Search results for 'tag:Literature tag:English grammar' matching tags 'Literature' and 'English grammar'

Re: Am I right?

CalifJim — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 06:16:20 GMT

wholegrain
from what reference book you learned that "but" has no meaning in the given context

Personally, I learned it from observation, not from a reference book. I am a native speaker, and I have read quite a few books over the years, and so I don't need to consult a reference book to understand the meaning or usage of this formulation any more than I need a reference book to understand hundreds of others.

I'm sorry, but I don't have a reference book to recommend that might contain information about this construction. It would have to be something of a historical nature, because this pattern so rarely occurs in modern English that the most of the more recent books probably don't even discuss it.

Later edit:

Take a look at Curme's English Grammar of 1925. There you will find a little discussion of but, but that, and but what as less common and older substitutes for that in contexts such as those we have been discussing. Note that nearly a hundred years ago (1925) a grammarian was already saying that these substitutes for that were falling into disuse. Here is one of his examples:

"It could not be doubted that (or now less commonly but, but that, or but what) his life would be aimed at."

And another: "I do not doubt, or Who doubts that, or now less commonly but, or but that, or but what, he will win."

_____

It appears to me that some of the typical historical uses of but that are those which occur after the negation or interrogation of the verbs doubt or deny or wonder.

Note also that neither Curme, nor any others I know of, say that but means only or merely or except or anything else in these patterns. but that is treated as a single unit -- a compound conjunction. You certainly don't find patterns like the following in the literature: I don't doubt [only / merely] that he will win. If you did, it would support the claim that but means only or merely. But I think it will be hard to find examples like that.

hi.please help me can any one check statement of purpose and can guide me f

Ahnajfi — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:26:53 GMT

My interest in Science and English dates back to my school days. Being an inquisitive boy, I always have been eager to learn more and more around me. My interest in wide range of subjects and my inner aspiration helped me a lot to acquire a significant knowledge of the Science, history and culture of the world. With the passage of time my eagerness for knowledge got specified and my desire to go deeper into my subjects intensified.

After completing my graduation with chemistry Biology and English I started teaching in Sir Syed Secondary School âa reputable institute of District Sahiwal (Pakistan). Here I had a chance to instill my curiosity and my knowledge into my students. I gave them the basic concepts of Science and taught them how to use correct English. I also learned from their questions as my teachers had from mine. Along with teaching I also worked as an educational counselor by keeping close relation with students and their parents.

To familiarize my self with latest teaching and management techniques I got admission in bachelor of Education (B.Ed) program of Allama Iqbal Open University Islamabad. In this course I learned to teach English and science at elementary level.

Major subjects during this course were school administration and management education psychology, theories of education and Evaluation. At the end of the course I completed ten days workshop in which I was selected the representative of the class. I also helped the other trainee teacher.

The most important decision in my life was when I took admission in master in English language and literature. I have got a chance to get a wide range of knowledge in the realm of English the core courses during my master in English which have a great effect on my personality were English drama, Novel, poetry, linguistics and phonetics, English grammar and teaching of English as a foreign language (TEFL).During this study work I explored the world of English literature. I at once fell in love with a work of CHAUCER, SHAKESPEARE and BERTRAND RUSSEL which are the most humanistic writers of the world. This course has greatly improved my language skills. Now a days, I am teaching English and science in Govt middle school.

My hobbies are reading literature, watching English movies and listening English programmes of radio(like BBC,VOA ).i am also a good player of basket ball .i love to read about the history and culture of different nations and like to discuss and solve educational problems of teachers and students. But my ultimate aim is to improve and develop myself first then works for human beings at higher level in the field of education. My independence and full responsibility for myself have driven me to a higher level of maturity than many of my peers, a quality that differentiates me form many other applicants.

I have studied all about your program of studies, course content really attract me to join this master level program. This will develop in me different skills and broaden my perspective of life in the light of alternative points of views. Also on the completion of this master level program I will be able to analyze and assess the change process in education and may examine all these from a number of perspective

I am highly aware of the superb reputation of your current program. Course contents have served to deepen my interest in attending; I know that, in addition to your excellent faculty, your facilities like libraries are among the best. I hope u will give me the privilege of continuing my studies at the fine institutions of Europe

Re: gerund or verbal noun

CalifJim — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 20:25:23 GMT

All of your examples are gerunds if we stick to modern terminology.

Forget about the terminology verbal noun. It's total garbage!

It has many different definitions, depending on the author and when the grammar book was written.
_____________

The modern definition is given at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verbal_noun

A verbal noun is a noun formed directly as an inflexion of a verb or a verb stem, sharing at least in part its constructions. This term is applied especially to gerunds, and sometimes also to [bare] infinitives and supines [i.e., full infinitives].

That is, there are three types of verbal noun: gerunds, bare infinitives, and full infinitives.

So anything that is a gerund is also a verbal noun, because a gerund is one of the types of verbal nouns.
____________

The modern definition is echoed at

http://www.ielanguages.com/english.html

Gerunds: [Like participles,] Gerunds are also formed by adding -ing to the verb, but they function as a verbal noun [as opposed to the participle, which is a verbal adjective] and are normally preceded by articles or demonstratives. The singing was excellent.
___________

A completely different definition is found here:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O29-VERBALNOUN.html

VERBAL NOUN. A category of noncountable abstract noun derived from a verb, in English by adding the suffix -ing. Like the verb from which it derives, it refers to an action or state: writing in The writing has taken too long; hearing in His hearing is defective. Verbal nouns are frequently combined with the preposition of and a noun phrase that corresponds to the subject or object in a clause: The grumbling of his neighbours met with no response (compare His neighbours grumbled); His acting of Hamlet won our admiration (compare He acted Hamlet). Verbal nouns contrast with deverbal nouns, that is, other kinds of nouns derived from verbs, such as attempt, destruction, and including nouns ending in -ing that do not have verbal force: building in The building was empty. They also contrast with the gerund, which also ends in -ing, but is syntactically a verb.

Note the last (underlined) sentence. By this definition only usages like The neighbors were acting like fools are considered gerunds -- not all the other examples that preceded -- examples that we would all agree are gerunds in current terminology.
_____________

The next definition is more than 100 years old, and I've seen it quoted on this site. Note that it is classified (see the URL) under "Classic Literature". It is useful only as a historic document -- not as a guide to modern English and modern syntactic analysis.

http://classiclit.about.com/library/bl-etexts/wmbaskervill/bl-wmbaskervill-grammar-parts-nouns.htm

An English Grammar

1896

by W. M. Baskervill & J. W. Sewell

273. It [the gerund] differs from the participle in being always used as a noun: it never belongs to or limits a noun.

It differs from the verbal noun in having the property of governing a noun (which the verbal noun has not) and of expressing action (the verbal noun merely names an action, Sec. II).

[Sec. II. is actually Sec. 11, where nouns are discussed. The discussion of verbal nouns is within a category called Abstract Nouns, so in Section 11 verbal nouns are called by their more specific name: Verbal Abstract Nouns.]

II. The VERBAL ABSTRACT NOUNS Originate in verbs, as their name implies. They may beâ

(1) Of the same form as the simple verb. The verb, by altering its function, is used as a noun; as in the expressions, "a long run" "a bold move," "a brisk walk "
[These are called deverbal nouns in modern terminology -- or 'zero-related nominals' or just 'nouns'.]

(2) Derived from verbs by changing the ending or adding a suffix: motion from move, speech from speak, theft from thieve, action from act, service from serve.
[These,too, are called deverbal nouns nowadays -- or just 'nouns'.]

(3) Derived from verbs by adding -ing to the simple verb. It must be remembered that these words are free from any verbal function They cannot govern a word, and they cannot express action, but are merely names of actions. They are only the husks of verbs, and are to be rigidly distinguished from gerunds (Secs. 272, 273). [These are nouns that end in -ing. They have acquired fixed meanings as nouns, referring to something more concrete than the action of the underlying verb.]

To avoid difficulty, study carefully these examples:

The best thoughts and sayings of the Greeks; the moon caused fearful forebodings; in the beginning of his life; he spread his blessings over the land; the great Puritan awakening; our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting; a wedding or a festival; the rude drawings of the book; masterpieces of the Socratic reasoning; the teachings of the High Spirit; those opinions and feelings; there is time for such reasonings; the well-being of her subjects; her longing for their favor; feelings which their original meaning will by no means justify; the main bearings of this matter.
______________

It is debatable whether anything whatsoever is to be gained in the study of modern English by resurrecting these older definitions.

CJ

My interview experience.

Bird Of Paradise — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 20:07:48 GMT

I belong to a country where English is used as a second language, so it is not my first language. A few days ago I appeared in an interview for the post of English Teacher. I want to share a few points of that interview for your worthy comments.

I use A for interviewer and B for myself.

After the formal greetings,

A: Introduce yourself.

B. Sir, I have come from Swabiâ¦..

Donât say âI have come fromâ say âI come fromâ

Then I was asked some questions in English Literature and then,

How many moods are there in English Grammar?
Sir, there are three moods in English grammar, Indicative, imperative and subjunctive.

Can we use Model auxiliary with infinite clause.
Yes sir, we can.

How? Give an example.
For example âI will goâ

What is an infinite clause?
A clause, which doesnât show tense.

No. You are wrong.

Ok, tell my in how many ways can we use a subordinate clause?
Well sir, there are different kinds of subordinate clauseâ¦

No, no. Just tell me exactly in how many ways can we use it, like with subject-verb, subject-adverb etc.
Sorry sir.(it was really confusing for me.)

A. Ok, âHe is marriedâ which part of speech is married?

B. Sir, it the past participle form of the verb marry and here it is used as an adjective.

These are some of the point of my interview. Please give some comments. Thanks.

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?

Re: Native-speaker intuition.

Cool Breeze — Sat, 21 Oct 2006 08:36:44 GMT

Englishuser wrote:
A non-native speaker who has immersed himself or herself with highbrow literature written in a foreign language could very well have a more vivid vocabulary and a better knowledge of the grammar of the language than the average native speaker. At least as far as the 'standard version' of the language is concerned.

Englishuser

Hi Englishuser

I agree, learning the grammar of a language can be relatively easy for a person who is familiar with the grammatical structures of his native language. As far as I am concerned, English grammar was a piece of cake for me even though it differs considerably from Finnish grammar. It was easy because there is so little of it; an English word has very few forms: write, writes, writing, wrote, written. That's all there is written as single words. Of course has written, having written etc. exist in addition to the five basic forms.

However, in Finnish, for instance, you need six forms just to say something affirmative in the present tense, a different inflection for every person (I, you, he, we, you, they). You need another six forms to ask a question etc. Nouns have more than a hundred forms and an adjective has hundreds of inflected forms. Some English people have said to me they don't belive me when I say that. That's because they think the languages they may have some knowledge of, usually German or French, are as complicated in structure as a language can be. They know of nothing else.

What is difficult about English are the countless idioms and spelling.

By the way, when I am abroad I try not to sound British or American even though I have been told that I am able to mimic the American accent quite well. Finland was never a major country in world politics or colonization and I often get good service just because people don't really know anything about my country. They have no preconceived notions.

I was once having a drink in a hotel bar in New Orleans. The man sitting next to me asked me: "Where do you come from?" I said: "Finland." He said: "Which state is it in?" So I got wise and a couple of days later when a fiftyish woman asked me the same question, I said: "I'm from Europe." Her face lit up: "That's marvelous! I've got relatives in the same country."

Cheers
CB

Re: Essential books for the English language?

Marius Hancu — Wed, 24 May 2006 02:10:03 GMT

Swan, Practical English Usage
Garner, Modern American Usage
Green, Cassell's Dictionary of Slang, 2nd edition

In terms of grammars, I still find
Otto Jespersen, A Modern English Grammar (out of print)
the best, especially in terms of examples from the literature.
Get at least vol. IV (dealing with the verb) -- copy it at a university library.

It's much better in terms of page layout than George Curme's grammar, which is also quite good, but difficult for me to read because of unending blocks/ paragraphs.

BTW, Spears ^^ is outstanding.

For AmE, get an online subscription to:
http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com

Re: Beware the grammar expert!

Cool Breeze — Mon, 15 May 2006 15:42:38 GMT

I'd like to thank all those who gave their answers. I don't think there are right or wrong answers - and it certainly isn't for me to say what is acceptable and what isn't. For those who are interested in a nonnative speaker's comments, I'll provide some.

1. Susan is a girl eleven years old. Acceptable, and not even rare. There are countless similar examples in English and American literature. It can be interpreted as a sentence consisting of a main clause and a relative clause with the relative pronoun and is omitted: Susan is a girl (who is) eleven years old. Who is the subject and the subject is not very often left out in a relative clause - but it does happen now and then: There's somebody at the door (who) wants to see you.

2. Used they to take a walk after dinner? Acceptable but sounds archaic. The Collins Dictionary says it is possible to say They didn't use/used to take a walk after dinner, which must astonish all foreign students who are not versed in the peculiarities of English grammar. You definitely can't say He didn't went for a walk, can you?

3. Italy, who has been in the forefront of fashionâ¦ Although Italian fashion designers are people, Italy is not. So I would prefer which.

4. Mrs Robinson will be nominated chairman. Acceptable.

5. I am older than him. Acceptable.

6. She used to always read the paper after breakfast. Acceptable.

7. Iâve gotten a letter from him. Acceptable.

8. The average American likes his coffee hot. Acceptable. The majority of Americans are women, though. That makes me wonder how the average American can be a man? Perhaps the assessment is based on weight...

9. Whatâs the situation weatherwise? Colloquial, perhaps more American than British, but all right.

10. Youâll have to practice it a lot more. In the USA, practice is never spelled practise. Acceptable.

Re: Inferior dialects?

Randy_Tam — Mon, 19 Dec 2005 09:36:48 GMT

I am not quite close to 'homeless'. I am living at my aunt's home because my granny invited 3 of her siplings to stay... aiya, according to my parents this is going to last 2 weeks or more. I am currently using my uncle's PC just to get here and take a look at what you say. Though I cannot come here as frequently as I used to.

Looking at dictionaries for meanings, phonetic representations whatever does not mean you are forming rules of some sort. I am sorry I didn't include this in describing what a native speaker's going to do with a dictionary... lol. This is especially true with languages belonging to the Sino family, the orthography of which is ideographic, for which reason the phonological form can hardly be guessed just from its shape (I remember I read a passage during my F3 Chinese lessons called <æ¼¢åççµæ§>, in which the author asserted that there's a kind of Chinese letters, the å½¢è²å, whose pronunciations could be guessed. I can hardly agree with this. Even an L1 speaker of Chinese, without prior training, can hardly succeed in this.). This is also true, to a certain extent, of English because of its hybrid source of etymons (... um... I mean the root of a lexical item. I don't really remember the English jargon for it): French, Old English, German, Irish, Greek, Latin... all contribute to the English language as it is today, leading to the lack of consistency between the orthographical and phonological forms of English words. These little 'cracks' of course can not be formulated by the human cognitive system (simply by means of conjecture, etc).

Language is of course not a science, but the STUDY into it can be, just as one may well argue whether translatology is an art or a science.

I am not really sure whether university English courses lay more stress on the scientific side of languages than on the cultural side thereof. To the best of my knowledge, this is not the case. Both are given equal stress. I come to this conclusion from information available to me. Lingnan University, where I am taking my undergraduate yr1 course in Contemporary English and Education, and Chinese University, where a friend of mine is currently a yr2 student in English, both have introductory courses into 'English Grammar', as well as introductory courses into literature in English. The workload is virtually the same for the 2 parts, at least in yr 1. But as the course goes on, more such courses as 'language and culture' or 'sociolinguistics' are available, making the curriculum more relevant to the relationship between language and social factors.

But your statement is true in that Hong Kongers are culturally more and more illiterate, being ignorant not only in foreign cultures but also in their own. Their ignorance in local culture being irrelevant here, I'd like to suggest some plausible reasons why language education from a cultural perspective is losing its ground.

1. It appears students are less motivated (in their learning) these days. What I mean by this is that days at school become more and more dreary: schooling is more or less a long toil, against which students devise one of the most primitive countermeasures known to man --- go have some sleep and look for your Juliet in your dream, handsome Romeo.

But this 'countermeasure' has its roots in that at night students have to attend tutorial classes, which they deem even more useful than classes at school. They having had such classes head back home have their dinner, do some homework and perhaps some reading as well, and, hey mama, I need time to play and relax a while. Voila, time to sleep puppy, it's already 0300 in the midnight. Frankly last year when I was having my A Level, I spent almost 7 hours everyday after school just to revise and read something more (I didn't take tutorial classes, save for economics), it was already 1200 when I returned home from the self - study facilities. It was hell. All this lead to a persistent fatigue in students.

So, the consequence is that, even if the cultural side of language is come across at school, there could hardly be anyone listening (lol.... reminds me of my UE class. Almost 2 / 3 of our class were sleeping if no assignments were given).

2. One may well ask an old question, 'why do students opt for tutorial classes instead of school?' To this old question I give an old answer, 'because students think tutorial classes are more useful, in that they cut the craps and just get straight to the point.' ---> I didn't take tutorials so don't blame me for that. But from what I hear, from my ex - gf (...), my friends, and my classmates, this is the case.

What is meant, then, by 'craps'? ie. anything that is not relevant to the examinations ahead. Examinations, strangely enough, dominate students' minds. My classmates may well think that I am good at linguistics, and so they will immediately conclude, without exception, 'so you must score a high GPA'... Sadly, the thing that is immediately associated with 'good or bad' is a score.

Your suggestion about IELTS (that I took 2 years ago lol without attending any tutorial classes or doing preparations of any sort... just fulfilling your 'minimum requirement' when I was a 6th former) therefore, in this context, does not really render any use in determining the (always abtract) 'language standard' of English teachers. IELTS has nothing about 'culture'. Given that absurd formula (good / bad = score), and given the fact that actually there are tutorial classes given on this test available in Hong Kong, IELTS is simply another UE.

3. These lead to the 3rd possible cause: All that Hong Kong (as a physiological identity separated from its people) wants about English is to make it a little utility: the current English curriculum is concerned with how to use English (as the name of the subject suggests: Use of English), not how to appreciate English as a language or, as Sapir - Whorf's hypothesis suggests, a fruit of a culture. Think about the writing assignments: Letter to the editor, Letter of complaint, Informal letter to a friend (sharing students' own experience perhaps), and essays (on the sheer knowledge on some current social issues). Listening is more or less to make students a 'phono - type', write whatever you hear. (of course, that needs some thought... but what is needed in a real dialogue: any puns suggested? the attitude of the speaker? 'slips of tongue'? all these are absent). Oral~ haha, that's a joke. Just keep talking and make your points understandable to your partners to score high. If this is not enough, sham having some 'foreign accents'. What is the most 'important part' in English exams in Hong Kong, as an interviewee in a programme produced by TVB (name really forgotten, but the programme is great!) pointed out, is 'comprehension', not how to express oneself, accounting for the 'deteriorating English language standard' these days.

4. What makes the situation even worse is the availability of such 'lures' as PC games, movies, and the Internet (-_-... am I not surfing the net?). Students 20 years ago may take pleasure in reading fictions: Le Docteur Pascal, Women in Love, the God of Small Things (I didn't take AL E. Lit.; I really read it for pleasure), Sybil (by Benjamin Disraeli), these are all fictions that I like. But as other forms of leisure can be more easily reached today, reading (to learn from the 'experience of another person': a 'function' of literature) becomes a hefty burden from which every students wants to escape.

So... the entire 'English pedagogic machine' becomes a miserable thing brewing students who treat English as nothing more than a tool to show their 'erudition', as is observed from the fact that complaint letters written in English to the Government or to such other authorities as concerned are paid more attention to, even if the author thereof is a Hong Konger. I do not mean Hong Kongers are in their nature 'inferior' to non - Hong Kongers. What I am trying to bring out is that there exists a sort of 'linguistic discrimination', even if the government has declared equal legal status of Chinese and English. Discriminations of this sort conduce to English being treated the utilitarian way. Actually I was writing an essay on this attitude toward English when the semester started. But the 'study' was halted by the profs, on the grounds that I am but a yr1 student, so that I should leave the topic to my yr 3 (actually yr 4) final paper. Anyway, I don't give a damn anymore.

Your suggestion relative to the English curriculum is good... but I wonder if it would be possible even in the university, as the topics suggested are each already a large topic. Or are you actually suggesting it as a framework that is to be followed through during the 16 years (university years inclusive) of schooling?

I love linguistics not really because I treat language in a parochial scientific way. I am limiting 'language' to the 'essence' (leaving this undefined) because I am more interested in the common traits shared by ALL human languages. Culture... yes, that sounds great, and in my literature studies I remember I once looked into the relationship between 'gender roles' and why Alice Munro's <Boys and Girls> is written that way. But still, linguistics studied in the way I mentioned before is what I am most interested in, for which reason I am not really ok with the course I am taking and am therefore applying by non - JUPAS for CU linguistics... to see if I have a chance.

Re: I WANT TO LEARN ENGLISH WITH SKYPE

Silver — Wed, 07 Dec 2005 08:26:54 GMT

I am a professor of English literature at a university. .I would also like to teach English Grammar and Composition to the members who are interested in it.

silver cldidvr@yahoo.com