Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen
linguistlist.org>
Concerning the discussion by Ron Sheen and Joybrato Mukherjee about idioms, triggered by my article in John Kirk's Corpora Galore (2000, from the 1998 ICAME conference). My original comment about avoiding idioms as clich�s stems both from personal experience from EFL teaching at Stockholm and views of other EFL teachers, together with comments such as that of the Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Idioms: "...the evidence in The Bank of English suggests that [idioms] are also very common in journalism and magazines, where writers are seeking to make their articles and stories more vivid, interesting, and appealing to their readers. Idioms are often used by both journalists and politicians as shorthand ways of expressing opinions or conveying ready-made evaluations. While such use of idioms is often criticized and dismissed as 'clich�', suggesting that the speaker or writer has nothing interesting or original to say, it is also true that idioms help speakers and writers to be fluent and to get their opinions across effectively" (1995:vi). I don't have empirical data on whether EFL teachers in general discourage learning about/use of idioms. In favor of teaching them, there is the weak argument that books such as the CDI do sell and that mono- and bilingual dictionaries invariably include idioms. Various language columns in newspapers also comment on idioms, as do normal speakers. A much stronger (non-supported) trumpet blast in defense of idioms is to be found in the opening of the General Introduction to the Oxford Dictionary of English Idioms: "The accurate and appropriate use of English expressions which are in the broadest sense idiomatic is one distinguishing mark of a native command of the language and a reliable measure of the proficiency of foreign learners" (1993 [1983]:x). Given the relatively low frequency of idioms, this may seem strong, indeed. There is, however, also the question of salience, on two levels. First, a given idiom may be crucial to the understanding of a given text, as when in a Tom & Jerry cartoon from the 40s, Jerry cowers behind a black nr 8 pool ball while Tom aims the queue at him-and American children (may be supposed to) know that Jerry's "behind the eight ball". Second, a given idiom may be part of the discourse in a given household or community, a high-frequency marker of social identity in that particular speech community. At a national level, Richard Nixon's "Sock it to me" had the same function, while "The X doth protest too much" is perhaps still a similar cultural echo. My conclusion as a teacher is that (especially university) EFL students need to have metalevel (i.e. linguistic) knowledge about idioms and their various forms and functions, but that it is rarely possible to predict which individual idioms may be passively useful, let alone actively so. (Incidentally, I'd say that Joybrato Mukherjee and Ron Sheen used one idiom each in their responses...) But this is in a sense only a subset of the larger problem of learning vocabulary and cultural knowledge, where predictability diminishes as items become rarer. At our department, we try to finesse this by testing vocabulary and idioms from a wide range (the first 15,000 items of the Bank of English, idioms listed in CDI or ODEI), but only requiring students to succeed with a fairly low number of items. David Minugh at the University of Stockholm, Sweden David C. Minugh Phone: + 46 8 16 36 11 Director of Studies Fax: + 46 8 15 96 67 Department of English University of StockholmMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue