Search results for 'tag:Inflections tag:Grammar' matching tags 'Inflections' and 'Grammar'

Re: Which language is most difficult language for people to learn?

Cool Breeze — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 07:45:42 GMT

A Cornish Pasty

I have looked into Finnish a bit but quickly got discouraged after finding out about all the cases!

Many foreigners who come to Finland for a long time or for keeps say the same thing. What makes matters worse is that we don't just add inflections to words, we often change a letter or more in the middle of the word as well. In many cases these changes are so small that, incredibly, people who should know the basics of Finnish grammar make mistakes with them. These people include news anchors on TV! Every week I hear those people use the wrong comparative or superlative of an adjective: kauniimmat instead of kauneimmat, for example.

Another problem for foreign learners of Finnish is the fact that since the grammar is so complicated and many words are so long, there is a great difference between formal written and informal spoken Finnish. I remember somebody who tried in vain to learn Finnish by attending courses at various institutions. He said he eventually gave up all formal learning and went out to places where he could hear the real thing spoken: market squares, bars etc. His learning improved markedly!

Maybe you should come over to Helsinki and do that as well?

Re: Proper Use of Apostrophes (Dos and Don'ts about Do's and Don't's)

Anonymous — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 05:12:28 GMT

Evening!

I'm an author and dislike the everchanging rules of grammar as much as anyone else does. Grammar was invented to facilitate communication, especially written communication when voice inflection cannot be heard. However, I write serious novels, as opposed to trashy stories, and my readers don't care about grammar rules (for the most part) when abiding by them makes reading difficult or awkward. The last thing I want to do in the middle of an engaging paragraph is jolt my readers from the mood I've (hopefully) lured them into just to satisfy some arbitrary grammar rule.

I wouldn't consider writing do's and don't's or dos and don'ts. I write do's and don'ts and that's that, so to speak. I've never had a single complaint about my use of grammar, let alone a book returned yet. I have, on the other hand, had requests to refrain
from using 'Words I have to look up,' such as jejune, abstruse, evanescent, recondite, and so on. I guess education ain't what it used to be, LOL! Consistency is mandatory in whatever one chooses to write and that's tough when one is writing a seven-novel saga!

Blessings to you all - J.

Re: Which language is most difficult language for people to learn?

Forbes — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 10:40:52 GMT

When you say that English morphology is simple, I assume you are referring to the comparative lack of grammatical inflection. English employs a wide range of prefixes and suffixes to form new words. So, while English is highly analytic, it is by no means totally isolating, though it has isolating tendencies.

I think we have some difficulty with the word "grammar". "Grammar" includes not only morphology, but also syntax. When a student says "Latin has a lot of grammar" he means that he has had to memorise conjugations and declensions. Equally, a student of English, when he declares "English has no grammar" means he has not had the chore of memorising lots of paradigms. But clearly English has syntax - if it did not it would be soup.

In the introduction to my copy of Teach Yourself Malay the author says:

Malay is an easy language. Bafflingly easy. At the end of ten weeks you feel that you know all that there is to be known. At the end of ten years, you know you never will.

and

Malay words change their function according to context. Be prepared for this, and do not attempt to force the language into a set mould. It will escape.

Similar (but perhaps a little less extreme) observations may be made about English. It does not lack complexity; its complications are just different from other languages. The point is that some of the complications may not be perceived by native speakers or those who have learned it slowly over a number of years or live in a society where English is prevalent. Assertions that English is simple compared to other languages are purely subjective.

Re: I love you more than money

Cool Breeze — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 13:16:56 GMT

New2grammar
1 I love you more than anyone (loves you)

2 I love you more than money (loves you? This is wrong, IMO but it's commonly said. It should be I love your more than I love money)

Can anyone explain what the second doesn't follow the first construction?

Hi N2G

English is a language of fixed phrases and, theoretically at least, often inexact. One reason for this is a lack of inflections and grammatical forms. Anyone has only two forms, the other being anyone's. If there were an object form, it would be used in the first sentence if anyone were meant to be an object. The same applies to money in the second sentence. Money has no object form. Even though English is inherently ambiguous, English speakers want to understand one another correctly and true misunderstandings rarely occur.

Re: as far as one's concerned

Avangi — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 00:00:17 GMT

Hi Anon,

Your questions are excellent and show a good grasp of the issues. You're pushing me to the limit of my knowledge on the subject, which is a good thing. My opinions are based more on a long lifetime of listening to people use the expressions, and less on reading about them in text books.

