|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 956
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 956 |
Yes, quite true. I was thinking along another tangent which is'nt quite relevant now. More to do with punctuation, where and when to use certain elements.
For instance: as a speaker of Maori we never used to write a glottal stop, we just new there was one there. But for new learners.... ya gotta put em in.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
There's where we part company
Not bad parting company as long as we have a conversation.
For me a grammar is a sort of abstract device for parsing and generating acceptable sentences in a given language.
I think this is how I understand grammar too.
There is a difference between breaking a rule for an obvious purpose or breaking a rule because you never exactly knew what the rule was.
I meant when someone writes well, thus handling this device for parsing and generating acceptable sentences in a given language well, he/she may want to take "liberties" for expressive or aesthetic or whatever reasons which I called "obvious purpose" (which apperently wasn't very clear and obvious).
To a good reader these free movements in writing are obvious, I mean logic, natural and enjoyable.
With breaking a rule because you never exactly knew what the rule was I meant: in many publications, newspapers, magazines, critics and articles I notice that they are more and more written by people who never learned to properly use this sort of abstract device for parsing and generating acceptable sentences in a given language. So they (sentences) are not acceptable but is seems to be such a general phenomenen.
Question: do you still think it is important that children learn grammar well. We are not born with this understanding.
We really have to learn it. All of us. ( olly :~) )
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 132
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 132 |
For me a grammar is a sort of abstract device for parsing and generating acceptable sentences in a given language.
I think this is how I understand grammar too.
With breaking a rule because you never exactly knew what the rule was I meant: in many publications, newspapers, magazines, critics and articles I notice that they are more and more written by people who never learned to properly use this sort of abstract device for parsing and generating acceptable sentences in a given language. So they (sentences) are not acceptable but is seems to be such a general phenomenen.
If I may, I think that your understanding grammar does differ a great deal from how zmj and I understand it. For me, this abstract device for parsing and generating acceptable sentences is acquired by children, almost automatically and largely unconsciously. By the time children learn to read, they already have a mastery of most of the grammar of their language. So when you say that there are adults who don't understand how to use this abstract device for parsing and generating acceptable sentences, in other words they don't know the grammar of their native language, I'm very skeptical. A real example might help.
Last edited by goofy; 10/21/11 12:16 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,916 Likes: 2
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,916 Likes: 2 |
I'd like a definition of "conversation".
----please, draw me a sheep----
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
A real example He gots no (whatever)?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 132
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 132 |
A real example He gots no (whatever)? I don't know the history of gots. My sense is that it's used very informally and often jokingly. Is that really an example of the sort of thing Nunberg is talking about?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295 |
A real example might help.
Yes, possibly my understanding of grammar may differ from your's and Zm's. (I doubt it) It's a.o. about things like inconsistancy in using plural and singular forms in one sentence.
Or mixing up articles and personal pronouns incoherently.
Yes, children master a great deal of their grammar before they enter school(most of them), but then why teach them if it weren't to give them the real understanding of the why, such and so... and why do children find it so hard? Many children consider Dutch grammer as more difficult than English grammar.
Maybe you English are just lucky. But it can't be a local thing. In many countries people complain about today's language education.
Universities here complain that a too large part of newly entering students is no longer able to write correct Dutch; to a point where they have introduced an obligatory test and special courses to try solve this problem.
**Ha! example!!! Universities here complain that a too large part of newly entering students is no longer able to write correct Dutch.= correct
Universities here complain that a too large part of newly entering students are no longer able to write correct Dutch. = incorrect
(its a very simple example but this is what I mean)
I know this is not what Nunberg means directly but bad writing becomes worse when the knowledge of basics gets lost.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290 |
Yes, children master a great deal of their grammar before they enter school (most of them), but then why teach them if it weren't to give them the real understanding of the why, such and so... and why do children find it so hard?
Because those children speak a kind of Dutch (a dialect or sociolect) that differs in its grammar from the Standard Dutch preferred in certain jobs and situations. They speak this way, because they acquired the grammar of the dialect spoken at home and in their neighborhood. If you really want them to speak proper ("correct") Dutch, you should remove them from this improper environment and put them in one where only proper Dutch is spoken. Then they will acquire proper Dutch without any need for teaching them anything.
Many children and adults make all sorts of errors (both according to the grammars of their learned dialect and of proper Dutch because they mix them up and/or have not really learned how to code-switch between the different languages they know.
**Ha! example!!! Universities here complain that a too large part of newly entering students is no longer able to write correct Dutch.= correct
Universities here complain that a too large part of newly entering students are no longer able to write correct Dutch. = incorrect.
Yes, I would call this a grammatical error. You see this sort of thing all the time. I am not sure that it is generated by the writer's faulty grammar or by some other problem. It's kind of a clunky sentence, too. I'd've rewritten it as:
Universities here complain that many newly entering students cannot write correct Dutch.
It's the sort of error that probably cannot be corrected by teaching writers some grammatical rule of subject-verb concord (which I would argue all have in their grammar), but to teach them how to edit their own writing or another person's. And you teach them that in high school, although, more and more, this sort of lesson is being pushed off to universities.
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290 |
I'd like a definition of "conversation".How about A-H ( link): "The spoken exchange of thoughts, opinions, and feelings; talk"? Of course, Bran was using it metaphorically, because our conversation is happening offline via forum software and not in real time as face-to-face conversations do. Hope that's helps.
Ceci n'est pas un seing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 132
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 132 |
**Ha! example!!! Universities here complain that a too large part of newly entering students is no longer able to write correct Dutch.= correct
Universities here complain that a too large part of newly entering students are no longer able to write correct Dutch. = incorrect
If the first sentence is correct, then why does the second sentence sound better to me? I think the answer is because the English I speak differs from Standard English in this respect. In Standard English, the verb agrees with the subject. In my English, if there is a lot of material between the subject and the verb, the verb sometimes agrees with the closest noun. This is called the principle of proximity. Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage says Proximity agreement may pass in speech and other forms of unplanned discourse; in print it will be considered an error. But this does not mean that I don't know the grammar of my native language. It means that I have to learn the grammar of another language, the grammar of Standard English. The same thing goes for those Dutch children who have to learn Standard Dutch.
Last edited by goofy; 10/21/11 02:04 PM.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,322
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
519
guests, and
4
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
