critical response
Phạm Tiến Dũng
I. Summery:
Cuthbert declares that Globish is simpler and more effective than English in communicating. She supports the idea of Globish by bringing out its advantages. Those are: simple vocabulary and grammar, English without culture, more confident in speaking and more time for innovating activities in class. According the evaluation of credibility, her argument seems to be weak.
II. Credibility:
Regarding credibility, Cuthbert works for English Learning Center where Globish is being taught. That means her opinions might be in control of the organization. In addition, her experience in teaching Globish seems not enough to be persuadable. Evaluating learning languages needs a long term to have enough time to have reliable data, instead of three months in teaching Globish.
III. Body
Cuthbert’s claim regarding ability to have enough words and enough basic grammar to communicate effectively in very short time is an overstatement because just a few day, the students could not have enough vocabulary and grammar to communicate and are unlikely to have real conversations in Globish. She states that 1500 words are enough for a language is also overestimated, because Globish would be used in many fields, such as business, science and politics. Plus, lack of vocabulary and grammar would not help students be confident in communicating because they would find complicated in describing things. Generally, it seems debatable to evaluate learning progress in a short time.
Also, the author presents an illogical cause and effect relationship when claiming that Globish doesn’t concentrate on accuracy leads to students convey exactly message across because wrong pronunciation would results to misunderstanding in communicating. Moreover, this might create students a bad manner in correcting wrong words, instead of relaxed and confident manner. Beside, poor grammar is likely to lead students hard to describe activities in different tense and sophisticated
I. Summery:
Cuthbert declares that Globish is simpler and more effective than English in communicating. She supports the idea of Globish by bringing out its advantages. Those are: simple vocabulary and grammar, English without culture, more confident in speaking and more time for innovating activities in class. According the evaluation of credibility, her argument seems to be weak.
II. Credibility:
Regarding credibility, Cuthbert works for English Learning Center where Globish is being taught. That means her opinions might be in control of the organization. In addition, her experience in teaching Globish seems not enough to be persuadable. Evaluating learning languages needs a long term to have enough time to have reliable data, instead of three months in teaching Globish.
III. Body
Cuthbert’s claim regarding ability to have enough words and enough basic grammar to communicate effectively in very short time is an overstatement because just a few day, the students could not have enough vocabulary and grammar to communicate and are unlikely to have real conversations in Globish. She states that 1500 words are enough for a language is also overestimated, because Globish would be used in many fields, such as business, science and politics. Plus, lack of vocabulary and grammar would not help students be confident in communicating because they would find complicated in describing things. Generally, it seems debatable to evaluate learning progress in a short time.
Also, the author presents an illogical cause and effect relationship when claiming that Globish doesn’t concentrate on accuracy leads to students convey exactly message across because wrong pronunciation would results to misunderstanding in communicating. Moreover, this might create students a bad manner in correcting wrong words, instead of relaxed and confident manner. Beside, poor grammar is likely to lead students hard to describe activities in different tense and sophisticated