Introduction

Teachers like to teach English proverbs for many reasons, because they are colourful, they vary from culture to culture, and students like to compare them, and because it is a break from the serious work of learning grammar.

Proverbs  to teach/revise grammar: A rationale.

Proverbs are not particularly useful in themselves.They are difficult for students to pull out at the right moment, and they rarely appear in exam questions. There is, however, another possibility: use them to explain grammar. This simply means linking a proverb to a grammar point, using the proverb as a metaphor or illustration of  a structure. This could be done in a single lesson, and may help students to get a new perspective on difficult grammar and vocabulary items.

Level: Intermediate and above

Procedure. Give students a list of proverbs and ask them to match them with the meanings. Go through the answers.

Proverbs

1 A leopard can’t change its spots.

2 Kill two birds with one stone

3 Too many cooks spoil the broth.

4 Out of sight, out of mind.

5 A double-edged sword.

6 A person is known by the company he keeps.

7 Hobson’s choice. *

8 A wolf in sheep’s clothing.

9 Birds of a feather flock together.

10 Two’s company, threes a crowd.

Meanings

a. If you can’t see someone or something, you soon forget about them.

b. Achieve two goals with one action

c. If you want to know about someone look at his friends

d. Some people never change

e. No choice at all.

f. Sometimes it is better for one or two people to do something, rather than lots of people.

g. Something that can be both an advantage and a disadvantage

h. Something dangerous, but looks innocent. i. Two people can get on better when there’s no one else.

j. People with similar interests meet together

Next, ask students to look at the following grammar points and say why they sometimes cause problems. If they need help to understand these structures, go through the questions below with them.

Grammar points:

1.  *I don’t want no milk. (double negative)

2.  Turning the corner, he saw a packet in the road. Omitted subject (=As he turned)

3.  ‘I must go’ he said= He said he must go. compare ‘I have to go’ he said= He said he had to go.

4. I saw a man standing next to me ( reduced relative clause= a man who was standing)

5.  I had my car cleaned/stolen. (Causative)

6.  If I’d known, I’d have come. (Conditional I had, I would)

7.  Would you mind waiting a minute? (Request used as an order)

8.  *I worked hardly this afternoon. (compare I worked hard this afternoon)

9.  He worked as a tennis umpire and a football referee. (Collocation)

10. *She is more slower than her sister. (wrong form of comparative)

*indicates grammatically incorrect forms

1 What is the meaning of the double negative sentence? (It means the opposite)

2.Why do we omit the subject? (Because it’s easier, quicker and avoids repetition)

3. What is the difference in form between must and have to in this situation? (must does not have a past form)

4. Why is this a problem for students? (If they can’t see the relative clause, they may not know it is there.)

5. What is the difference between the two examples. (One is a good thing, one is bad)

6. What is the difference between the meanings of the two I’ds. How do you know? (One means I would and one means I had, we understand this from the words around them.)

7. What is the answer to this?  (Probably Ok). It looks like a question, but could well be an order, and an answer may not be expected.

8. What is the difference between hard and hardly? Why does this confuse students? They almost have opposite meanings: hardly worked means almost not at all, which is the opposite of work hard)

9. Why do we use different words to describe the same job? (It depends on the word following, in this case, the sport. Collocation is important)

10. What is wrong with this sentence? What is the rule? (Short,ie one syllable adjectives make comparatives by adding –er only, more is only used for longer adjectives)

Let students compare their answers in groups and then ask for feedback. Here is a suggested answer list.

Now ask students to make a connection between a proverb and a grammar point. You can give the following example

• Too many cooks spoil the broth: Double negatives are not used in English: *I don’t want no icecream. Too many negatives spoil the sentence!

Let students try to find their own  connections.

Suggested answers

• A double-edged sword: have something done You either ask someone to perform a service for you: I had my hair cut, or it is something you did not expect to happen to you (usually bad): I had my car stolen. The first is something you want to happen, the second something you don’t want. A double edged sword can cut both ways, someone else or yourself.
• Kill two birds with one stone:  Walking down the street, Mary  saw her friend. In this construction we only need one noun for two clauses
• A person is known by the company he keeps:  I’d go, I’d gone. We can tell the meaning of I’d (I would or I had) by the word that follows.
• Two’s company, three’s a crowd. Two syllables are usually enough for comparatives eg colder, slower. If you try to add more to slower, more slower (three syllables), it’s wrong.
• A leopard can’t change its spots. Some people never change, and some words never change. Might, would, could, should, must do not have past tenses, so they do not change in reported speech.
• A wolf in sheeps clothing. Hardly looks like something positive in the context of work, yet He hardly works actually it is a bad thing!
• Birds of a feather flock together. People have their own groups, so do words. Umpire collocates with tennis, referee with football.
•  Hobson’s choice= no choice at all.  Where a choice seems to be offered, but is not really. Would you mind waiting a minute?  Is often not really a question but a request used as an order, and a yes/no answer is not required.
• Out of sight, out of mind. The relative clause can be omitted, the old man standing in the street means the old man who is standing in the street. Students may not realize this is a type of relative clause, because the pronoun is invisible.