Your post should be retitled, " One CELTA trainer did not understand my humour" as this would be fairer. Presumably the trainer had sight of your lesson plan before you were being observed? In your lesson plan, you could have indicated the rationale for " under a bridge" and that it was perhaps intended to promote some free practice, and to encourage students to "think outside the box."

As for British humour, please don't judge all of us on the evidence of one example, which is what your learned friends seem to have done in their response. In British humour, smut and innuendo are popular forms, as is the macabre, and poking fun at stereotypes.

Some time ago I bought and read Kate Fox's excellent book, "Watching the English." She observes that

"Many English people seem to believe that we have some global monopoly, if not on humour itself then at least on certain 'brands' of humour -certainly the high class ones such as wit and especially irony. My findings indicate that while there may be something distinctive about English humour,the real 'defining characteristic' is the value we put on humour, the central importance of humour in English culture and social interaction."

She calls it The Importance of Not Being Earnest Rule.

Did you hear the one about the CELTA trainee who suggested to his students that they could stay under a bridge while on their holiday?
No, where was he doing his course?
Mumbai.

[to site ADMIN - could not format this post]