Jump to content

University teaching shows why Thais' command of English is so abysmal!


webfact

Recommended Posts

Most problems in speaking English correctly has very little to do with race.  Getting the language correct is about pronouncing words fully and not leaving words out altogether dropping letter off words.  This all reminds me of a friend who after spending more the 20 years in the British Army in their Public relations section.  Being used to addressing large groups of people, broadcasting on the divisional radio station who thought he was pretty good at public speaking.

 

Upon leaving the army he was employed by the BBC.  He had to spend 3 months being taught how to speak proppa English, day in and day out and all day long,  yes 3 months before he was allowed to go on the air.  He still talks about it and now spends a lot of retirement time coaching English people how to speak proppa English.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 749
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 minutes ago, David Walden said:

Most problems in speaking English correctly has very little to do with race.  Getting the language correct is about pronouncing words fully and not leaving words out altogether dropping letter off words.  This all reminds me of a friend who after spending more the 20 years in the British Army in their Public relations section.  Being used to addressing large groups of people, broadcasting on the divisional radio station who thought he was pretty good at public speaking.

 

Upon leaving the army he was employed by the BBC.  He had to spend 3 months being taught how to speak proppa English, day in and day out and all day long,  yes 3 months before he was allowed to go on the air.  He still talks about it and now spends a lot of retirement time coaching English people how to speak proppa English.

 

Does he also teach proper (proppa) spelling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, nausea said:

Number one is motivation. I've known people become fluent, and their initial motivation was something as trivial as Harry Potter or English language music. But we all know that as kids we can become obsessed,  and overcome all obstacles. For most Thai people English language mastery is pretty low on the priorities. It's nice to have it, but it won't change your life. It's slowly changing, as the upper and middle classes realise that English language mastery is a "sine qua non"  to entry into the priviliged elite. I predict there will be a drip down effect. What I mean by that is all the current pretence will be blown away, and normal people will be pursuing effective solutions to their lack of English language skills.

Many have watched 'Hancocks half hour'  ''It is are not raining here also''

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, CaptHaddock said:

 

There is a school of thought that holds that there is no "correct" version of any language.  However, many of us do not believe it, so you are mistaken to imply that this is now the mainstream view.  There is such a thing as correct grammar, usage, spelling, etc. The better foreigner learners of English master those skills the better their communication in English will be.

No there are no rules only conventions - you are speaking from a point of view derived from lack of understanding of the very language you speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, jpinx said:

More mis-conceptions.  From the way you refer to English as "their" language, it appears that you are not a native English speaker.  Try telling a German that there is no "standard" German language.  Along with Autobahns, it was one of the successes of Hitler's regime.

""

Try telling a German that there is no "standard" German language.  - but there is! and that's my point.

 

Those who try to “define” English language are in fact whether they realise it or attempting to put restrictions on or confine the language and history has shown they will almost universally fail. they are simply perpetuating a myth nothing to do with the real story of English......

 

The misconceptions and ignorance of these people lead them to believe that English is a static language that has rules that say what is right and what is wrong - nothing could be further from the truth

 

There is no authority that regulates the English language, nor is there a definitive dictionary of the English language, there are academic bodies that research English usage and then publish their findings - often in the form of dictionaries .... but they are not government organs, simply commercial projects.

 

How easy it is to regulate a language does to some extent depend on how widely it is spoken, but in some cases vis-à-vis French, the language is strictly regulated by a government body or “academie”.

 

German is spoken in a wide range of countries (nearly 100 million speakers), mostly within Europe and is regulated by “Rat für deutsche Rechtschreibung” the council for German orthography. It has 7 main European German language regions represented. The language has an official standardised form - this was set out in German orthography reform of 1996, which is now the official standard, by governments of all German-speaking countries.

 

Spanish the second most used language after English has about 2 dozen academies in different countries telling us what to say and how to say it

 

Thai is governed by the Royal Society of Thailand it plays an official role in the defining and regulation of the Thai language. I’m sorry to say but I think that almost ALL cultural aspects of Thailand are not so much preserved as interfered with and rendered artificial by such bodies.

 

English is FREE of all this.......

