Click here to log in
4 million accounts created!
JOIN our free club and learn English now!
Get a free English lesson every week! 2 MILLION subscribers!
- Our other sites
Grammar Rules/helpForum > English only || Bottom
Message from niagrass1234 posted on 01-05-2017 at 10:48:48 (D | E | F)
Could you help me please and tell me about my mistakes?
Thank you very much.
Contextualization involves meaningful language use for real communicative purposes and helps students to understand how meaning is constructed by language users (be it writing, speaking, reading, or listening) depending upon the context.
Context refers to the topic and situation of a communicative act that are necessary for understanding (Walz, 1989). Walz (1989) points out that a number of language textbooks provide contextualized grammar exercises. These exercises provide thematically related sentences requiring mechanical manipulation of a grammatical form, but often do not force students to understand. Therefore, contextualization of mechanical drills in this sense is certainly not the same thing as creating a context (Walz, 1989, p. 162).
Would you say context and contextualisation mean the same, are technically different, are related to each other or are part of a grammar lesson?
We were proud that you conceded defeat so graciously.
Would I be right to say the words you conceded defeat so graciously is an independent clause AND NOT an infinitive, surbodinating or cordinating clause?
Edited by lucile83 on 10-05-2017 09:00
we are no robots !!
Re: Grammar Rules/help from mah, posted on 09-05-2017 at 17:48:07 (D | E)
As I found out contextual lisation is : to place a word or idea for example is a particular context. Infact it means , put into context. On the other hand context is a part of statement that surrounds a particular word or passage and determines it's meaning. We can say they are almost the same , or we can say their goal is the same. They are not a part of a grammar , they are a good way to learn grammar better. Best regards
Re: Grammar Rules/help from mah, posted on 10-05-2017 at 02:22:22 (D | E)
sorry :In a ****
Re: Grammar Rules/help from here4u, posted on 10-05-2017 at 08:32:14 (D | E)
What a strange message to ask about a very technical, yet important question... and an even stranger way of asking it...
I'm not going to argue on every point but will simply say that "context" is a part of "contextualization". "Drills" ate out-dated and are no longer referred to, or considered as being "a context". The monkey-like repetition of patterns is, thankfully, no longer in use when teaching. Let's be grateful.
The mechanical repetition of an imposed pattern was terribly artificial and couldn't be a part of "real life communication" between intellectually gifted individuals... The reference you're giving is a proof of that... We surely don't communicate and teach now as they used to in the 1980s...(sigh of relief )
Showing a "phenomenon" in different contexts, studying its construction and nuances, and then using it in a really meaningful sentence or (better!) text : this is "contextualization"; it will help the student use and experiment the pattern he/she has then understood in other "real communicative purposes".
Therefore, contextualization of mechanical drills in this sense is certainly not the same thing as creating a context (Walz, 1989, p. 162). This sentence was right at that time, in the 1980s-90s, but really sounds as "stating the obvious" nowadays.
- We were proud that you conceded defeat so graciously.
Would I be right to say the words "you conceded defeat so graciously" is an independent clause AND NOT an infinitive, surboRdinating or cordinating clause? I'd say it's a strange independent clause... which is totally cut out from its context and cannot be given as an "example" to explain a pattern.
I do hope you could understand my point, hope it was of some help, and thank you for reading me.
Forum > English only