Авиационный английский в картинках

[22sobaki.livejournal.com]

grecha2000 выложил креативный конспект по авиационному английскому языку.

Автор - полковник П.В.Искратов, военный штурман 1-го класса.



2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


8.


9.


10.


11.


12.


13.


14.


15.


16.


17.


Фрагментарно. Полностью архив для скачивания здесь.

Comments

[owl80lvl.livejournal.com]

А кто говорит про нанизывание слов на конструкции без нужных окончаний или чего там? Это тоже принцип. И да, почему все повернутые на языках считают, что всем ппц как нужно свободно говорить с носителями языка?) Смысл в том, чтобы понимать и доносить суть. Я пойму узбека, кладущего кафель, если нужно будет. Лишь бы он кафель хорошо клал)) тут то же самое. Я понимаю то, что нужно для работы, меня понимают при коммуникации по работе, этого даже на международный проф. сертификат хватает. Одни только фанаты языкового образования негодуют, как я посмела учить язык избирательно и "по менюхе".

[wordbuff.livejournal.com]

как я посмела учить язык избирательно и "по менюхе".

Oh, you lost me there. Must be the kind of Russian that grew in the years I spent learning English in-place, so to say.
Well, I could admit there is something in your claim that knowing a foreign language to any degree is better than knowing none at all, but I am afraid that has never been enough for me.

Anyway, take your mother tongue (which I assume Russian is for you) as an example.
It is not sufficient to see a word like "bezhat" and its "translations". The language works along different lines altogether. We differentiate between senses by (a) verb patterns associated with the sense (in case of verbs) and (b) by the word collocates.
So in Russian you'd know immediately what I meant if I spoke of "voda", kotoraya bezhit, or "tok" begustchij po provodam, or about a sportsman begustchij 200 meters, or about someone begayustchij po magzinam ili po devochkam.

Absolutely the same principle works in other languages (at least in most European languages) - and both to understand them and (especially) to use them actively you'd need to know what sticks with what. Otherwise you'll produce broken English, pretty much like Uzbeks produce broken Russian.
I remember one of them once said to a man who stepped on a piece of newspaper page moved by the wind along a street
"pusti ego puskaj idet" (~ let him walk on). Being a native Russian speaker I know newspapers do not "walk", nor newspaper is "he" in Russian.

This is roughly what I mean when I say that pictures with object names do not provide sufficient information to begin to understand and use a foreign language meaningfully.
With an object name we need to know what (you or sth) can do with it, what it can do, what attributes it takes naturally, and with which logical groups of other words it combines.

It's a bit deeper than what you may have thought, I think.

P.S. check my "brochure" in tutor_me to get some idea of my thinking on the subject.
And/or make a search for my comments in ru_learnenglish