Conversation started Jul 18, 2015 at 22:09.
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Jul 18, 2015 22:09
Come to think of it, maybe I should be less rhetorical, and treat our learners more like kids.
When I wrote anything rhetorically, it implies that I trust their ability to solve the rest on their own. In other words, I trust that the learner already knows the answer or should be able to come to realize the answer by themselves if they think about it carefully.
Of course, this doesn't work for everyone.
But I noticed that it works less and less on ELL.
It seems like tell-all answers/comments work better.
Maybe people just want their answers, and don't want to think (much) to learn.
Rhetorical questions could be considered challenging, or even insulting, if being read incorrectly, like "Do you think I don't know?" or "If you know it, why don't you just tell me. I don't want more questions!"
Personally, I'd perceive tell-all answers as potentially more insulting, 'cause it assumes that you don't know what you're supposed to know. (And quite likely, we already know the answer.)
​
As an example,
> However, looking at the original source, I'm curious to know who spoke this sentence: "Benzodiazepines can impair that experience by numbing emotions, decreasing learning efficiency, and inhibiting memory processing of material learned in therapy."
> ell.stackexchange.com/a/61998/3281
Jeffrey Guina, Sarah R. Rossetter, Bethany J. Derhodes, Ramzi W. Nahhas, Randon S. Welton. Benzodiazepines for PTSD. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, 2015; 21 (4): 281 DOI: 10.1097/PRA.0000000000000091 — PerryW yesterday
That's a plain piece of information given by PerryW.
You still din' get my point @PerryW check the source...the 'quoted' sentence comes from nowhere. The previous sentence finishes with doctor and his colleagues 'write'. And the sentence is concerned is 'left alone' with no additional information. And I know the original source. — Maulik V yesterday
When I read that, I realized that the However, looking at the ... wasn't used humorously. The answerer seemed to forget that that pattern is common enough. So, I tried to remind him with...
@MaulikV [ "You're dirty," he said. "You ought to wash. Where did you go and what did you do? Tell me everything at once." ] Who would you think said "You ought to wash. ... Tell me everything at once."? — Damkerng T. yesterday
Then, I got this as the feedback.
@DamkerngT. in the original source... 'they concluded' or 'they added' would have worked. In your created example, I can add it!---> "You're dirty," he said. "You ought to wash. Where did you go and what did you do? Tell me everything at once," said her mother agreeing him. — Maulik V yesterday
Which made me realize that my message didn't reach him.
So I chose to insist that the example was real, without any further explanation.
I didn't create my example. I'm quite sure that you can find it on the web. — Damkerng T. yesterday
Fortunately, TRomano dropped by:
@Maulik: It's common reportage style for quotations to appear before and after an attribution. In the quotation that follows the attribution, it is understood that the source remains the same. "The building should be demolished," according to Joe Shmoe, City Engineer. "The foundation cracked during the earthquake." — TRomano yesterday
His tell-all comment worked better than my rhetorical comment, apparently.
oh...I see! @TRomano unfortunately have never come across such things in Indian newspapers! My bad! — Maulik V 17 hours ago
But it made me wonder if Indian newspapers really never use it...
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Jul 18, 2015 22:42
​
Today I learned that "grammar school" are different in the UK and the US.
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Jul 18, 2015 22:54
​
Then again, not all of my tell-all comments work very well.
The first time I read it, I thought will would be acceptable because I read it as If we're informed (or if we know) that the lava will come down as far as this, we will evacuate these houses. Why? Because in my opinion, by the time the lava comes down this far, you won't have any houses left to evacuate. But then again, this depends on the context and the intended meaning. It's unclear without context what as far as this means. (In other words, where is this?) — Damkerng T. Jul 6 at 22:03
Which ended up in my nativeness being questioned:
@DamkerngT. "Then 260.2 should apply." Why do you think so? I think the place is not very far(say 100 miles) from their houses but far enough(say 30 miles) for them to be able to evacuate. By the way, are you a native English speaker? — Deep Jul 7 at 11:55
(and I chose to do nothing but upvoting the top-voted answer after its edit half an hour ago)
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Jul 18, 2015 23:16
user image
> nbcnews.com/id/6233897/ns/us_news/t/…
The lahars zone is probably only as far as 35 miles from Mount St. Helens.
 
Conversation ended Jul 18, 2015 at 23:17.