 

The beauty of English is that it is a profoundly democratic language - all government and official attempts to interfere with it have ultimately failed (e.g. the USA attempt to “rationalise” spelling).

The result is a language with many references, many CONVENTIONS but absolutely no RULES. Grammar, spelling pronunciation are all dictated by the users and there are many regional differences - continental, national and local, but i the end it is the number one first language in the world and a second language to billions. Not since Latin has the free movement of ideas and information shared such a worldwide commonality (a word incidentally that comes from over 500 years ago but changed or rather expanded, its meaning after the 1950s)

 

English as a result is a fairly easy language to get started in - the lazy grammar and word order make it easy for beginners to get by. However, native speakers of other languages often have specific problems when it comes to learning English to a higher level. For instance Thai doesn’t make use of pronouns very much and often omits a subject; Thai has no difference between adjectives and adverbs and often nouns - hence the problem with “I am England” (English being the adjectival form). However the “er” (Englander) ending is grammatically correct, it is just that in English we don’t use that very much to describe “English people, but it is used when a second word is involved (New, Little etc ). To some extent it actually shows the speaker has learned about this suffix but not fully appreciated the usage of it.

 

The classic example of this is when native speaking children grow up and learn the past tense.

Ask the question “what did you do yesterday.?”

At first the toddler says “go shopping with Mummy”

Then later - much to the parents joy the toddler starts to reply ... “went shopping with Mummy”

But after a while the parents become concerned when the child’s reply becomes

“GOED shopping with Mummy” - the parents often regard this as retrogressive step - but in reality it is not. The child to begin with was repeating by rote the word “went” - but as time progresses the child learns the past tense is expressed with “ed” - and so modifies the verb “go” accordingly.....it is in reality a step forward and later the child will learn the real irregular version of go (i.e. went)

 

Reading age - what’s yours??? - the level of your reading ability compared with an average child of a particular age.......

 

Learning a native language is a life-time’s work and some native speakers never achieve more than scratch the surface, these are often the vociferous protectors about what is or isn’t their “own” language. (you can’t “own” English). For those who read news papers the reading age required for the Sun is 7 years and before anyone gets too smug, the reading age for the Guardian is 12. They used to claim the Times was 18, but I don’t think that applies anymore.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2016 at 1:30 PM, maewang99 said:

this only happens with English as a topic in school. 

not any of the other topics? 

 

is that implied by this article?


because some other subjects also have seem to have surprising results... even with the Thai language as a study subject... for which I continue to encounter all kinds of blather that do not equate with my actual experiences in Thailand.

 

 

As the latest PISA rankings show the problem is not just English.  In Reading, Math and Science the average Thai 15 year old is around 3-4 years behind 15 year olds in Singapore, Hong Kong, Korea, Japan, China and even a poor country like Vietnam.  If you take out the few well funded schools in Bangkok and Chiang Mai the results in the rest of the country are really dire with kids being another year or more behind.  In a global economy these kids are going to have very limited opportunities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most problems in speaking English correctly has very little to do with race.  Getting the language correct is about pronouncing words fully and not leaving words out altogether dropping letter off words.  This all reminds me of a friend who after spending more the 20 years in the British Army in their Public relations section.  Being used to addressing large groups of people, broadcasting on the divisional radio station who thought he was pretty good at public speaking.
 
Upon leaving the army he was employed by the BBC.  He had to spend 3 months being taught how to speak proppa English, day in and day out and all day long,  yes 3 months before he was allowed to go on the air.  He still talks about it and now spends a lot of retirement time coaching English people how to speak proppa English.


In the British Army the ability to speak (and write) clear concise and accurate English is an absolute requirement for officers. It is needed to issue clear unequivocal instructions and pass accurate information, and in the stress of battle can be a "life saver". It is taught, and assessed in your professional education - hence the often mocked "Sandhurst accent", (an accent probably regarded as anachronistic in today's diverse BBC)!

I have to say that I wasn't aware that the British Army had a PR department as such. Some "Staff jobs" required interaction with the media, ( limited training is given for that), and specific operations and deployments would lead to the creation of Media Ops Teams, largely staffed by called up reservists with relevant civilian experience. Such PR staff as there are are civilians employed as such by the MOD. Nor have I ever come across a "divisional radio station", although overseas garrisons are served by the "British Forces Broadcasting Service" (BFBS), again staffed and run by civilians employed by the MOD.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Loeilad said:

""

Try telling a German that there is no "standard" German language.  - but there is! and that's my point.

 

 

Those who try to “define” English language are in fact whether they realise it or attempting to put restrictions on or confine the language and history has shown they will almost universally fail. they are simply perpetuating a myth nothing to do with the real story of English......

 

 

The misconceptions and ignorance of these people lead them to believe that English is a static language that has rules that say what is right and what is wrong - nothing could be further from the truth

 

 

There is no authority that regulates the English language, nor is there a definitive dictionary of the English language, there are academic bodies that research English usage and then publish their findings - often in the form of dictionaries .... but they are not government organs, simply commercial projects.

 

 

 

How easy it is to regulate a language does to some extent depend on how widely it is spoken, but in some cases vis-à-vis French, the language is strictly regulated by a government body or “academie”.

 

 

 

German is spoken in a wide range of countries (nearly 100 million speakers), mostly within Europe and is regulated by “Rat für deutsche Rechtschreibung” the council for German orthography. It has 7 main European German language regions represented. The language has an official standardised form - this was set out in German orthography reform of 1996, which is now the official standard, by governments of all German-speaking countries.

 

 

 

Spanish the second most used language after English has about 2 dozen academies in different countries telling us what to say and how to say it

 

 

 

Thai is governed by the Royal Society of Thailand it plays an official role in the defining and regulation of the Thai language. I’m sorry to say but I think that almost ALL cultural aspects of Thailand are not so much preserved as interfered with and rendered artificial by such bodies.

 

 

English is FREE of all this.......

 

 

The beauty of English is that it is a profoundly democratic language - all government and official attempts to interfere with it have ultimately failed (e.g. the USA attempt to “rationalise” spelling).

 

The result is a language with many references, many CONVENTIONS but absolutely no RULES. Grammar, spelling pronunciation are all dictated by the users and there are many regional differences - continental, national and local, but i the end it is the number one first language in the world and a second language to billions. Not since Latin has the free movement of ideas and information shared such a worldwide commonality (a word incidentally that comes from over 500 years ago but changed or rather expanded, its meaning after the 1950s)

 

 

English as a result is a fairly easy language to get started in - the lazy grammar and word order make it easy for beginners to get by. However, native speakers of other languages often have specific problems when it comes to learning English to a higher level. For instance Thai doesn’t make use of pronouns very much and often omits a subject; Thai has no difference between adjectives and adverbs and often nouns - hence the problem with “I am England” (English being the adjectival form). However the “er” (Englander) ending is grammatically correct, it is just that in English we don’t use that very much to describe “English people, but it is used when a second word is involved (New, Little etc ). To some extent it actually shows the speaker has learned about this suffix but not fully appreciated the usage of it.

 

 

The classic example of this is when native speaking children grow up and learn the past tense.

 

Ask the question “what did you do yesterday.?”

 

At first the toddler says “go shopping with Mummy”

 

Then later - much to the parents joy the toddler starts to reply ... “went shopping with Mummy”

 

But after a while the parents become concerned when the child’s reply becomes

 

“GOED shopping with Mummy” - the parents often regard this as retrogressive step - but in reality it is not. The child to begin with was repeating by rote the word “went” - but as time progresses the child learns the past tense is expressed with “ed” - and so modifies the verb “go” accordingly.....it is in reality a step forward and later the child will learn the real irregular version of go (i.e. went)

 

 

Reading age - what’s yours??? - the level of your reading ability compared with an average child of a particular age.......

 

 

Learning a native language is a life-time’s work and some native speakers never achieve more than scratch the surface, these are often the vociferous protectors about what is or isn’t their “own” language. (you can’t “own” English). For those who read news papers the reading age required for the Sun is 7 years and before anyone gets too smug, the reading age for the Guardian is 12. They used to claim the Times was 18, but I don’t think that applies anymore.

