Search results for 'tag:Gerunds tag:Speak english' matching tags 'Gerunds' and 'Speak english'

Re: Two question about "where"

Goodman — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 23:49:04 GMT

<<<<Such concepts as tense, gerund, participle, clause (and classification thereof) are wihtout a slightest doubt useful and sometimes even essential to the learning of English (at least, this is so for me).

<<<Furthermore, I try to undrstand things logically and find explanations for every problem so that I won't have to simply memorize things! - I agree with you. However, I see room for tone and structure improvements!

Without taking side, I would like to share my 2 cents' worth. I always feel that if one is not born an English speaking native and his ultimate goal is to be able to write and speak English like a master, he is in for a long-agonizing journey. I have been at it for 20 years and still painfully working on getting it perfect. I realize that I often made careless errors, such as missing an "s" here and there and misspellong word etc. That, I think is something I have to work on but is tolerable to myself, as long as I know my speech and sentence structure are gramamtically sound and the meaning is getting across. For learners, it's extremely benifitial to possess a good understanding on all aspect of English, but in real life I dare say, many are not in that category, including natives. Frankly, more than a few don't even know and could care less what "past perfect tense" is. I don't mean to antagonize anyone. That's how I see it. That's said, learners must in time learn to develop a balance in learning. By that, I mean learning the fundanentals and applying them gramamtically correct in their writing without suffering from the"unnatural" sound. What I see is, many learners are too focused on the grammatical aspects and neglected on structure and tone, or vise vera. Ultimately, their writing is often compromised. I have been there. Believe me!

Re: Two question about "where"

Ant_222 — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 19:43:25 GMT

Thanks for that long and interesting post, Velimir!

«Let me be allowed to advise you not to fall for that kind of reasoning.I mean "Look at me,I'm a miracle,I speak english gorgeuously and I don't have to learn grammar",that kind of reasoning.»

I didn't get me right. I was talking about the usefullness of certain aspects of grammar. Part of them (a greater part!) I of course find useful. It's just that some very deep theoretical investigations in the field a purely of scientific interest. Plus I can use the word "where" very well without having to decide which part of speech it is first.

Such concepts as tense, gerund, participle, clause (and classification thereof) are wihtout a slightest doubt useful and sometimes even essential to the learning of English (at least, this is so for me).

Furthermore, I try to undrstand things logically and find explanations for every problem so that I won't have to simply memorize things!

«If you give proofs that it is just a useless entertainment for idle men then you'll make a scientific breakthrough,and not only in the field of language.Here goes one smiling smiley.»

Nah, I am not gonna do no such thing for I do agree with the opposite!

BTW, it is so good a post that I'd make it a sticky so that every ESL learner could read it, frankly!

P.S.: So don't fall into the delusion that you have _converted me_. I already was of that opinion.

Re: He insisted on my/me singing a song.

Goodman — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:13:46 GMT

Hi,

This is how I was taught. The terminology can be confusing. I was taught that gerund is the noun form of a verb. Although itâ not a real noun by definition, it functions like one. Another confusing aspect of the âingâ form is that, itâs often mixed up with participle and gerund.

i.e. I love my family. Family is a noun. To replace âfamilyâ with dancing, it becomes âI love dancingâ. Therefore, âdancingâ in function is a noun, (a gerund)

On the other hand, â I saw her standing thereâ where standing is a participle, not gerund. Likewise, âI heard the police shouting at the burglar to stop runningâ. Shouting and running are both participles.

With the subjunctive use, âI insisted on his speaking Englishâ, itâs [his], not [him]. But Iâd prefer to say âI insist that he speak Englishâ for that context.

Re: He insisted on my/me singing a song.

Grammar Geek — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:38:29 GMT

You're right - gerunds are not nouns, but rather they act like nouns in many situations.

As you know, without an English Academy, language will evolve along, and eventually what enough speakers use in any given context becomes the correct form.

(For your last example, I'd rewrite, by the way. I insist that everybody speak English.)

Re: Start a phrase with verb

Cool Breeze — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 09:22:44 GMT

Hi DS

You have a very theoretical approach to your subject. I'm not sure I understand what exactly you mean by 'a phrase verb', but you can begin a sentence with a verb in at least the following cases:

A verb is the subject:
1. Infinitive: To know him is to like him.
2. Gerund: Seeing is believing. (A gerund is neither a verb nor a noun but resembles both to an extent.)

A verb is an imperative:
Come here at once!
Do not close the door.

An auxiliary verb begins a question:
Can you swim?
Does he speak English?
Have you seen him?

Cheers
CB

Re: Native-speaker intuition.

Tam Sadek — Sat, 21 Oct 2006 23:06:04 GMT

One of the main problems is the source of English Grammar.

English Grammar 'Rules' were based on the written forms of English and basically ignored any reference to Spoken forms used by Native Speakers.

There was and it appears still is contempt for the spoken form of English. In fact even the term used to describe the Spoken form, the 'vernacular' has negative connotations to most so-called educated and enlightened people.

So, guess what? Native speakers don't sound like grammar books! Perhaps you're approaching the problem from the wrong source and should be asking the question, "Why don't English grammar books reflect the English language used by native speakers?"

Do you seriously believe "English Grammar" arrived before its speakers?

To even ask why native speakers don't sound like grammar books is to miss the point entirely. Of course they don't, and what's more they never did!

Grammatical analysis has been based on interpreting usage in written documents, novels, plays and trying to promote English to the level of Latin which was the language of Education. It was only when people tried to promote English that they then borrowed terminology from Latin and stuck on to English (usually not very well) that English became regarded as a serious subject.

Ever wondered why the 'verb+ing' is referred to as both a present participle and a gerund? Blame Latin!

French and German were given much higher importance in the Royal family - mainly because the last true-English King died at Hasting in 1066. In fact George I of England is reported to have never even bothered to learn English, and spoke for his entire reign using his first language, German.

Even RP, the/a 'standard' of British pronunciation gets its name from the fact that if you could only speak English, then you would not be 'received at the Royal Court' unless you spoke like that.

And so now our legacy is to have a set of 'Grammar Rules' (for the most part based on Pre-1900 literature) combined with 'Pronunciation Rules' for visiting Queen Victoria (in the 19th Century)... and you wonder why normal native-speakers in the 21st Century don't sound like what exactly?