Clearly, the overall effect of these sentences depends on the "introductory expression," the message which follows, the previous context, and (if spoken) the inflection of the voice. The expression and the message have an influence on each other. You've shown that you understand this.

I agree with what you've said about the army example.

The teacher/student example is very interesting, because the expression is used in the second person as well as in the first person. (All three sentences are good.) To me, the student's reply comes across as rude [disrespectful] and argumentative. (I wonder if you thought of it in that way?) The student's position is contentious, and I doubt he could express it in a way that would not be offensive. Not only is he challenging the teacher's opinion; he's making it personal.

If you substituted "In your opinion/in my opinion" it would be somewhat less offensive. I can't honestly say that the difference lies in the "dismissiveness." Even if you simply say, "I thought the test was hard," you're in trouble, because you're challenging the teacher's judgment, not just a point of grammar, etc. "I had trouble with the test," is about as far as you can go. Maybe I'm just old fashioned.

In the flea example, all the insult seems to be carried in the main clause. I don't believe you could say the insult goes back and retroactively colors "in my opinion." But on the other hand, you can't say that the "neutral" nature of "in my opinion" in any way lessens the impact of the insult, which lies in the extreme exaggeration of the comparison to a flea brain.

"In my opinion, she's not qualified for the job," is not insulting at all. "As far as I'm concerned, she's not qualified for the job," makes it more personal than "in my opinion," and seems to imply that you have your own reasons for rejecting her, which may go beyond a purely objective "opinion." You just plain don't want her = dismissive.

Best wishes, - A.

Edit. It looks like I've contradicted myself. "The expression and the message have an influence on each other." "I don't believe you could say the insult goes back and retroactively colors in my opinion."

For now, let's just leave it that whether or not the message actually changes the impact of the introductory expression is open to discussion.

Re: I want to learn to speak clearly-What do I have to know/do?

Anonymous — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 08:35:36 GMT

I also have also had problems speaking clearly and coherently, making me seem less intelligent that i think i am. And as a result i have lost opportunties for relationships i had very much hoped for, so i had to be determined to work out my speaking problem. I think there are many reasons for me rambling non-sensically in person, some are:

1)feeling shy/inadquate/self conscious compared to those i am speaking with, and trying to impress too much (probably from having bad experiences with my fumbling language and social skills).

2) not having much experience/practice at expressing my thoughts verbally

3) not really sitting down and thinking my thoughts through logically and forming them well to myself before i go and sprout my opinions off.

4) not being formally taught the right way to structure my sentences. i dont know why i can speak so much more clearly on paper than in person.

But the way have attempted to fix this problem is by writing down on some paper some rules for me to follow when i am having my say in a conversation. (i collect these rules from books i read on communication at the library). and reading over those rules every night before bed, and asking myself: did i break any of those rules that day?, and what happend when i did?, and how could I have done it differently?. and trying to do better the next day.

Some of the rules on my list are these:

1) When a comment is made to you that was meant as a conversation starter, do not give one word answers, and NEVER EVER just start and continue talking until the other person interrupts you. Give brief responses, with clear pauses in it for interruption. You will either look like a mute or a babbling fool if you do anything else. Give brief but complete answers with a definite pause at the end to hand the conversation back over clearly. Donât just talk until you are interrupted. Give pauses for people to interject, and also this sounds much more powerful and simple. Most people are taught to not interrupt. and it can make people feel distressed if you donât, and then frustrated and bored. many people either talk too much or too little as their response. dont make your message too long or too short.

2) dont try to say too many things at once. make one point at a time, decide what is the most important thing you want to say is, and say that, and then hand the conversation back over.

3) when you tell a story or make a point, say the main idea first, and then add supporting detail afterwards (usually just one supporting detailafterwards, not 600). eg an example, a statistic, a story to support your point. keep it short and simple and you will have more weight to your words. and sound more powerful and authoriative and easy to listen to. dont make it hard work for them to listen to you. be economical with your words.

4) dont say anything without saying why you think that, so they understand why you feel that way. or else it sounds bossy, and opinionated, and not worth listening to.

5) pause before you speak, it sounds authorative. and also gives you time to think. think before you speak, dont just regurgitate information, its amazing how much structure you mind can give to your thoughts in 2 seconds.

6) The value of information depends on its relevance, how up to date it is, how complete it is, the timing that it is received, its impartiality, and its presentation.