 

 

 

 

 

I liked your post very much however i feel, like the correct matching of colours, there is a natural beauty in a language when it is spoken correctly (correctly is more than mainstream or common usage) consider Richard Burton's rendition of reading the Letter reporting the defeat of the British forces at Natal at the beginning of the film 'Zulu' and compare that with the way a Londoner of today would freely describe the event, even the most poorly educated cockney could appreciate the beauty of Burton's rendition, it is beautiful because it has a feel of correctness about it, why do for instance the colours pink and grey go so well together, no reason, it just looks correct. As well as appreciating the English language i can also delight in well spoken formal German, even the well spoken dialect Bavarian, they all have their own natural order which sounds correct no matter how much they may 'evolve' on the street. In my opinion the English language hasn't evolved so much as degenerated. One can express oneself just as exactly in a crude manner as in a 'correct' manner of course but as Oscar Wilde once said, 'A man who calls a spade a spade should be made to use one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Loeilad said:

""

Try telling a German that there is no "standard" German language.  - but there is! and that's my point.

 

 

Those who try to “define” English language are in fact whether they realise it or attempting to put restrictions on or confine the language and history has shown they will almost universally fail. they are simply perpetuating a myth nothing to do with the real story of English......

--------.........

Learning a native language is a life-time’s work and some native speakers never achieve more than scratch the surface, these are often the vociferous protectors about what is or isn’t their “own” language. (you can’t “own” English). For those who read news papers the reading age required for the Sun is 7 years and before anyone gets too smug, the reading age for the Guardian is 12. They used to claim the Times was 18, but I don’t think that applies anymore.

Nicely put, and a nice example of reading age.  It's not always about vocabulary, it's often that subtle use of word-order  which makes a piece stand out as "good" English.  The same can be said about Spanish, but I can't speak for other languages even though I can speak them. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2016 at 0:43 PM, IMA_FARANG said:

Wouldn't be better to say, "I do not speak English WELL rather than I do not speak English GOOD".

Or is that just my American born English ear?

You are correct.  Well is proper English.  However, the language changes over time and there is increasing backlash against rules like this that come of as pretentious.  (I haven't seen any disagreement on this particular rule, but, for example, even the legal writing manual that I use as my primary grammar guide roundly condemns the 'never end a sentence with a preposition' rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2016 at 11:37 AM, jpinx said:

There are so many versions of English (Spanish also) that it is hard to know where to set the standard, but there is no doubt that most Thai "English Teachers" are hard pressed to have a conversation in English with a native UK English speaker.

 

. . . but there is no doubt that most American and European English teachers are hard-pressed to have a conversation in English with a native UK "English" speaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, soalbundy said:

I liked your post very much however i feel, like the correct matching of colours, there is a natural beauty in a language when it is spoken correctly (correctly is more than mainstream or common usage) consider Richard Burton's rendition of reading the Letter reporting the defeat of the British forces at Natal at the beginning of the film 'Zulu' and compare that with the way a Londoner of today would freely describe the event, even the most poorly educated cockney could appreciate the beauty of Burton's rendition, it is beautiful because it has a feel of correctness about it, why do for instance the colours pink and grey go so well together, no reason, it just looks correct. As well as appreciating the English language i can also delight in well spoken formal German, even the well spoken dialect Bavarian, they all have their own natural order which sounds correct no matter how much they may 'evolve' on the street. In my opinion the English language hasn't evolved so much as degenerated. One can express oneself just as exactly in a crude manner as in a 'correct' manner of course but as Oscar Wilde once said, 'A man who calls a spade a spade should be made to use one

Beauty is largely subjective - I think the popularity of English as an international language is down to convenience and the USA's grip on the world economy.

I am firmly of the opinion that EL has EVOLVED - in fact I could spend a lot of time deconstructing that Burton speech which of course is in a Welsh accent, but if you look at how pop music is totally dominated by English you can see how the language is eminently suited to poetry and lyrics. None of the "old stuff" (burton, which is audio) and Shalespseare (which is written) is lost - it is still there and in the bank as it were but because of its flexibility for so many uses EL is growing in popularity and influence (BTW German is the second biggest alnguage in science - but still a long way behind English. 

