? Even though it is "wrong"

[jessen100]

isnt it "acceptable" now a days? Even though it is "wrong"

i know my friends would make fun of me if they saw me do it.

[bum1]

Some kids were pronouncing it "moe" in my school which is some wierd Akihabara slang. They then proceeded to teach me Akihabarajanken which invloves several arguably obscene gestures and changing the last word of the rhyme that goes with the game from poi to moe. I couldn't stop laughing.

[Paul]

Some kids were pronouncing it "moe" in my school which is some wierd Akihabara slang. They then proceeded to teach me Akihabarajanken which invloves several arguably obscene gestures and changing the last word of the rhyme that goes with the game from poi to moe. I couldn't stop laughing.

Please feel free to share the entire exchange here I would love to learn it.

[Otaku]

...other things I see with this Unit:

1. "Show me your passport, please." This particular grammar point is classified in J-English grammar books as: S+V+O+O (subject + verb + object1 + object2). However, in the target sentence there is no 'S' (subject).

2. "Tons" This is not a standard unit of weight in Japan or other English-speaking countries. I think the textbook should strive for English-nuetrality whenever possible and I think there could be other ways to express units of weight. Or better yet, take the moai story out of textbook altogether.

3. Moai plural? What is the plural of moai?

4. No, WE don't I am having a bigger and bigger problem with Japanese people speaking for the whole of society: "We this..." We that..." At the bottom of page 14, the target sentence reads: "We call it a moai." No, WE don't. "It is called a moai." 'Moai' is the name of the statue. WE don't call it that; IT is called that. I feel that when you want to say "We call..." it is in reference to a small group of people calling something/one different to that of which the majority refers to him/her/it.

This isn't an isolated example, directly below the target sentence (in the teacher's manual), there are two additional sentences in red:
-- "We call him Ken."
-- "We call this cat Tama."

If 'Ken' is the person's real name, WE don't call him Ken, everyone calls him Ken. Therefore, "His name is Ken."
Likewise, if the cat's name is Tama, WE don't call the cat Tama. "The cat's name is Tama."

I feel like the textbook is always trying to fit a round block into a square hole and it's frustrating to watch. And, what's even more frustrating is being asked to take an active role in the forcing.

[jessen100]

4. No, WE don't I am having a bigger and bigger problem with Japanese people speaking for the whole of society: "We this..." We that..." At the bottom of page 14, the target sentence reads: "We call it a moai." No, WE don't. "It is called a moai." 'Moai' is the name of the statue. WE don't call it that; IT is called that. I feel that when you want to say "We call..." it is in reference to a small group of people calling something/one different to that of which the majority refers to him/her/it.

this needs to be braodcast on primetime television or something. i hate it so much too.

tell them it makes them sound arrogant as a japanese person, (i think it does) that will hopefully make them stop.

[Paul]

If 'Ken' is the person's real name, WE don't call him Ken, everyone calls him Ken. Therefore, "His name is Ken."
Likewise, if the cat's name is Tama, WE don't call the cat Tama. "The cat's name is Tama."

I feel like the textbook is always trying to fit a round block into a square hole and it's frustrating to watch. And, what's even more frustrating is being asked to take an active role in the forcing.

The better JTE's will in my experience explain it differently. They will for example say "This is Paul" "We call him Paul 先生*

They make the point of explaining the difference between a persons name and their nickname.

I have used any number of pictures of Japanese and foreign stars to reinforce this point as well. Like a picture of Matsui Hideki, as an example here; "This is Hideki Matsui" "We call him Godzilla".

But to take your example of Tama, it is semantics I believe. Even if the cat's name is Tama, it could very well be called something else by the family as well. Hell my pet dog when I was a kid was named Thor but I used to call him "shithead" when my parents werent in hearing distance.

