Beating Around the Bush

Recently, I heard a great misinterpretation of the beloved idiom "beating around the bush". A student used an example to explain what he thought it meant. The following example, although humourous on many levels, is also educational and serves to illustrate just how easily an English learner can suddenly create confusion, unintentionally, because of a small mistake in interpretation, accent, tone etc. The story goes as follows:
One time our friend we'll call Rafael had a bad case of stomach trouble. It was so bad that he didn't know which side had to come out first #1 or #2. His dilemma was whether to use the urinal or public toilet (enough said). He asked me whether his ordeal could be expressed idiomatically as "beating around the bush." Rafael reasoned that he had to make a decision between one of the two processes but didn't want to disappoint the other one. So somehow he had to placate one of the two needed functions and by so doing delaying its turn. Ultimately, Rafael chose to "hold it". So the act of trying to "trick" his colon into "thinking" it's needs weren't so urgent (i.e., wait until getting home) satisfied, in essence, the spirit of the idiom.
Well in a very humourous way, I would even tend to agree...haha.

Homework: Can you think of any double meanings that can be construed from this story?
Next: This is not "Omitable"

What?

What, as we all know, is one of the big 5 questions that English Speakers use to navigate through life. What English learners don't always realize is that 'what' is probably the most complicated of these 5 questions. What can be used in at least 15 different ways:

1. interrogation; (What is this?)
2. repetition; (What did you say?)
3. act like who (What do you think I am)
4. exclamation; (What is that!!!!)
5. introduction; (What, no Breakfast?)
6. direction; (You know what?)
7. tag question; British (a clever play, what)
8. act as that or which (no money but what he inherited)
9. observation; (what I see...)
10. acts as why (what for?)
11. punishment; (Got what he deserved)
12. genre of literature (whatnot)
13. inquiry; (What's happening?)
14. needed tools and (what it takes)
15. true states. (what's what?)

Source:
Websters Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary

Homework: Write a paragraph using 3 different forms of what
Next: Beating Around the Bush

Social Pants

I would like to to comment on what appears to be the universal tendency of making literal translations from one's Native Language to their second or other spoken language(s). A humourous example of this phenomenon occurred a while ago with a student who is highly fluent in English. She wanted to describe clothing that is NOT formal and NOT day-to-day like joggers or jeans. In Portuguese, this type of dress is used socially so she simply said "Social Pants." Of course, my reaction was inappropriate. I automatically laughed at her mistake not because of her miscue but because my mind thought of what the opposite term might be called, 'anti~social pants'. After explaining this she laughed too and we spent some time imagining what 'anti-social pants' might look like. But I digress.
This literalism was yet another example of hoe English by its very nature complicates trivial matters. I explained to her that "social ants" probably fell into one of several categories, for example: 'Casual Wear', 'Business Casual' or 'Evening Wear' (this last category being applicable exclusively to women's fashions). I'm sure that my breakdown, like most classification systems, is not 100% correct for everyone. And ultimately, that is the point. English Learners should avoid absolutes like "Social Pants" because they can lead to serious communication difficulties.

Homework: Send a picture of 'Anti-Social Pants' to mail@torontoenglishconsulting.com
Next Post: What?

Drive vs. Ride

Because car culture is so ubiquitous, it is important for English learners to try understand the difference that exists between the meaning of certain words they may think are interchangeable, when it comes to 'auto talk'. A classic example is the mis-use of the words "drive and ride".
The confusion might stem from an illogical deduction.
For example: If it's true that a person can ride a motorcycle, bicycle or a horse, than implicitly they are orientating their steed (inanimate or animate), they must therefore be driving it.
Similarly, if one is in a sitting position in a car or bus, why is s/he not 'riding' in the vehicle when their passengers are?
The complication, of course, does not end here. On a train, the operator conducts, a boat is captained, and on a rocket commanded. Would it not be easier if all these operations were described by one verb? The simple answer is yes. But if that were the case English would lose one of it's great characteristics, its ability to describe, sometimes adnauseam, what others may think of as mundane and unworthy of such attention.

Home Work: What other verbs can you think of that describe orientation of a craft or vehicle?
Next Post: Social Pants

Gen X, Y, Baby Boomers?

When one leaves North America, we are suddenly confronted with the realization that no matter how hard we try, or want to believe, the world does not revolve around us. I was again reminded of this after writing a recent Blog without considering the cultural baggage associated with particular words. I was shocked to learn that some demographic descriptors were not easily comprehensible by Non-Native English Speakers in Canada and the U.S.A. Specifically, words to do with generations like: Baby Boomer's, Generation X, Generation Y.
Simply, Baby Boomers are the generation that is either in their 50's or early 60's;
Generation X'ers are the generation in their early 30's into their late 40's roughly;
and Generation Y's are in their late teens through their late 20's.
Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generation for a more detailed explanation.
The key point to grasp is that each generation has been ascribed a set values and beliefs that give a stereotypical profile of individuals belonging to these groups.

Home Work: Describe the qualities that each of these generations have.
Next Post: Drive vs. Ride

By the Numbers

“Catch 22; the $64,000 Question; six of one or half dozen of another; a baker’s dozen; 3:11” are examples of expressions that contain specific number values. These values have either a historical or (pop)cultural significance that should be understood in order to grasp their intended meaning. Because the usage of these expressions is so widespread in English, the number value must be said correctly or the listener will probably misunderstand you. They may think you are joking or even worse, ignorant. Sometimes, we can discern the meaning of these special numbers through deductive reasoning. For example, “six of one or half dozen of another” seems to suggest, on its own, that the speaker believes that 6 of one thing, is the same as, 6 of another. In other words, there is NO difference between the two variables that are being discussed.
Unfortunately, this type of reductive logic cannot be applied to all expressions. Catch 22, could have been Catch XX, or whatever else. The number #22 in this case has no significance, it appears that this number was the 5^th choice, seeing that 18, 11, 17 and 14 were all considered before 22 but were all rejected for a variety of reasons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch_22

Homework: What do the five number values in the above expressions mean?

Next Post: What is a Baby Boomer, Gen X’er and Gen Y’er ?

Obama - A Friend or Foe of English?

Obamamania is sweeping the globe and with it, for those who believe that the English language should be communicated with care,”a sigh of collective breath we relief." I for one am not so sure. The incidence of mixed metaphors, like the one above, uttered by President-Elect Obama will surely pale in comparison to the wonderful Bushisms we've grown used to over the last eight years. Bushisms are routinely used to point out: grammatical and idiomatic errors, tautologies, metaphor confusion, hanging sentences, problems with subject-verb agreement, conditional miscues, illogical sentence construction and misunderstanding of word meanings, just to name a few.
Obama's command of English will prove to be less helpful for those wanting to learn English than Bush's "unmastery" of the language.
I make this argument based on the time-tested mantra 'you learn from (your/others) mistakes' and since Obama makes so few and Bush so many of them it goes to follow that English Learners, especially those who are at a Basic or Intermediary Level, would be better off reviewing Bush's linguistic misfeasance's instead of trying to decipher Obama's intellectually driven verbiage.
Do you agree or disagree?
Homework: re-write the expression "a sigh of collective breath we relief," properly.