Recently sited problem with Thai research was that although Thailand does more scientific research than its neighbours there is too little satisfactorily translated and published in English - as this is the standard science language these days.

the wonderful thing about English is that if you need a new word, you can make it....Shakespeare is credited with about 5000 new words, but things like "bling" "Selfie" all meet a need as did that wonderful Aerican invention "commuter" o r the new usage of "hotel" these are not degradation they are meeting a need.

 

as for grammar...well the EL has been degrading Grammar since Anglo-Saxon times - which is one of the reasons it is so easy to use on a basic level - few declensions cases or paricles and participles. One of the most difficult things for ESL learners is not as most suggest the tenses but prepositions 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ajahnski said:

You are correct.  Well is proper English.  However, the language changes over time and there is increasing backlash against rules like this that come of as pretentious.  (I haven't seen any disagreement on this particular rule, but, for example, even the legal writing manual that I use as my primary grammar guide roundly condemns the 'never end a sentence with a preposition' rule.

Well is an adverb - originally and good is an adjective.....except we chose quite legitimately not to use those words in that way all the time....

explain "I am well". or  "Quick, come here"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Loeilad said:

Well is an adverb - originally and good is an adjective.....except we chose quite legitimately not to use those words in that way all the time....

explain "I am well". or  "Quick, come here"

Well, I am good, and well as well. I also do good, but not so well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Howitzer said:

I like to play penis!!! Rofl anyone ever encountered a female (preferably) say that to you?

 

I think it happened to me once in soi 6 Pattaya, not sure if she was a female so I declined the offer. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Loeilad said:

Beauty is largely subjective - I think the popularity of English as an international language is down to convenience and the USA's grip on the world economy.

I am firmly of the opinion that EL has EVOLVED - in fact I could spend a lot of time deconstructing that Burton speech which of course is in a Welsh accent, but if you look at how pop music is totally dominated by English you can see how the language is eminently suited to poetry and lyrics. None of the "old stuff" (burton, which is audio) and Shalespseare (which is written) is lost - it is still there and in the bank as it were but because of its flexibility for so many uses EL is growing in popularity and influence (BTW German is the second biggest alnguage in science - but still a long way behind English. 

Recently sited problem with Thai research was that although Thailand does more scientific research than its neighbours there is too little satisfactorily translated and published in English - as this is the standard science language these days.

the wonderful thing about English is that if you need a new word, you can make it....Shakespeare is credited with about 5000 new words, but things like "bling" "Selfie" all meet a need as did that wonderful Aerican invention "commuter" o r the new usage of "hotel" these are not degradation they are meeting a need.

 

as for grammar...well the EL has been degrading Grammar since Anglo-Saxon times - which is one of the reasons it is so easy to use on a basic level - few declensions cases or paricles and participles. One of the most difficult things for ESL learners is not as most suggest the tenses but prepositions 

so true -- simple(-ish) tenses are not difficult, but prepositions, pronouns, definite and indefinite articles -- it's a minefield ;)  The first threshold was to get Thai students to be unashamed to use "I".  There's a cultural block that resists referencing yourself.  I had some success in using "One" but it's not the solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, jpinx said:

so true -- simple(-ish) tenses are not difficult, but prepositions, pronouns, definite and indefinite articles -- it's a minefield ;)  The first threshold was to get Thai students to be unashamed to use "I".  There's a cultural block that resists referencing yourself.  I had some success in using "One" but it's not the solution.

 

Thai can be shy to speak English but  referring to themselves in Thai is well developed art form. There are several pronouns from impolite to ultra-polite (you say ka-pa-jao to the judge), based on age/status,  and they also refer to themselves by formal name, nickname, or even temporary nicknames. Girls also use noo for 'mouse'.

 

Saying 'I' may be a problem because it limits expression of things important to them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

In general life it really doesn't matter if the grammar is incorrect.

 

It does however matter if foreign students are taught incorrectly as per the simple sentences in the OP.

