Cato's Grammar Grumble

Started by Cato, February 08, 2009, 05:00:18 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Henk and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Sean

Will correct these as nec, thanks, Polaris.

Are you sure you don't mean that you are interested in that. . .

And when you say 'propaganda and fakery that passes for news',


But However doesn't need a comma- it's a pause but only a short pause. And on is as good as at for me.

As for very and adverbs I remain unsure.

Cato

Quote from: Sean on February 22, 2015, 12:52:19 AM
Will correct these as nec, thanks, Polaris.

Are you sure you don't mean that you are interested in that. . .

And when you say 'propaganda and fakery that passes for news',


But However doesn't need a comma- it's a pause but only a short pause. And on is as good as at for me.

As for very and adverbs I remain unsure.

Why unsure? As an adverb, it modifies verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs.

"She is very beautiful."  (modifying an adjective)

"He ran very quickly."  (modifying another adverb)

"Very" can also be an adjective: "I am the very model of a modern major general."  0:)
"Meet Miss Ruth Sherwood, from Columbus, Ohio, the Middle of the Universe!"

- Brian Aherne introducing Rosalind Russell in  My Sister Eileen (1942)

North Star

Quote from: Cato on February 22, 2015, 08:34:23 AM
Why unsure? As an adverb, it modifies verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs.
Very true.  8)
But, we must allow Sean his complaints of the lack of command of the English language those orientals have. . .
"Everything has beauty, but not everyone sees it." - Confucius

My photographs on Flickr

Jo498

I agree that the examples from Sean in the pdf are often hilarious or frustrating. But as I said this is what you get if a language that is very different from the local ones (apparently Chinese in most cases?) as lingua franca. To make hypotheses about the reasons I think one would have to know the local languages quite well (this would very probably also explain most of the common mistakes). But speculations about English being objectively "more expressive" or more subtle or about the apollinian or dionysian national character seems rather far-fetched.

Comparing English with the languages I have some knowledge of (unfortunately no Asian language) it allows very fine distinctions because of its huge vocabulary. It is also more expressive than German (but probably somewhat less than e.g. Spanish and Latin) with respect to tempus and verbal aspect. OTOH because there is almost no flexion of verbs and nouns word order is somewhat strict and inflexible (or prone to misunderstandings if handled more freely in poetry).
The curse of English as a second or third language is that it is fairly easy to know enough to get more or less along but very difficult to know it well because of its huge vocabulary and the dreaded "idioms". Also the spelling and the failing correspondence between spelling and pronounciation are probably the worst of all languages.
Tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui est de ne savoir pas demeurer en repos, dans une chambre.
- Blaise Pascal

Sean

Cato, we don't say I very like it. Can you elaborate why?

Jo

QuoteBut speculations about English being objectively "more expressive" or more subtle or about the apollinian or dionysian national character seems rather far-fetched.

Well I take a different view, English is a fantastic language, even if not perfect and I can even feel it sometimes constraining my thinking. It's not just the large vocabulary but subtle word order and other sophisticated features I can't claim to understand that give it enormous expressive reach and articulation that can no way exist if for instance you're using crude pictographs, which is what Far Eastern languages of course do.

Spelling and pronunciation issues are interesting- though inconsistent they hugely add richness, and corresponding latitude and critique of thought...

jochanaan

Quote from: Sean on February 21, 2015, 11:48:14 PM
...Ken B, plenty of native speakers use bad English, sure. But even those characters don't have the foolish indifference to it that non-westerners show, and indeed usually have a grasp somewhere of those underlying features that seek articulation of meaning.... there is no respect for its richness, expressive flexibility and articulating power, because they're not aware of it ... They hence also dodge the proper awareness that almost all the literature in the entire modern arts and sciences is in English or other European languages.... it's well beyond an issue of learning the basics of [a] language so you that can hold down a simple conversation....
Sean, you're talking about some of my U.S.-born neighbors here in downtown Denver! :o :laugh:
Imagination + discipline = creativity

Ken B

Quote from: jochanaan on February 22, 2015, 04:15:06 PM
Sean, you're talking about some of my U.S.-born neighbors here in downtown Denver! :o :laugh:

I think that's part of his complaint. It is now frowned upon to insist on good English even from monolingual native speakers born here. like Rodney Dangerfield, English don't get no respect.

Sean

jochanaan, I still think there's a difference- even in the moronic masses' crudest English there's more grasp of its ability to articulate the world than the average Chinese learner.

There's some good examples of Chinglish on Youtube, and characters making similar points as me.

By the way I don't live in much of a Standard English zone here in central England- the place has its qualities but people have long since deliberately distorted the language, and knowing what they're doing-

How am you?

He's borrowed me his car


Jo498

Quote from: Ken B on February 22, 2015, 05:33:14 PM
I think that's part of his complaint. It is now frowned upon to insist on good English even from monolingual native speakers born here. like Rodney Dangerfield, English don't get no respect.
But whoever may be to blame for this, clearly not the Asians, but probably the speakers italicized above...
(My sister studied English at a German university. One of her professors (apparently a British person) corrected students who used American phrases or pronunciation: "That's how they speak on the other side of the ocean" (But they had also  a few Aussie and American professors (and of course many Germans but I think the more practical exercises were usually taught by native speakers.)

