 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / ESL Teaching / September 2006the verb "to lecture"
Hi, It has recently come to my attention that the noun phrase "courses lectured in English" is rather common. As a non-native speaker and learner of the language, I don't think it is correct. This is because "lecture" isn't a transitive verb. "Courses (which are) lectured in English" (incorrectly) implies it is a transitive. However, someone found the following passages where "lecture" is indeed used as a transitive verb. 1. It was asked how much consideration questionnaire results received, and why, if a lecturer scores very badly one year, he/she may continue to lecture the course the following year. (http://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/~murc/minutes/mins9511.html) 2. Resources are required to lecture the course, to invigilate the practical and problem sessions, to set and mark coursework, to set and mark exams, to answer student questions, and so on. (http://www.engineering.ucl.ac.uk/committees/pg_sub/Documents%20for%20...) The two sentences are taken from British sources. I want to know whether they are valid evidence for the transitive use of the verb "lecture". Or are the authors non-native speakers? Maybe could you please look at other sentences on the sites to see if there is any sign of non-native English speakers? I'd appreciate your help. Ray Ray schrieb: > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > please look at other sentences on the sites to see if there is any sign > of non-native English speakers? First of all I'd like to point out that as the links show we are talking here about English as written by natural scientists/engineers - as someone who has on occasion had to translate texts written by natural scientists and engineers I have to admit that regardless of their native language most people who have received studied natural science or technological subjcts have never received any training in writing and thus have difficulty expressing themselves properly in writing. Secondly, however, English grammar is very flexible and readily absorbs new structures. while it is true that the verb "to lecture" is historically intransitive it may be that these usages are an early indication of a trend towards transforming it into a transitive verb - certainly "to lecture a course" seems to me to be more precise than "to teach a course" since it specifies the form of teaching, even if it still sits a bit uncomfortable - but then even during my lifetime I witnessed many words and constructions moving from sub-standard or even condemned to accepted standard. This, however, doesn't mean that anything goes, just that what is acceptable is constantly changing. For the moment, however, I would avoid using this structure if I were you. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan > Ray schrieb: > > Hi, [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > certainly "to lecture a course" seems to me to be more precise than "to > teach a course" since it specifies the form of teaching, even if it Now my question is more specific: Why didn't the authors write "to lecture ON a course"--the form described in the dictionary? Instead, they wrote "to lecture a course". I want to know whether this transitive usage without "on" is common among native speakers of English when the object is a school subject. Would you personally say "to lecture on a course" or "to lecture a course"? Best, Ray > still sits a bit uncomfortable - but then even during my lifetime I > witnessed many words and constructions moving from sub-standard or even > condemned to accepted standard. > This, however, doesn't mean that anything goes, just that what is > acceptable is constantly changing. For the moment, however, I would > avoid using this structure if I were you. > > Regards, Einde O'Callaghan > > Ray schrieb: > > > Hi, [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > lecture ON a course"--the form described in the dictionary? Instead, > they wrote "to lecture a course". Forget my above question. I didn't read your reply carefully. My fault. > I want to know whether this transitive usage without "on" is common > among native speakers of English when the object is a school subject. This is the question that really bothers me. > Would you personally say "to lecture on a course" or "to lecture a > course"? [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > > > Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Ray schrieb: >>>Ray schrieb: >>> [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] >>Would you personally say "to lecture on a course" or "to lecture a >>course"? I would say "to lecture on a particular topic", e.g. "to lecture on the the poetry of Ovid". If you're talking about the academic subject I'd say "he's a lecturer in sociology" or probably more likely "he's a sociology lecturer". But normally for me the verb "to lecture" is intransitive, has a personal object (I would think of it