 

 

When you learn a language you learn how to deduct what is right - I think that as said there was some deduction but the wrong answer arrived at...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JAG said:

 


In the British Army the ability to speak (and write) clear concise and accurate English is an absolute requirement for officers. It is needed to issue clear unequivocal instructions and pass accurate information, and in the stress of battle can be a "life saver". It is taught, and assessed in your professional education - hence the often mocked "Sandhurst accent", (an accent probably regarded as anachronistic in today's diverse BBC)!

I have to say that I wasn't aware that the British Army had a PR department as such. Some "Staff jobs" required interaction with the media, ( limited training is given for that), and specific operations and deployments would lead to the creation of Media Ops Teams, largely staffed by called up reservists with relevant civilian experience. Such PR staff as there are are civilians employed as such by the MOD. Nor have I ever come across a "divisional radio station", although overseas garrisons are served by the "British Forces Broadcasting Service" (BFBS), again staffed and run by civilians employed by the MOD.

 

I think the British army are the last one would listen to regarding education - I have "friends" (school chums) who went through Sandhurst and cae out with nothing more than the funny voice - they were still two short planks, but now they were Captain two short planks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Loeilad said:

I think the British army are the last one would listen to regarding education - I have "friends" (school chums) who went through Sandhurst and cae out with nothing more than the funny voice - they were still two short planks, but now they were Captain two short planks.

I think a few came out with an arrogant, self-important view too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the British army are the last one would listen to regarding education - I have "friends" (school chums) who went through Sandhurst and cae out with nothing more than the funny voice - they were still two short planks, but now they were Captain two short planks.

I think a few came out with an arrogant, self-important view too...


I don't want to torpedo treasured stereotypes, but if you have neither undergone professional training or indeed worked in that profession, perhaps your assessments are a "tad" superficial? Anyway we are straying from the topic...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, JAG said:

 

 


I don't want to torpedo treasured stereotypes, but if you have neither undergone professional training or indeed worked in that profession, perhaps your assessments are a "tad" superficial? Anyway we are straying from the topic...

 

 

You're quite right - knowing retired officers in the UK navy means nothing (roll eyes).

 

But I agree that it is off-topic as the thread is about the sad, incorrect English lessons taught in Thai schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

In general life it really doesn't matter if the grammar is incorrect.

 

It does however matter if foreign students are taught incorrectly as per the simple sentences in the OP.

 

 

By the same reasoning you could say it doesn't matter how i dress as long as my naughty bits aren't showing. I realize that you mean that the gist of what one wishes to say can be brought over without perfect grammar, English is a language that can be completely messed up and yet still understood, one of its attractions probably, but it is worthwhile to try to get things right. 'It is are not raining also' may sound funny but it doesn't lend itself to you being taken seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fings have got read into fings I never said till me mouth becomes me head which ain't not all that clever.
And it's not not saying 
One thing nor another
Neither, either is it anything 
I haven't said, whatever
And it ain't not proving 
That me mind ain't moving
And I answer to the name 
Of Trever, however

Knock me down with a feather
Clever Trevor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JAG said:

 

 


I don't want to torpedo treasured stereotypes, but if you have neither undergone professional training or indeed worked in that profession, perhaps your assessments are a "tad" superficial? Anyway we are straying from the topic...

 

 

Straying, think had happened  at about page 1 of the topic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been there - done that - could use the annual output of Sandhurst to build a log cabin with a few bits left over that *might* come in handy for something needing a bit more imagination ;) 

 

The Sandhurst lads were taught to wash their hands after pee-ing, but in Mons they taught us not to pee on our hands :D

 

Most of them spoke a pretty unintelligible version of English --  part of the "requirement" I suppose. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/12/2016 at 7:04 PM, pookiki said:

Same meaning.  'Good' is an adjective. 'Well' is an adverb.  See the earlier thread with link.

 

I would have difficulty discerning much of a semantic difference between the two phrases: 'He speaks good English.' and 'He speaks English well'.

On reflection of this.... especially is terms of semantics....."He  speaks  English  well ( but with a limited  capacity in  vocabulary) as opposed to "He speaks  good English " ( with a great capacity in vocabulary).

In view of  semantic differentiation I personally  would  opt for the  latter because I have come  across  many who have well practiced social phrases and others  who labouriously  but  accurately can converse in "good' English.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...