^ I must try to remember this next time you go full grammar nazi on someone. ;)
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______________

Yeah, I get what you guys are saying, and OH's image of a little girl and her mum's English is a good illustration. Not always, but I often try to squeeze in the word "grammatically" when I'm correcting students. I'm not judging them or their ideas, I hope I'm making a neutral observation that they are not using what is known as accepted grammar.
Ideally, teachers should also explain to students how there are different tones and formalities in English. In formal written English you should use accepted grammar, but what OH's little girl and her mum say at home is entirely their business. So the little girl's mum's English is not "wrong" it's just not appropriate for advancing academically.

Also, of course, I have the advantage of teaching smallish groups in a less charged atmosphere than OH's classes in the US. I don't have to cope with that tension between social class, race and type of English, but if you explain about appropriate tone for different situations, perhaps some of that tension can be diffused.

And finally a note on corrections. Plenty of teachers (even me on a good day) use this method:
i) get students working in groups,
ii) prowl around with ears/eyes open to notice important errors
iii) when students have expressed their ideas, put some of the errors you noticed on the board
This way you can correct grammar without embarrassing/interrupting individual students.

I don't know that it's entirely a question of being charged, but we're a nation of 300 million people dispersed over a landmass the size of a continent. The idea that we could have a uniform anything is a lie of modern history. In any other time period without modern forms of communication we would simply culturally evolve into countless cultures that had little to do with one another, but because of modern technology we are thrust together with the idiotic notion that all of us should naturally be the same simply because we all have "America" labeled on our butts.

Without the "benefit" of electricity and whatnot we'd all eventually be different cultures the same as Europe is assuming Europe hadn't evolved with Morse code and radio and whatnot after the fall of the Roman Empire.

I delicately and painstakingly made that point.

With ESOL (as we called them) I didn’t give a ****. I’m talking about black kids whose native language is English. They have just as much right to the ownership of their native tongue as anyone. 90% of it is verb conjugation which should be ****ing irrelevant whether it’s a medical journal or a text to a friend. If it’s communicated then mission accomplished.

^ Very good points about technology and how it promotes/maintains a standardised language. I like the bit about Europe moving from the Roman Empire to Morse code.
Perhaps I'm missunderstanding what you wrote (in bold): the USA has plenty of uniform stuff: rules of the road, domestic voltage, money, etc. And on the topic of language, even a uniform accepted language allows for variations of spelling, pronunciation, etc. It's not like everyone in America is being forced to speak like Gore Vidal.

Well then your idea of how formal writing defines how people should speak should be shot in the head because speach only exists to communicate ideas and if people are effectively communicating ideas to one another then there is no problem.

Lulz

In my experience, not being able to write for **** usually translates to not being able to communicate for ****, usually in the form of jarbled ass sentences. Also, given that speach is meant to communicate ideas, wouldn't a standardized system yield better results?

^ That's to your credit then, OH, because as we both know, delicate and painstaking instruction requires extra patience and effort.

^ There's relatively little conjugating for different persons in English; the verb Be, a few "s"s and that's about it. Tense changes are important because of the way meanings change. But whatever verb changes you're making, you should be doing the right thing for the right context.

Put what you like in a text to a friend, but if you're writing for a medical journal, your work will only be accepted if it is in correct formal language. Students should be aware that in many professions their ideas will be rejected if they are not expressed in the accepted syntax. However much you may disagree with that notion morally, we should prepare students for that rl attitude if we can - by teaching them the rules of grammar they will need for professional/academic writing.

*speech

*whoosh*

Yeah. We agree. I just grew weary over time.

Language is never static though.