as the indirect object) or takes an object with "on" but the object is always for me something quite specific - I don't think I'd feel comfortable saying "he lectures on law" or "he lectures in law" - and definitely not "he lectures law" - but "the preacher regularly lectures young people on the evils of premarital sex". Regards, Einde O'Callaghan > Secondly, however, English grammar is very flexible and readily absorbs > new structures. while it is true that the verb "to lecture" is [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > teach a course" since it specifies the form of teaching, even if it > still sits a bit uncomfortable uncomfortably? > - but then even during my lifetime I witnessed have witnessed, unless you are posting from beyond the grave? (Pace) Owain Owain schrieb: >> Secondly, however, English grammar is very flexible and readily >> absorbs new structures. while it is true that the verb "to lecture" is [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > have witnessed, unless you are posting from beyond the grave? It is always advisable not to post too quickly after you rewrite parts of a sentence - particularly in a language newsgroup. :-( Regards, Einde O'Callaghan >Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >English" (incorrectly) implies it is a transitive. > Check a dictionary or two first. My Pocket Oxford and my paperback Random House both list 'lecture' as t & i. >However, someone found the following passages where "lecture" is indeed >used as a transitive verb. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > > >Hi, > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Check a dictionary or two first. My Pocket Oxford and my paperback > Random House both list 'lecture' as t & i. I believe the vt sense takes a human being, not something related to a subject, as its object in your dictionaries. And this vt sense is not what I asked about. > >However, someone found the following passages where "lecture" is indeed > >used as a transitive verb. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > > > > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Nope. 'He lectured a course in humanities to a wide variety of students' uses lecture as both t & i. Also correct and transitive is 'He lectured on the Theory of Relativity'. Just because there's a preposition there does not mean lecture is intransitive. 'on the theory of relativity' is prepositional noun phrase, direct object of lectured. I'm a native speaker and teacher of English and I've never found trying to sort out transitive and intransitive use of verbs which are both to be useful. To make matters worse, your example 'courses lectured in English' is an absolute phrase . And if you check a dictionary, you'll find that 'absolute' means not limited or restricted. Or just do a web search for absolute phrases and you'll see what I mean. > > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > > >>>Hi, > >>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > wide variety of students' uses lecture as > both t & i. Is the above sentence taken from your dictionaries or invented by you? I understand that your Pocket Oxford, or any other Oxford Paperbakc dictionary, doesn't really specify whether a verb is transntive or intransitive. Only a simple label 'v' is given. > Also correct and transitive is 'He lectured on the Theory of Relativity'. We have no problem with that. > Just because there's a preposition there does not mean lecture is > intransitive. Most, if not all, dictionaries do list "lecture" as intransitive when the sense is "to teach (a subject)". The Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary lists "lecture" that way, and so does Longman. http://www.ldoceonline.com/ http://www.oup.com/elt/select?url=/eltnew/catalogue/teachersites/oald7/ If "lecture" has a transitive use, with the object being a school subject, then it seems to be a glaring omission on the part of the dictionary compilers. > 'on the theory of relativity' is prepositional noun phrase, direct > object of lectured. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > To make matters worse, your example 'courses lectured in English' is an > absolute phrase . I don't understand what you mean by "absolute phrase" here. You seem to be using it in an unconventional sense. In the following sentence, "her her fears creeping up on her" is an absolute phrase because it has its own subject "her fears". I see nothing similiar in "courses lectured in English". Joan looked nervous, her fears creeping up on her. Ray > And if you check a dictionary, you'll find that 'absolute' means not > limited or restricted. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > > > >>>> >>>>>Hi, >>>>> >>>>>It has recently come to my attention that the noun phrase "courses >>>>>lectured in English" is rather common. As a non-native speaker and >>>>>learner of the language, I don't think it is correct. This is because >>>>>"lecture" isn't a transitive verb. "Courses (which are) lectured in >>>>>English" (incorrectly) implies it is a transitive. >>>>> >>>>Check a dictionary or two first. My Pocket Oxford and my paperback >>>>Random House both list 'lecture' as t & i. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>I believe the vt sense takes a human being, not something related to a >>>subject, as its object in your dictionaries. And this vt sense is not >>>what I asked about. >>> >>> >>> >>Nope. 'He lectured a course in humanities to a >>wide variety of students' uses lecture as >>both t & i. >> >> > > >Is the above sentence taken from your dictionaries or invented by you? >I understand that your Pocket Oxford, or any other Oxford Paperbakc >dictionary, doesn't really specify whether a verb is transntive or >intransitive. Only a simple label 'v' is given. > Invented by me as a native speaker/teacher to test my ear and then supply a viable example to a student. Your understanding is wrong. My Pocket Oxford is harcover, 1960 edition. My Random House is PB, 1968. Both do list lecture as "v.i. & t". My PB Funk and Wagnall's, 1980, goes one step farther. It lists lecture as "v.i. To deliver a lecture" and "v.t.. To deliver a lecture to". >>Also correct and transitive is 'He lectured on the Theory of Relativity'. >> >We have no problem with that. > > > >>Just because there's a preposition there does not mean lecture is >>intransitive. >> >Most, if not all, dictionaries do list "lecture" as intransitive when >the sense is "to teach (a subject)". > >The Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary lists "lecture" that way, and >so does Longman. > >http://www.ldoceonline.com/ > >http://www.oup.com/elt/select?url=/eltnew/catalogue/teachersites/oald7/ > >If "lecture" has a transitive use, with the object being a school >subject, then it seems to be a glaring omission on the part of the >dictionary compilers. > Those dictionaries are specifically for ESL students. Unfortunately ESL materials sometimes attempt to be demand more than expected from native speakers and go too far by imposing artificial distinctions. I have seen this in instructional materials and test items. Perhaps the dictionaries have to match ESL test items. Even when the items are wrong. [I've also seen wrong items in grammar tests for native speakers.] I taught high school English for 35 years, plus some ESL, using a variety of texts and handbooks, all of which contain lists of misused expressions. I have never seen any reference to lecture being restricted in its t or i usage. > >>'on the theory of relativity' is prepositional noun phrase, direct >>object of lectured. >> >>I'm a native speaker and teacher of English and I've never found trying to >>sort out transitive and intransitive use of verbs which are both to be >>useful. >> >>To make matters worse, your example 'courses lectured in English' is an >>absolute phrase . >> >> > >I don't understand what you mean by "absolute phrase" here. You seem to >be using it in an unconventional sense. In the following sentence, "her >her fears creeping up on her" is an absolute phrase because it has its >own subject "her fears". I see nothing similiar in "courses lectured >in English". > >Joan looked nervous, her fears creeping up on her. > >Ray > Try comparing "courses lectured in English" to the phrase used with the verb intransitive. "Courses lectured to in English?" Does not sound right. I can't think of any noun + past participle phrase which adds a preposition. > > >>And if you check a dictionary, you'll find that 'absolute' means not >>limited or restricted. >> >>Or just do a web search for absolute phrases and you'll see what I mean. >> >> >> >>> >>> >>>>>However, someone found the following passages where "lecture" is indeed >>>>>used as a transitive verb. >>>>> >>>>>1. It was asked how much consideration questionnaire results received, >>>>>and why, if a lecturer scores very badly one year, he/she may continue >>>>>to lecture the course the following year. >>>>>(http://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/~murc/minutes/mins9511.html) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>2. Resources are required to lecture the course, to invigilate the >>>>>practical and problem sessions, to set and mark coursework, to set and >>>>>mark exams, to answer student questions, and so on. >>>>>(http://www.engineering.ucl.ac.uk/committees/pg_sub/Documents%20for%20...) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>The two sentences are taken from British sources. I want to know >>>>>whether they are valid evidence for the transitive use of the verb >>>>>"lecture". Or are the authors non-native speakers? Maybe could you >>>>>please look at other sentences on the sites to see if there is any sign >>>>>of non-native English speakers? >>>>> >>>>>I'd appreciate your help. >>>>> >>>>>Ray >>>>> Native speakers are not necessarily correct. Otherwise I would have had to do another job for 35 years -:) John Ramsay schrieb: > >>>> > [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > My PB Funk and Wagnall's, 1980, goes one step farther. It lists lecture > as "v.i. To deliver a lecture" and "v.t.. To deliver a lecture to". After Tom's big binge, his father lectured him on the evils of drink. That is the only transitive usage I'm aware of. > >>Also correct and transitive is 'He lectured on the Theory of > Relativity'. [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > I can't think of any noun + past participle phrase which adds a > preposition. Neither sound right to me. IIRC my university used the phrqase "courses offered". Regards, Einde O'Callaghan > > > > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > Native speakers are not necessarily correct. Otherwise > I would have had to do another job for 35 years -:) > >>>> > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > Your understanding is wrong. My Pocket Oxford is harcover, 1960 > edition. My Random House is PB, 1968. Your Pocket Oxford is quite outdated. I have two Oxford paperback dictionaries, one published in 1997 and the other in 2001. Both list "to lecture" as a mere v. Could you please give the vt definition for "lecture" in your Pocket Oxford? > Both do list lecture as "v.i. & t". > > My PB Funk and Wagnall's, 1980, goes one step farther. It lists lecture > as "v.i. To deliver a lecture" and "v.t.. To deliver a lecture to". Note that this vt sense is "to deliver a lecture TO (someone)". Certainly one cannot deliver a lecture to a school subject. > Those dictionaries are specifically for ESL students. Unfortunately ESL > materials sometimes attempt to be demand more than expected from native [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > I can't think of any noun + past participle phrase which adds a preposition. How about " the usage frowned upon"? Does it sound right? > > > > [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > Native speakers are not necessarily correct. Otherwise > I would have had to do another job for 35 years -:) >> >>>>>Hi, >> >>>>> >> >>>>>It has recently come to my attention that the noun phrase "courses >> >>>>>lectured in English" is rather common. As a non-native speaker and >> >>>>>learner of the language, I don't think it is correct. This is >>because >> >>>>>"lecture" isn't a transitive verb. "Courses (which are) lectured in >> >>>>>English" (incorrectly) implies it is a transitive. >> >> >>>>> >> >>>>Check a dictionary or two first. My Pocket Oxford and my paperback >> >>>>Random House both list 'lecture' as t & i. >> >>>> >> >>>I believe the vt sense takes a human being, not something related to a >> >>>subject, as its object in your dictionaries. And this vt sense is not >> >>>what I asked about. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >>Nope. 'He lectured a course in humanities to a >> >>wide variety of students' uses lecture as >> >>both t & i. >> >> >> > >> >Is the above sentence taken from your dictionaries or invented by you? >> >I understand that your Pocket Oxford, or any other Oxford Paperbakc >> >dictionary, doesn't really specify whether a verb is transntive or >> >intransitive. Only a simple label 'v' is given. >> > >>Invented by me as a native speaker/teacher to test my ear and then >>supply a viable example to a student. >>Your understanding is wrong. My Pocket Oxford is hardcover, 1960 >>edition. My Random House is PB, 1968. >> > >Your is quite outdated. I have two Oxford paperback >dictionaries, one published in 1997 and the other in 2001. Both list >"to lecture" as a mere v. >Could you please give the vt definition for "lecture" in your Pocket >Oxford? > Just because my dictionaries are old does not mean they're wrong. Why do old dictionaries include t & i for verbs and new ones don't? Indeed, the fact that you got your interpretation of t & i for 'lecture' from 2 more modern dictionaries designed specifically for ESL students suggests some sort of marketing strategy. Definition: Pocket Oxford : lecture. v.i. & t. Deliver a lecture(s) And here's another example of lecture as intransitive with human beings: Tomorrow he has to lecture on Boyle's Law to his Chemistry 101 students. The above is just as correct as: Tomorrow he has to lecture his Chemistry 101 students on Boyle's Law. But marketers of ESL tests can put items like those in a multiple choice test. And say one or the other is the only correct answer. > >>Both do list lecture as "v.i. & t". >> >>My PB Funk and Wagnall's, 1980, goes one step farther. It lists lecture >>as "v.i. To deliver a lecture" and "v.t.. To deliver a lecture to". >> >> > > >Note that this vt sense is "to deliver a lecture TO (someone)". >Certainly one cannot deliver a lecture to a school subject. > Depends on the context. Both class and course can mean the subject matter or the students taking the course/class. 'The history course/class is quite difficult.' A statement about the subject matter. 