[Paul]

4. No, WE don't I am having a bigger and bigger problem with Japanese people speaking for the whole of society: "We this..." We that..." At the bottom of page 14, the target sentence reads: "We call it a moai." No, WE don't. "It is called a moai." 'Moai' is the name of the statue. WE don't call it that; IT is called that. I feel that when you want to say "We call..." it is in reference to a small group of people calling something/one different to that of which the majority refers to him/her/it.

this needs to be braodcast on primetime television or something. i hate it so much too.

tell them it makes them sound arrogant as a japanese person, (i think it does) that will hopefully make them stop.

Be careful here, what goes around comes around. You wont be seen as the purveyor of the fountain of knowledge regarding gaikokuland if you do that. You wont be able to say that "We dont talk that way" I'mu fainu sanku yu. Ando Yu?

[jessen100]

ive heard this used in translation of words in english to japanese as well, so it would create a sentence such as this second one:

"how do you say desk in japanese?"
"we say tsukue."

i didnt like that.

[Otaku]

If 'Ken' is the person's real name, WE don't call him Ken, everyone calls him Ken. Therefore, "His name is Ken."
Likewise, if the cat's name is Tama, WE don't call the cat Tama. "The cat's name is Tama."

I feel like the textbook is always trying to fit a round block into a square hole and it's frustrating to watch. And, what's even more frustrating is being asked to take an active role in the forcing.

The better JTE's will in my experience explain it differently. They will for example say "This is Paul" "We call him Paul 先生*

They make the point of explaining the difference between a persons name and their nickname.

I have used any number of pictures of Japanese and foreign stars to reinforce this point as well. Like a picture of Matsui Hideki, as an example here; "This is Hideki Matsui" "We call him Godzilla".

But to take your example of Tama, it is semantics I believe. Even if the cat's name is Tama, it could very well be called something else by the family as well. Hell my pet dog when I was a kid was named Thor but I used to call him "shithead" when my parents werent in hearing distance.

I don't know, maybe it's my debate background but I would still personally shy away from "we". I like the example of Matsui Hideki, let's use that. I would say, "This is Hideki Matsui. His nickname is Godzilla."

To say "We call him Godzilla." is rather pompeous in my opinion because because I would arguable say "we" is being defined as "all Japanese people." While Japan prides themself as being a community society, I think it rather bold to speak for the whole of society, which is ironic considering the uber-politeness the society is reown for. Furthermore, even in America, Matsui is referred to as "Godzilla". That is his nickname, period. "He is called Gozilla." The only way I can see the we-call-him-Godzilla being an accurate statement is that if Matsui referred to himself as something other than Godzilla. Confused yet?

The "we" has always ground on me since being in Japan. When I had only lived in one place in Japan and heard Japanese people always say, "We do this..." or "Japanese people do that...", I always thought that was the way all Japanese did things or that all Japanese people ate the same things. However, when I started moving around Japan, I quickly realized the "we" was a way to try and maintain an inaccurate impression of all Japanese people. While Japanese people share many things, viewpoints are not one of them.

[bum1]

"While Japanese people share many things, viewpoints are not one of them."

Thank you.

This is a universal truth of humankind. People who think all Japanese are the same or do the same things just havn't lived here long enough.

[Paul]

Using we is safer that saying I. Since we indicates the group and not the individual it is acceptable to use but does not necessarily mean that the person is speaking for all Japanese people either. Using I makes things too personal.

I also get the impression that the use of the word "we" is being taken too literally in the context that it is being taught as well. Seeing as how in Japanese it is perfectly safe and ok to say "everyone" or "we" call him Godzilla. Foreigners tend to be more specific and try very hard to stay away from generalities because it is often pointed out to them that there are exceptions to every rule. So to stop people from having to point that out to them they qualify their opinions by making it more personal.

I would say that in Japanese people do not challenge people for qualification because they "know" that of course not "everyone" is calling him Godzilla.

The use of "we" is also easier when one considers that many if not most Japanese people are not open with their opinions and whether not they agree with someone or something they usually dont open their mouths to tell someone otherwise. Purely because it may open themselves up to being on a different side than all of the rest of the "we's".

[Otaku]

You make a good point, Paul. "We" is more acceptable when speaking in Japanese because it doesn't bring attention to the individual. It kinda correlates to that whole tatemae vs. honne thing. It's a good cultural point you make about Japanese=generalisms vs. non-Japanese=specificity. I wonder if Japanese people usually view foreigners as more selfish because of what they say and how they say it? I wonder if they realized it is not seen as being 'selfish', rather being specific and not speaking for the masses?

All this wondering makes me wonder how much Japanese culture should be introduced into the English classroom, especially at the point the entire school system has a foreign English teacher in classroom? Classroom aside, Japanese culture is drastically different than most Western cultures. Language and culture are connected; they are synonymous.

When the primary culture/language collides with its foreign counterpart on what is arguably the foreign counterpart's stomping ground, how much do/should each bend to accomodate the other? If there were no foreign English teachers in the classes, I would say 'the bending' could hyperextended in either direction. But, with the presence of a native speaker of the language in the classroom...?

[Paul]

Where do you see Japanese culture being introduced into the classroom?

I wonder if Japanese people usually view foreigners as more selfish because of what they say and how they say it? I wonder if they realized it is not seen as being 'selfish', rather being specific and not speaking for the masses?

I just had a discussion about this with a friend last night. He made the comment that he another another buddy of his sometimes get told that they come across as arrogant or selfish but that stems from their natural manner of speaking. They discuss with others about things that they do without realizing that the listener really isnt interested in hearing what they are saying.

When is the last time you heard a Japanese person make small talk, discussing about what they did over the weekend if it didnt have anything to do with their job?

When the primary culture/language collides with its foreign counterpart on what is arguably the foreign counterpart's stomping ground, how much do/should each bend to accomodate the other? If there were no foreign English teachers in the classes, I would say 'the bending' could hyperextended in either direction. But, with the presence of a native speaker of the language in the classroom...?

Ah but does it actually "need" to be pointed out? Just because the foreigner is not comfortable or doesnt understand the reasoning doesnt necessarily make the lesson or point any less valid or in some cases depending upon the point wrong either. Why is it even necessary to even contemplate accommodating the native speaker other than to make them feel better or useful in the classroom environment? How many native speaking foreign language teachers did you have in your HS or JHS when you were a kid? Mine...."zero" native Latin, Spanish, Greek, German, French, Polish or Russian in my school. Different topic of course but something to take into consideration when wanting to influence not just one's own classroom but an entire country as well.

I dont know if you noticed or not but the Japanese as I see it anyway, dont take foreign criticism very well and on a smaller scale neither do JTE's either, not really. The method of delivering the message is very important as well.

The primary culture is still Japanese, even though the language is English.

[Otaku]

Paul asks: "Where do you see Japanese culture being introduced into the classroom?"

-- the greeting: the bow, the hajime chant, the Borg-like and oftentimes insincere "I'm fine".
-- the way grammar is taught - mathlish style grammar. (which, to be honest, isn't a Japan-only thing. It seems to be the norm in the Asian EFL education system, but not other parts of the world)
-- holding students' hands - open sea vs. fish bowl theory. Simply put, students are used as a vessel for stored information spewed by the teacher, rather than being given tools and set free to make mistakes and learn on their own.
-- anything less than perfect usually results in an eerie silence. In other words, the environment isn't mistake-friendly.
-- rote memorization vs. mnemonic techniques to remembering.
-- the all-infamous "translate" method of teaching.

I would argue that most if not all are very common J-cultural things seen in the English classroom, and these things are a detriment to the English classroom in various ways.

Now, to play devil's advocate on myself, there could be an argument made that its not the culture per say but more fault lies with the homeroom teacher. There's no denying that the homeroom teacher sets the tone for the entire class in all of their classes because that homeroom teacher is tagged with the unfair responsibility of being held accountable for his/her students in everything they do, in and out of every class. For example, if a student gets in trouble outside of school, who is called? The school, who in turn calls in the homeroom teacher. A strict homeroom teacher has ability to take the breathe out of an entire class, leaving every student's head looking at their desk like a dejected child, which has serious ramifications on how that class can be taught. It's kinda like a dog that has been beaten and trying to get the dog to trust another person.

Along with the homeroom teacher, it could be argued that it's not the J-culture but the lack of a good JTE who encourages active participation, mistakes, and gives their students more hands-on practice of the grammar point. It could be argued that the lack of these three things brings about a negative classroom environment.

While I would say these three things can change the classroom environment for the better, most J-teachers default to how they were taught when they were in school. And, it starts in JHS when the whip is cracked and students start being taught how to be Japanese and to fit properly into society. I would argue this attitude training is often more important than every other subject in school. All of this, coupled with constant pressure from other senpai teachers telling newer teachers how they should teach and the average J-teacher blindly accepting versus challenging, it seems like the 'Japanese way' is constantly pitting itself culture against culture...at least that has been my experience in my classrooms.

Now that I've spun myself in a complete circle...


Paul writes: "Just because the foreigner is not comfortable or doesnt understand the reasoning doesnt necessarily make the lesson or point any less valid or in some cases depending upon the point wrong either. Why is it even necessary to even contemplate accommodating the native speaker other than to make them feel better or useful in the classroom environment? How many native speaking foreign language teachers did you have in your HS or JHS when you were a kid? Mine....'zero' native Latin, Spanish, Greek, German, French, Polish or Russian in my school."

I totally agree with you, ignorance is not an excuse to make a lesson invalid. However, this then begs the question, "How does an ALT become competent in their job, and what information has the employer/government given the ALT to make a gap between staying ignorant versus becoming competent in their job?" Because the average ALT is not given the tools they need to understand the reasoning behind a particular lesson, they must rely on the only tool they have - logic. If something is not logical, I think it brings into the limelight a legitimate concern that needs to be addressed. Why? Because if a ALT doesn't understand, chances the average student isn't going to understand either. Not that the average student is looking at their entire English education from a wholeistic perspective but a whole bunch of and stacked upon each other has the possibility of making their whole English education nil, followed with: muri, wakannai and eventually iranai.

Finally, while we often times never had native-speaking foreign language teachers in school back in our home country, it doesn't preclude that the native-speaking teacher would pretty much final say on anything having to do with that language. However, that doesn't seem to be the case over here. The 'textbook' seems to trump an ALT every time.

Yeah, we didn't have very many native-speaking foreign language teachers in school. Question, "How much of that language do you remember now?" Japan DOES have native-English speakers in the class. I would dare argue that the retention level is about the same. What's up with that?

[jessen100]

i did have a native speaking language teacher in high school.
it was for japanese, and we learned it culturally as being one of a collective society.

i am of the opinion that its very neccesary to teach them that they have to act as an individual.

[Paul]

First thing I would like to say is that I think good ideas, opinions, and thoughtful points are being made on all responses here! Thumbs up!!

Ok my response to a couple of things......

-- the greeting: the bow, the hajime chant, the Borg-like and oftentimes insincere "I'm fine".
-- the way grammar is taught - mathlish style grammar. (which, to be honest, isn't a Japan-only thing. It seems to be the norm in the Asian EFL education system, but not other parts of the world)
-- holding students' hands - open sea vs. fish bowl theory. Simply put, students are used as a vessel for stored information spewed by the teacher, rather than being given tools and set free to make mistakes and learn on their own.
-- anything less than perfect usually results in an eerie silence. In other words, the environment isn't mistake-friendly.
-- rote memorization vs. mnemonic techniques to remembering.
-- the all-infamous "translate" method of teaching.

Which were posted in response to my comment;

"Where do you see Japanese culture being introduced into the classroom?"

Now maybe I am being pedantic here however I would like to point out that these responses that Otaku made here are not introducing Japanese culture into the English classroom but rather an extension of how Japanese are already being taught in other subject areas as well.

These are not introductions but fact of life teaching by Japanese teachers in all subject areas as well. The students are spoon fed material in all subject areas besides English.

