|
ESL Forum:
Techniques and methods
in Language Teaching
Games, activities
and teaching ideas
Grammar and
Linguistics
Teaching material
Concerning
worksheets
Concerning
powerpoints
Concerning online
exercises
Make suggestions,
report errors
Ask for help
Message board
|
ESL forum >
Message board > Short forms of to be
Short forms of to be
|
vickyvar
|
Short forms of to be
|
Dear colleagues,
I heard something really strange yesterday and I �d like to share it with you. A student of mine (private lesson) told me that her teacher at a state highschool told off the students for using the short forms of the verb to be, i.e. he said that they must not use the contractions when they speak as it is wrong. The contractions are only supposed to be in written speech and even if they write "I �m" - for example - they should pronounce it " I am". According to him the full forms are meant to emphasize the verb and short forms do not exist in spoken speech - they are just the result of people speaking fast.
Now, I �ve come across lots of course books which teach both the full forms and the shorts forms and the pronunciation is sometimes slightly different, e.g. You are - You �re.
What do you think? Is it correct that short forms MUST always be read as full forms and that it �s wrong to use short forms?
I got shocked when I heard it, but maybe I am making a mistake. Please tell me what you think.
Best regards,
vicky
|
18 Oct 2009
|
|
|
|
procei
|
|
According to what I know...(and I don�t know much) about the written form, the short form is used at informal English...and I have read it in good linguistics book....When we write formal English we can�t use the " � ". However about speaking during the conversation and it is one characterist of the fluency and entonation the formal form is pronounced as short form.... You can pronounce the formal one - I am .... to emphasyse.....If anyone wants to add something feel free...this subjective involves more than formal and informal itens... (I believe) |
18 Oct 2009
|
|
|
libertybelle
|
In reality - the short form was only allowed in speaking and never in written English unless it was in "quotes" reflecting direct speech. So your boss is wrong.
I was never allowed to write "spoken English" when writing in school in the USA.
Today it is allowed in informal English as procei wrote - but not in formal English.
|
18 Oct 2009
|
|
|
vickyvar
|
Yes, I agree with you libertybelle. Short forms are informal forms indeed, but I believe we can pronounce short forms even if as a result of speaking fast - it �s not wrong. A characteristic of formal speech is full forms. That �s what I have read in many books and I was surprised to hear sth different.
Thanks both of you for your replies.
Have a nice day
|
19 Oct 2009
|
|
|
