To me, the terms “TESLese” and “motherese” are rather strange and I don’t think I’ll ever start using them. They sound a bit like “disease”.[YSaerTTEW443543]
TOEFL listening discussions: A conversation in a campus cafeteria[YSaerTTEW443543]
What they represent can be pretty contagious, that’s for sure. 
Why did you ask about TESLese and TEFLese in the first place, T?
You are a sentimental fellow.
The purpose of a generalised illustration of the structure of a plant is not to help you buy flowers. It is to teach you the structure of the plant.
MrP
Which leaves you with partial knowledge of plants, right?
At any stage in the process of learning X, your knowledge of X is “partial”.
But when you have mastered plant structure, DNA analysis, toxicology, vector biology, bioinformatics, human anatomy, the breeding habits of the phalarope, evolutionary theory, and an appropriate module in the philosophy of science, not to mention a little discreet environmentalism, you will be ready to learn the Last Great Secret of the Ancient Masters of Biology: how to choose flowers for your wife.
Study hard, Little Grasshopper.
MrP
And some might prefer it remain that way. 
Is that a subjunctive, M?
My partial knowledge leads me to think it may be. :lol:
Interesting…
MrP
Who was it who said something like “An abstract apple may feed you soul, but a real apple will satisfy your hunger”?
Here’s an interesting comment:
“Manufactured sentences are more likely to contain such atypical examples than sentences drawn from natural sources.”
Read more here: Why manufactured sentences? | Antimoon Forum
Same source.
“There is no need to see natural sentences unless you intend to learn to produce sentences and not simply understand.”
Good point, but are there many ESL students who are of the “I simply need to understand and not do want to produce” mindset?
We are not dealing with abstract and real apples. We are dealing with a comparison between, on the one hand, the sentence:
- There is a pencil on the table.
and on the other:
- Open your eyes!
Since the original context of #1 was existential “there”, #2 does not meet the case.
MrP
I thought we were dealing with “Why manufactured sentences?”.
manufactured sentences* = abstract apples (IMO)
*Those created with the purpose of illustrating a grammar point
If a sentence were created for the purpose of illustrating a point of grammar, but also happened to exist elsewhere – say, in the BNC – would it still be a “manufactured sentence”?
MrP
If the teacher manufactured the sentence in or before the class and without help form the BNC, it might, IMO.
You seem to have a problem with the word “manufactured” and this “Those created with the purpose of illustrating a grammar point”.
Do you think the BNC examples would have been “created with the purpose of illustrating a grammar point”?
And how would you tell the difference between the sentence “manufactured” in class, and the sentence in the BNC?
MrP
If you have to ask that, MrP, you certainly haven’t been anywhere near an ESL classroom or study book.
Suppose the teacher devised this sentence, to demonstrate the use of “quite”:
- This is quite an interesting book.
Would that be a “manufactured” sentence?
MrP
You insisted that all sentences are manufactured, so why would you be interested in another opinion?