0

Let's say you are a teacher who is a family member at the same to one of your students (such as uncle-niece) Your opinion is that sometimes, it's a bit awkward. You say:

Being a family-relative teacher can cause uneasiness, because your approach becomes different from what you normally would as a non-family relative teacher.

I'm not only describing the bold letters using the adjective-noun combination to avoid verbosity, but also in an advanced way to express it. However I'm not sure if those (bold letters) are grammatical/correct description, cause I've just combined them, which I've never heard of in my entire life.

| improve this question | |
  • The expressions "family-relative teacher" and "non-family relative teacher" are not common in English. Please do some simple Googling and check whether you are correct or not. – Mari-Lou A Jan 2 '19 at 15:00
  • I had already done that before this posted question, nothing came closer to what I'm asking here. – John Arvin Jan 2 '19 at 17:35
  • Then you know it's not idiomatic. Just keep to "…a teacher who happens to be a relative ..... to a teacher who is unconnected to your family" It may not be succinct but it's clear. – Mari-Lou A Jan 2 '19 at 17:46
3

family-relative teacher

That phase simply does not work to express the idea of a person being a teacher who is related to one of her/his students.

Being a teacher with a family member in one's class is [etc.]

As a teacher, being related to one of one's students is [etc.]

Being related to a student one teaches is [etc.]

Generally, one cannot use a hyphen between two nouns and expect to come out with the complicated relationship being described.

| improve this answer | |
  • I am looking for a phrase, if there's any, to say what I actually is trying to say, not describing it. Still, the options here are a good way to say it correctly. – John Arvin Dec 31 '18 at 19:47
  • There is no phrase per se. – Lambie Jan 1 '19 at 16:18
2

Your proposed sentence is not idiomatic.

"Teaching a relative can cause uneasiness because normal techniques may not be appropriate or effective" is what I think you are trying to say.

| improve this answer | |
  • No, that's not what I'm trying to say here, but the "family relation to a student when one is a teacher"... – John Arvin Dec 31 '18 at 19:43
  • I may indeed have failed to understand the full complexity of what you want to convey. A "relative" and a "member of the family" mean the same thing. The concise and idiomatic word to use here is "relative," not "family-relative." Because what you say in your comment that you want to say has no verb, it has no meaning. Where do you think my answer needs clarification or amendment? – Jeff Morrow Dec 31 '18 at 19:58
  • First off, thx for the correction on family=relative thing hehe. Whereas, my answer to your question is the "approach"... I'm not asking that, sry man. – John Arvin Dec 31 '18 at 20:28
0

You could go with it, but you'd have to also use non-family-relative teacher. It's starting to get a bit convoluted though. I'd tear it down and make it a lot simpler.

Being a family relation of a student can cause uneasiness and your approach to become different than it would otherwise be.

You don't need to add the ..if you weren't related. It's already clear.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.