As I said, I think one common problem of mangling English by both natives and foreigners is the huge difficulty differential between basic communication and advanced literate use of language. I still remember that I was puzzled when an older friend of mine (who was a teacher of English and French) claimed that English was considerably harder than French. Hardly any German High school student would agree with this because they struggle with French verbs or whatever. But apparently, once you are beyond the basics, it is not so hard to get really good at French because it is more regular (and maybe more logical). English seems to get harder the "deeper" you go.
Tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui est de ne savoir pas demeurer en repos, dans une chambre.
- Blaise Pascal

Sean

English is indeed more sophisticated the deeper you go. But what trips up the Chinese and Koreans, who're already looking for their idea of language as s simple pidgin, is the deceptively simple base to English.

It's not really simple because although you can communicate with a limited amount of study unlike some languages, the more advanced richness is implicit in the basics. In English you can write even a very simple sentence well or crudely. And the correct formations then give rise to immense potential for expression and articulation- once you understand the fuller meaning structured in the simple sentence.

Ken B

Quote from: Jo498 on February 22, 2015, 10:57:55 PM
But whoever may be to blame for this, clearly not the Asians, but probably the speakers italicized above...


Oh I don't disagree, far from it. I'm just trying to explicate the legitimate core at the heart of Sean's maundering.

Ten thumbs

#3231
Quote from: Sean on February 22, 2015, 01:12:00 PM
Cato, we don't say I very like it. Can you elaborate why?

Because very is an adjective, not an adverb. I've just encountered an interesting illustration of this, in the use of the superlative form, namely 'veriest'.

Sorry, I wrote this hurriedly. What I mean is that 'very' does not directly modify a verb. It can of course modify an adverb providing indirect modification, as in 'very quietly' or 'very much so'.
A day may be a destiny; for life
Lives in but little—but that little teems
With some one chance, the balance of all time:
A look—a word—and we are wholly changed.

Cato


Quote from: Sean on February 22, 2015, 01:12:00 PM
Cato, we don't say I very like it. Can you elaborate why?

Yes, because there are various kinds of adverbs.  What you have there is "Borat English" !   :laugh:

"Very" is an adverb of degree, and is therefore wrong in your example.  "I very much like it" is of course correct.

Quote from: Ten thumbs on February 23, 2015, 01:30:01 PM
Because very is an adjective, not an adverb. I've just encountered an interesting illustration of this, in the use of the superlative form, namely 'veriest'

Again, "very" is both adjective and adverb: the superlative form is for the adjective.  "The veriest foolishness was on display in the cafeteria."  Meaning the best example of foolishness could be found (most probably) among the male students at the tables.   $:)

"Meet Miss Ruth Sherwood, from Columbus, Ohio, the Middle of the Universe!"

- Brian Aherne introducing Rosalind Russell in  My Sister Eileen (1942)

Ken B

Quote from: Cato on February 23, 2015, 02:15:30 PM
Yes, because there are various kinds of adverbs.  What you have there is "Borat English" !   :laugh:

"Very" is an adverb of degree, and is therefore wrong in your example.  "I very much like it" is of course correct.

Again, "very" is both adjective and adverb: the superlative form is for the adjective.  "The veriest foolishness was on display in the cafeteria."  Meaning the best example of foolishness could be found (most probably) among the male students at the tables.   $:)

Your explanation is the very thing.  And denying very is an adverb? The very idea!

It's a day for archaic words today. It's been a while since I saw titer, captious, or veriest, but I ran across them all today.  I send someone to the dictionary with parturition recently too, but that's not archaic, just esoteric.

Sean


Cato

#3235
Quote from: Sean on February 23, 2015, 11:11:28 PM
Thanks Cato.

Spreading contentment wherever I can!   8)

Quote from: Ken B on February 23, 2015, 03:16:21 PM
Your explanation is the very thing.  And denying very is an adverb? The very idea!

It's a day for archaic words today. It's been a while since I saw titer, captious, or veriest, but I ran across them all today.  I send someone to the dictionary with parturition recently too, but that's not archaic, just esoteric.

Don't forget "twee" and "axolotl." 
"Meet Miss Ruth Sherwood, from Columbus, Ohio, the Middle of the Universe!"

- Brian Aherne introducing Rosalind Russell in  My Sister Eileen (1942)

Karl Henning

I was listening to some Peter Gabriel the other day, so I am in no danger of forgetting twee  8)
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

Cato

Quote from: karlhenning on February 24, 2015, 03:05:22 AM
I was listening to some Peter Gabriel the other day, so I am in no danger of forgetting twee  8)

And then there is: louche!  0:)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/louche
"Meet Miss Ruth Sherwood, from Columbus, Ohio, the Middle of the Universe!"

- Brian Aherne introducing Rosalind Russell in  My Sister Eileen (1942)

Florestan

#3238
Found today here on GMG:

I know a few French phrases and them a few English.

I think it should read either

I know a few French phrases and they a few English ones.

or

I know a few French phrases and they a little English.

Anyway, them strikes me as wrong.


There is no theory. You have only to listen. Pleasure is the law. — Claude Debussy

Christo

Quote from: karlhenning on February 24, 2015, 03:05:22 AMI was listening to some Peter Gabriel the other day, so I am in no danger of forgetting twee  8)

It's safer if you play him in German, then. (I liked him best in those years).  ;D
https://www.youtube.com/v/wv4_g5pmFPQ
... music is not only an 'entertainment', nor a mere luxury, but a necessity of the spiritual if not of the physical life, an opening of those magic casements through which we can catch a glimpse of that country where ultimate reality will be found.    RVW, 1948