0
Snappy Posted 17 years ago
Grammar

Taught English to kids/Taught kids English

According to an English-Japanese Dictionary published in Japan,

1. She taught kids English. (implies that the kids acquired English.)
2. She taught English to kids. (does not imply whether the kids acquired English or not.)

There is no difference if the sentences are in present tense.
She teaches kids English = She teaches English to kids

Is the above true?
  

Top answer

Let's give her the benefit of the doubt, regardless of the tense. After all, to teach = to cause to learn .

— Philip

  • Let's give her the benefit of the doubt, regardless of the tense.
  • After all, to teach = to cause to learn .
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

4 Answers
0
Let's give her the benefit of the doubt, regardless of the tense. After all, to teach = to cause to learn.
0
0
I thought of this fo a bit, and don't really make any distinction between these forms of the indirect object.
She taught English to the students.

She taught the students English.

Cheers,
A-
0
0
It doesn't matter. Neither sentence implies that the kids actually learned English. If you're writing for work or school, use the second one because there could be misunderstandings with the first one. Also, if you're writing formally, use children instead of kids. (Kids is kind of slang because it came from the word for young goats)
0
0
SnappyAccording to an English-Japanese Dictionary published in Japan,1. She taught kids English. (implies that the kids acquired English.)2. She taught English to kids. (does not imply whether the kids acquired English or not.)There is no difference if the sentences are in present tense.She teaches kids English = She teaches English to kidsIs the above true?
D
0

Related Questions