Hope the link works…
just a funny thing I wanted to share with everyone! ^___^
A funny conversation.
That’s really funny 
The “grammar troller” is doing a spelling mistake, though (see “quesiton” instead of question).
yeah I noticed that. Unfortunate mistake but still funny
Funny conversation. So, the “grammar troller” is the one called Perolex, right?
I’ve got to say that I’ve never used ‘u’, ‘ur’, ‘cuz’, left off a question mark when asking a question and I do know how to spell both ‘through’ and ‘though’.
I just hope that you’re not serious and that you don’t truly believe we should avoid grammar… hahaha
Of course I’m not serious! 
…I just couldn’t think of a title… : /
Actually I believe the troll is the one whispering to Perolex. I’m sure I would be driven crazy if someone was like, “Excuse me, where’s the direct object? Okay, there it is! Good job! Now where is…”
And in the end for Perolex… Troll Face… “Problem?”
hahaha Cloud!
As a language teacher, language learner, and an applied linguistics student, I strongly believe in avoiding pedagogical grammar.
So, you think that people shouldn’t study grammar at all?
I have to say that I’m totally against such an opinion. I can’t see any evidence which shows it’s a ‘bad’ thing. To this day, I’ve never heard any arguments against it which add up, either.
Studying pedagogical grammar in the context of input or output has never been proven to affect learning outcomes to any significant degree.
I study grammatical points, understand them, then experience those points in text or audio and understand what it means. It’s very clear to me that it does affect my learning in a positive way.
Your argument doesn’t have any validity.
I do not think you understand my argument.
I’ll put it this way: anecdote does not equal data.
Well, please explain your argument clearly.
I think your argument against anecdote is pointless. Because it hasn’t been proved in a scientific paper, it must be false? Surely you see the fault with that view.
Well if you want to make serious claims about a topic, data is nice. Also, false is not the same as indeterminate.
Dooo said: “As a language teacher, language learner, and an applied linguistics student, I strongly believe in avoiding pedagogical grammar.”
You made the claim. I simply refuted it because I witness directly how studying grammar improves my knowledge of a language. I don’t need ‘data’ to prove that to anybody. There are many things in life which don’t need a scientific paper to be true.
If you think I’m still not understanding what you mean to say, then I encourage you, again, to explain it.
There are no studies that support the notion that pedagogical grammar improves learning outcomes. No amount of anecdotal evidence changes that. What you or others feel strongly about it is irrelevant in this context. Lots of people felt the earth was flat at one point in history.
Those people who felt the earth was flat didn’t have any evidence to support saying that it was flat or spherical, for that matter. But, I know for myself that studying grammar does help me. I’ve studied languages and purposefully avoided the use of grammar completely, and found that I didn’t get nearly as far as when I did use grammar. I do not make the claim out of ignorance and stupidity. Also, I certainly do not attempt to hand in a paper or make some scientific finding, of which I want to be credited for. Personal experience is not worthless. On the other hand, one can not completely rely on it as it can be biased. I think it’s a terrible tyranny of the mind to say ‘because there isn’t a study on it, it’s false’.
‘it’s false’
I did not at any point say that.
The flat earth analogy is just evidence that people can be delusional when depending on subjective observations,
Forgive me but I am done.
I must be delusional! Because there’s no paper stating it to be true. What an insufferable bastard I must be for having my own mind and experiencing things which do not exist in a body of peer-reviewed literature! Oh the humanity!!!
Who are you shouting at? Your imaginary friend?