This paper looks at the continued survival of 'myths' about English grammar, for example, the statement that in negative and interrogative sentences any should be used instead of some. It is based on a survey of 195 Hong Kong students majoring in English, in five different cohorts, which found that such myths are quite prevalent; with choices of 'true', 'false', 'don't know' and 'partly true', the true option was chosen in over 50% of cases. Differences between subjects are identified and discussed, as well as changes across time from the first to the last cohort. Then the individual myths are discussed and explained one by one. A number of possible sources for the myths are suggested, and the means of combatting them are discussed, along with the reasons for their resilience.
[Copyright of Language Awareness is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2013.873803]

Two hundred and ninety-six English majors at universities in Poland, Austria and Hong Kong were given a 50-item questionnaire designed to evaluate their knowledge of grammatical terminology. The main aim was to identify whether the three populations were subject to differing 'terminological cultures'. This was found to be substantially the case; for example, the term indefinite article was known by 95% of Polish students but only 29% of the Hong Kong ones, whereas imperative was known by 71% of the Austrians but only 5% of the Hong Kongers. Some differences were attributed to a lack of use of the related concept in teaching; others were explained by the use of a synonymous term (e.g. reported speech was preferred in Poland and Hong Kong but indirect speech in Austria). A significant correlation between terminological knowledge and language proficiency was found for the Hong Kong students. Qualitative findings included confusion between pairs of complementary terms and thosewith similar forms; unknown terms being treated as transparent with functional reference where possible; and the prototypical use ofwords as examples of grammatical categories (e.g. 'beautiful' for adjective). Implications for teachers, writers and researchers are discussed.
[Copyright of Language Awareness is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09658410802513751]

This paper investigates L2 English learners' reactions to mixed personality in a pedagogic grammar. Personality refers to how authors represent themselves in a text and interact with their readers (e.g. personally via the use of personal pronouns or impersonally via the use of the passive, etc.); mixed personality occurs when an author switches from one option to another. In an experiment, 195 students from Hong Kong and Poland were asked to read a text in which the author switched from we to you. The expectation that this mixing would cause we to be interpreted as exclusive was not borne out; however, some students did attach negative attributes to you as a result of its proximity to we. Another finding was that awareness of the generic reference of we was higher than that for you. Writers of pedagogic grammars are encouraged to be more aware of the referential complexities of personal pronouns.
[Copyright of Language Awareness is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585170902763973]