How do languages deal with distinctions like watch/see?

[finlay]

Btw, are you teaching ESL in Japan?

me? yeah. didn't you get that already?

[clawgrip]

Technically it's EFL, not ESL. It's impossible to teach ESL in Japan.

[finlay]

huh what the hell are you talking about? it's the same.

[clawgrip]

ESL is English language education in an English-speaking country. EFL is English language education in a non-English-speaking country. The teaching requirements for the two are different because an EFL classroom accounts for just about all of the students' language input and output, while this is not at all the case for ESL. As such, an EFL teacher needs to be a little more careful about what is taught and how the classroom time is used, since the students are almost guaranteed to get no other English-language interaction outside of the classroom (except maybe watching a movie or something, the benefits of which are slim for anyone who is not an advanced learner).

[hwhatting]

Russian does it with aspect.
For instance:
watch = смотреть (imperfectve)
see = посмотреть (perfective)

Where did you get that from? Both смотреть and посмотреть mean "watch", смотреть / посмотреть на "look at". "To see" is видеть / увидеть. The difference between the two members of the pair is purely aspectual:
Когда я смотрю этот фильм, я всегда плачу. When I watch that film, I always cry.
Я посмотрел фильм и пошёл спать. I watched a film and went to sleep.
Он весь вечер смотрел на картину. He looked at the picture all evening.
Он посмотрел на картину, потом на художника. "И такое Вы называете искусство?" He looked at the painting, then at the artist. "And something like that you call art?"
Пока мы гуляли в парке, мы видели утки, бомжа, бешеную собаку... "While we were walking in the park, we saw ducks, a tramp, a rabid dog..."
Когда мы гуляли в парке, я увидел своего бывшего одноклассника. "When we were walking in the park, I saw / noticed a former classmate."

[Qwynegold]

:S I thought ESL was English Sign Language. So I was wondering why Japanese people would need to learn that.

[Ser]

It's called BSL, actually. British Sign Language.

[finlay]

ESL is English language education in an English-speaking country. EFL is English language education in a non-English-speaking country. The teaching requirements for the two are different because an EFL classroom accounts for just about all of the students' language input and output, while this is not at all the case for ESL. As such, an EFL teacher needs to be a little more careful about what is taught and how the classroom time is used, since the students are almost guaranteed to get no other English-language interaction outside of the classroom (except maybe watching a movie or something, the benefits of which are slim for anyone who is not an advanced learner).

Meh, i've always taken them as two acronyms for the same thing. It gets annoying after a while when you realise that some people might well be using one or the other for a specific reason, and other people who think of them as theoretically distinct feel the need to come up with further acronyms such as ESOL. I don't really give a damn.

And yeah, this is theoretically true, but in practice I've had a lot of students who use English at work, so they don't exactly get no practice. One of them did point out that errors that are shared by a majority of the L2 users might be reinforced, and sometimes they come in with company jargon that sounds positively strange to me.

[Ser]

Yeah, a lot of EFL kids around the world also get exposed to English through videogames outside the classroom... I do remember asking my English teachers if this or that word existed in English meaning anything, in case the videogame makers had made it up (which was now and then the case).

[clawgrip]

It's true that their input is not necessarily limited to the classroom, but their interaction with native speakers, if it does exist, is usually limited in time, subject matter, or both. If they speak English at work, they will probably be using it in a limited number of situations, such as phone calls for placing orders or setting up this or that. If they work with multiple native speakers and interact with them in a variety of situations then this is fortunate for them, because it's an exception to the norm.

[Imralu]

Meh, i've always taken them as two acronyms for the same thing. It gets annoying after a while when you realise that some people might well be using one or the other for a specific reason, and other people who think of them as theoretically distinct feel the need to come up with further acronyms such as ESOL. I don't really give a damn.

This.

I don't know about in other countries, but here, what I work in is called ELICOS (English Language Intensive Courses for Overseas Students). I usually say I'm an ESL teacher, though, because that's what we generally call it and more people will have an idea of what that is than ELICOS.

The teaching requirements for the two are different because an EFL classroom accounts for just about all of the students' language input and output, while this is not at all the case for ESL.

Actually, for a very significant number of my students, it is. A lot of my students speak their language at home and at work, and even when going shopping here. I had a Thai student who asked me why he wasn't improving. He was living with other Thais, worked in a Thai restaurant and, when he came to school, sat with the other Thai students. I was also sure he spoke Thai with them whenever there was no teacher around. He didn't study and there was no way he was going to just soak English up from around him because he had surrounded himself with other Thai speaking people. The only native English speaker he ever really spoke to was me.

[clawgrip]

Meh, i've always taken them as two acronyms for the same thing. It gets annoying after a while when you realise that some people might well be using one or the other for a specific reason, and other people who think of them as theoretically distinct feel the need to come up with further acronyms such as ESOL. I don't really give a damn.

This.

I don't know about in other countries, but here, what I work in is called ELICOS (English Language Intensive Courses for Overseas Students). I usually say I'm an ESL teacher, though, because that's what we generally call it and more people will have an idea of what that is than ELICOS.

The teaching requirements for the two are different because an EFL classroom accounts for just about all of the students' language input and output, while this is not at all the case for ESL.

Actually, for a very significant number of my students, it is. A lot of my students speak their language at home and at work, and even when going shopping here. I had a Thai student who asked me why he wasn't improving. He was living with other Thais, worked in a Thai restaurant and, when he came to school, sat with the other Thai students. I was also sure he spoke Thai with them whenever there was no teacher around. He didn't study and there was no way he was going to just soak English up from around him because he had surrounded himself with other Thai speaking people. The only native English speaker he ever really spoke to was me.

That's true. That happens to a lot of English-speaking people in Japan as well. For your Thai student, it was effectively EFL. Nevertheless, that is the difference between EFL and ESL as they are defined, more or less.

[Qwynegold]

It's called BSL, actually. British Sign Language.

Yeah, it only occurred to me when I was writing that. >.<

[Khvaragh]

Actually, for a very significant number of my students, it is. A lot of my students speak their language at home and at work, and even when going shopping here. I had a Thai student who asked me why he wasn't improving. He was living with other Thais, worked in a Thai restaurant and, when he came to school, sat with the other Thai students. I was also sure he spoke Thai with them whenever there was no teacher around. He didn't study and there was no way he was going to just soak English up from around him because he had surrounded himself with other Thai speaking people. The only native English speaker he ever really spoke to was me.

Indeed. I've lived in Egypt for 4+ years, but just being here doesn't magically mean I became fluent (and I'm still not, but I'd say I'm just below fluent I guess). It took a lot of hard work, especially absorbing yourself in the society. But I work with Egyptians, have mono-lingual Egyptian friends (and my boyfriend's family is all mono-lingual), teach Egyptian kids, etc. Interaction in the target language is the key. Especially if it's outside your comfort level, honestly.

[clawgrip]

I know several people who have lived in Japan ten years or more and who still know very little Japanese beyond some useful phrases. It is confusing to me that they can't find the motivation to study. I don't know why they would want to live in another country for such a long amount of time without being bothered to learn the language. You're only getting a superficial view of the culture if you can't understand what anyone is saying!

[hwhatting]

I know several people who have lived in Japan ten years or more and who still know very little Japanese beyond some useful phrases. It is confusing to me that they can't find the motivation to study. I don't know why they would want to live in another country for such a long amount of time without being bothered to learn the language. You're only getting a superficial view of the culture if you can't understand what anyone is saying!

Well, in my experience a lot of people are going abroad not because they're interested in other cultures (except perhaps in a very superficial, touristy kind of way), but because they see it as a smart career move or because they get paid better than if they'd stay home. I've worked abroad a lot and met much more people who prefer moving in always the same expat circles and bitching about how impossible the locals are than people who actually try to get to know the locals and to integrate themselves into the host country society.

[Skomakar'n]

While it's perfectly fine to "watch/look on TV" in Swedish (kolla, titta, glo, et c.), "see on TV" (se) is fine too, and not at all uncommon. I don't think either verb would be used without a preposition, though. One will "listen to/on music" (lyssna), but to "hear music" (höra) is distinctive in the same way as in English.

As for conlanging, I don't distinguish them in my current language, at least, although transitivity and other morphology can be played with to add some nuances.