Take this into account and people might start to understand better why kids for the most part in English classes DO NOT participate at levels that ALT's are by experience accustomed to expecting.

To expect or think that just because there is a foreign teacher in the classroom and by osmosis the kids should retrain themselves to respond in a manner that the foreign ALT is accustomed to is my opinion something that shouldn't be expected. Rather if it happens it should be praised and used as an example that others in the class might try to emulate or copy. But there are many barriers that each individual student has to over come before that becomes the norm rather than the exception.

Point is lowering expectations.

I would argue that most if not all are very common J-cultural things seen in the English classroom, and these things are a detriment to the English classroom in various ways.

Let's qualify this by trying to keep in mind that it is a detriment in the English classroom only in regards to learning communicative or spokenEnglish, not however to the historical method that Japanese have studied English in the past. Learning grammar and written English was taught and learned with fair success I might add as well for over 100 years here in Japan. Purely because communication was limited to written and not spoken English as well all are aware of and know.

Along with the homeroom teacher, it could be argued that it's not the J-culture but the lack of a good JTE who encourages active participation, mistakes, and gives their students more hands-on practice of the grammar point. It could be argued that the lack of these three things brings about a negative classroom environment.

Class participation needs to be focused on in all subject areas and made a part of the grading system before people should start expecting that everyone is going to suddenly start participating only in English class.

Being held back for failure to perform to expected standards, tools given to teachers to discipline students in a manner that wakes the student up and forces them to take responsibility for their actions or inactions. Classroom attitude, personal responsibility and a host of other things need to be reinforced as well.

Dont know if other people here have ever heard this one but here is something to consider; to many teachers the "good" students are the students that are quiet, listen in class, are good at memorization and cause no disturbances. That is and of itself not conducive to learning how to speak English but is great for learning grammar and copy vocabulary words and their meanings off the blackboard!

[mangakk]

If 'Ken' is the person's real name, WE don't call him Ken, everyone calls him Ken. Therefore, "His name is Ken."
Likewise, if the cat's name is Tama, WE don't call the cat Tama. "The cat's name is Tama."

They make the point of explaining the difference between a persons name and their nickname.

I have used any number of pictures of Japanese and foreign stars to reinforce this point as well. Like a picture of Matsui Hideki, as an example here; "This is Hideki Matsui" "We call him Godzilla".

I didn't like it when my JTE asked me to give an example @ using the words "We call ....." I told her I prefer to give my own example and use " I call him, or it" rather than we call ....

[Paul]

I didn't like it when my JTE asked me to give an example @ using the words "We call ....." I told her I prefer to give my own example and use " I call him, or it" rather than we call ....

Did she say anything about it afterwards? Kudos to you btw for saying it though!

[jessen100]

i used the phrase, "you call it ..." since "you" is going to be the one to say it. and thats what sounds natural to me.

[mangakk]

I didn't like it when my JTE asked me to give an example @ using the words "We call ....." I told her I prefer to give my own example and use " I call him, or it" rather than we call ....

Did she say anything about it afterwards? Kudos to you btw for saying it though!

She is very nice, she just said thanks for pointing it out. Often I take examples from here and discuss it with her, she is open to all discussion.

[Otaku]

In a total shift of topic but still within the confines of this unit...

Dash this, uppercase that.

DASHES: What's up with all the dashes in this particular unit? E-pal, E-mail. Everything seems to casual with these dashes. Instead, why don't the students learn the 'uncool' way of explaining things? I think instead of "e-pal", it should be "email friend". And about "e-mail", isn't the word email reached mainstream English to the point that the dash has been removed? I wouldn't say removing the dash is casual, rather than its acceptance into the mainstream English lexicon.

UPPERCASE: Why is the word "Internet" still being uppercased? I would think like "email", "internet" is now mainstream English to the point that it doesn't really need to be capitalized. Yeah, the original meaning of the internet was the name of the actual network, but I think we've moved on from this term to refer to the internet as a general place of hanging out. We we hang out at the store, do we really hang out at the Store?