7) becareful how you end your message. dont weaken your point by saying anything that could contradict your message, at the end of your message. just leave nothign at the end. to give your message structure, my english teacher used to say "tell them what you are going to tell them, tell them, and then tell them what you just told them". there should be a beginnign a middle and an end to your paragraph.

8) know what the purpose/goal of your message is before you give one. all communication is desgined to either inform, entertain, or persuade, or all.

9) make sure you use correct grammar, and use downwards inflections with your voice when you talk to sound more authorative and you can show if you are about to end your message or keep going talkign or not. keep it simple, with a main point first, and some kind of examples to help them understand, and then let them have their say.

* body language plays a large roll as well, but i am just saying some points about how i try to structure my messages now.

these are just some things on my list.

i hope it helps.

Re: "Many a", Joining two subjects with "And" and MS Word.

Cool Breeze — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:13:15 GMT

Welcome to EF, Zhuk

There is no unanimous "correct" reply to your last question. As a rule, English is very flexible and in many cases liberal grammarians accept more than one alternative while some others insist on only one that they think is right. I would go for has, like you.

"Our teacher of English and friend are Mr. Bruce.â
As for the above sentence, in English the word order is extremely fixed because there are so few inflections. "Mary loves John" and "John loves Mary" mean completely different things. In my language the word order is free. Since the word order is so rigid in English, MS Word doesn't understand that Mr. Bruce is the subject as the subject is rarely the last word in an English sentence.

If you changed the sentence a little, MS Word would be right in demanding are: Our teacher and friend are coming this way. (Provided of course that there were two people coming.)

I don't have my grammar checked by MS Word when I write English texts but I have a vague recollection from years back that it didn't have a very good grasp of relative clauses. I think it considered sentences like

This is the book which I bought yesterday

to be wrong. After that I realized that Mr. Gates could take some lessons in elementary grammar and quit using it. (I had only tried it for fun anyway. )

CB

Re: Spelling of Plural noun /vs/ the Third-person-singular verb inflection.

Marius Hancu — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 23:38:07 GMT

See (for nouns)
Special cases
on this page at this grammar site:

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/plurals.htm

Re: Is grammar essential for learning a language?

Feathers — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:11:39 GMT

Thanks, anon. Without your post, I would have missed this thread.

Goodman wrote:

Hi CJ,

What an impressive thread you have posted. You have slowly made me a fan of yours.

Yep!

CalifJim wrote:

In any case, the struggle for the learner is always making the conversion from 'computing' utterances (assembling them by applying grammatical rules) to generating meaningful utterances spontaneously. The more role models the learners have, whether in terms of number of speakers they have contact with or in terms of the number of written and spoken resources they have available, the smoother the transition. At the extreme, if the learner is thrown into a sink-or-swim situation -- immersion -- it may be possible to shortcut the 'computational' period considerably. The final goal is the same in any case: meaningful language that is automatically produced and instinctively felt without any further consciousness of or need for the 'computational' (grammatical) aspects which were so prominent and necessary in the learning stages.

How true.

I'm reminded of Prof. Stern's comment (University of Connecticut), as an additional tip for us learners.
_______________________________________________________________________________

when people are really acclimating themselves with American English, I think one of the first things that makes native English speakers more comfortable with a non-native speaker is not necessarily even the pronunciation of the individual vowels and consonants, but whether the inflections are moving in the direction that the listeners are used to hearing. Whether the rhythm of the language - some languages that are in a totally different rhythm, and if a speaker of that accent simply starts to elongate the syllables and change the pitch some, then a native speaking listener is going to become much more comfortable with that speech pattern.
_______________________________________________________________________________

Re: Proficiency alongside "poverty".

Cool Breeze — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 09:17:26 GMT

Milky wrote:
<To my mind, the articles are the trickiest part of English grammar>

And modals?

They are similar to other Germanic languages in structure and as there are only two infinitives in English (and in Swedish, for that matter), the modals or defective auxiliaries are very easy and simple to learn. They have no inflections for different grammatical persons, which is also helpful.

Like many other words in many languages, these words have a number of meanings and uses, and regional differences exist. The average user need not devote a lot of his time to subtleties that rarely present themselves in real life. He may never have to face a situation where a Scot uses shall or will in a sense that is unfamiliar even to most native speakers of English.

Disagreement regarding the use and meanings of some of the defective auxiliaries is widespread even in standard English. That doesn't make learning them more difficult for nonnatives. It's easy to learn the fact that people disagree on something, that some people think that certain verbs should or should not be used in some situations.

A learner might as well focus his efforts on more useful things to improve his English.

CB