R
(replying to R)
@hikari we unfortunately didn't get a "fair" exposure to second-language learning in school (we did Mandarin and stumbled hard into the realization that normal curricula are completely unsuitable for heritage speakers), but what we've seen of (American) first-language English grammar instruction is *completely worthless*
R
(replying to R)
@hikari for reasons that we also don't understand, compulsory education English teachers seem vaguely allergic to grammar, and *especially* allergic to "more academic" analysis of things such as tense–aspect–mood (imo the hardest part of English grammar)
we ended up getting taught this by our father who presumably learned it from some (possibly-non-US) english-as-a-*second*-language teaching material
1 replies
Kanbaru 🌟 (one hikari of too many)
(replying to R)
@r oh yes first-language english grammar instruction is universally awful as far as i can tell
Kanbaru 🌟 (one hikari of too many)
(replying to Kanbaru 🌟 (one hikari of too many))
@r different kinds of awful depending on where you live! but awful
R
(replying to Kanbaru 🌟 (one hikari of too many))
@hikari which is really weird! right??
like, academic linguistic analysis of English is actually really good and imo rather accessible as far as academia goes, and we have so much ESL curricula around the world. but it feels as if compulsory-education teachers just go "lalala i can't hear you" towards all of this?
Kanbaru 🌟 (one hikari of too many)
(replying to R)
@r it's because 1) native speakers of a language do not realise that they already know how their own language works better than anyone can teach them, 2) the purpose of teaching grammar in schools tends to be to force someone to speak in the Preferred Manner, not to improve understanding
Kanbaru 🌟 (one hikari of too many)
(replying to Kanbaru 🌟 (one hikari of too many))
@r purpose in the purpose-of-a-system-is-what-it-does sense, not necessarily the designed purpose
R
(replying to R)
@hikari whenever we need to triple-check something that we aren't sure about even as a native speaker, nowadays we tend to reach for _linguistics_ reference material and not "English grammar" reference material that we were (barely) shown back during compulsory schooling
R
(replying to R)
@hikari wrt music, we actually did learn a bunch of music theory by rote memorization. it ended up being completely useless and we've forgotten most of it. it also just... never made any sense?
R
(replying to R)
... because nobody successfully performed the _worldview shift_ to explain that "this is *one* framework for applying constraints to and studying the infinite variations that is sound/music. it is useful *because* many creative endeavors involve consuming, analyzing, borrowing from, and remixing *existing* culture in a manner which is *in conflict* with the ideology of 'individual creative expression' which is being concurrently propagandized"