'This student got the highest mark in the history course/class.' A statement about a student. So when an instructor is delivering a lecture is he lecturing the material or the students? > >>Those dictionaries are specifically for ESL students. Unfortunately ESL >>materials sometimes attempt to be demand more than expected from native >>speakers and go too far by imposing artificial distinctions. >> >>I have seen this in instructional materials and test items. Perhaps >>the dictionaries have to match ESL test items. Even when the items are >>wrong. >> >>[I've also seen wrong items in grammar tests for native speakers.] >> >>I taught high school English for 35 years, plus some ESL, >>using a variety of texts and handbooks, all of which >>contain lists of misused expressions. I have never >>seen any reference to lecture being restricted >>in its t or i usage. >> >> >> > >> >>'on the theory of relativity' is prepositional noun phrase, direct >> >>object of lectured. >> >> >> >>I'm a native speaker and teacher of English and I've never found >>trying to >> >>sort out transitive and intransitive use of verbs which are both to be >> >>useful. >> >> >> >>To make matters worse, your example 'courses lectured in English' is an >> >>absolute phrase . >> >> >> >> >> > >> >I don't understand what you mean by "absolute phrase" here. You seem to >> >be using it in an unconventional sense. In the following sentence, "her >> >her fears creeping up on her" is an absolute phrase because it has its >> >own subject "her fears". I see nothing similiar in "courses lectured >> >in English". >> > >> >Joan looked nervous, her fears creeping up on her. >> > >> >Ray >> > >> >> >>Try comparing "courses lectured in English" to the phrase used >>with the verb intransitive. >> >>"Courses lectured to in English?" Does not sound right. >> >>I can't think of any noun + past participle phrase which adds a preposition. >> >> > > >How about " the usage frowned upon"? Does it sound right? > Sorry, I was trying to come up with an example of a past participle with 'to' attached to make it intransitive and couldn't. 'Frown upon' is a phrasal verb, a different problem than t & i, involving verbs that go with certain prepositions. There are lists of them on the web, including the Cambridge Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs. [Remainder Snipped] > >>My PB Funk and Wagnall's, 1980, goes one step farther. It lists > lecture [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > So when an instructor is delivering a lecture > is he lecturing the material or the students? You think the word "course" can refer to a group of students taking a course? If so, then "to lecture a course in English" is indeed correct and means "to teach a group of students in English". But I don't see this sense for "course" in any dictonary. Maybe the question is not whether "to lecture" can take a school subject as its grammatical object, but whether "course" can mean a group of students. The topic on "course" perhaps deserves its own thread. > > >>My PB Funk and Wagnall's, 1980, goes one step farther. It lists > > lecture [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > subject as its grammatical object, but whether "course" can mean a > group of students. I forgot to ask if you think "to lecture linear algebra" is correct. > The topic on "course" perhaps deserves its own thread. > > >>John Ramsay wrote: >> >> >> >> >>> >>My PB Funk and Wagnall's, 1980, goes one step farther. It lists >>>lecture >>> >>as "v.i. To deliver a lecture" and "v.t.. To deliver a lecture to". >>> >> >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> >Note that this vt sense is "to deliver a lecture TO (someone)". >>> >>> >Certainly one cannot deliver a lecture to a school subject. >>> > >>> >>> >>>Depends on the context. >>> >>>Both class and course can mean the subject >>>matter or the students taking the course/class. >>> >>>'The history course/class is quite difficult.' >>> >>>A statement about the subject matter. >>> >>>'This student got the highest mark in the history >>>course/class.' >>> >>>A statement about a student. >>> >>>So when an instructor is delivering a lecture >>>is he lecturing the material or the students? >>> >>> >>You think the word "course" can refer to a group of students taking a >>course? >>If so, then "to lecture a course in English" is indeed correct and >>means "to teach a group of students in English". But I don't see this >>sense for "course" in any dictonary. >> >>Maybe the question is not whether "to lecture" can take a school >>subject as its grammatical object, but whether "course" can mean a >>group of students. >> >> > > >I forgot to ask if you think "to lecture linear algebra" is correct. 1. He lectures linear algebra for a living. 2. He lectures on linear algebra for a living. 3. He is a lecturer on linear algebra for a living. 1. may be as correct as 2. But I think 3. makes people use 2. more often than 1. You can't say: He is a lecturer linear algebra for a living. >>The topic on "course" perhaps deserves its own thread. >> |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.