different way of understanding grammer.

What did you say? And what did you mean by it?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

pljamesone@att.net
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 12:55 pm

different way of understanding grammer.

Post by pljamesone@att.net »

I cannot understand verbs and nouns clearly, so I created my own way to understand them. I use sentence structure and use the words as to relate to every sentence equally. Thoughts? paul
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12313
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by Arising_uk »

pljamesone@att.net wrote:I cannot understand verbs and nouns clearly, so I created my own way to understand them. I use sentence structure and use the words as to relate to every sentence equally. Thoughts? paul
Give us an example? As your last sentence appears incomprehensible.
pljamesone@att.net
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 12:55 pm

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by pljamesone@att.net »

The first word in a sentence seems to be the subject of the sentence, The words in the sentence relate to each other as in a string. I want to structure every word so as to the string sentence can be understood without interpreting. Paul
Impenitent
Posts: 3123
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by Impenitent »

pljamesone@att.net wrote:The first word in a sentence seems to be the subject of the sentence, The words in the sentence relate to each other as in a string. I want to structure every word so as to the string sentence can be understood without interpreting. Paul
"THE" first word... third word irony...

-Imp
User avatar
mtmynd1
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:43 pm
Location: TX, USA

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by mtmynd1 »

pljamesone@att.net wrote:The first word in a sentence seems to be the subject of the sentence, The words in the sentence relate to each other as in a string. I want to structure every word so as to the string sentence can be understood without interpreting. Paul
Re: "The first word in a sentence seems to be the subject of the sentence..."

Obviously, "The" is not the subject of your 1st sentence, nor is the first noun ('word').

When I read your 3rd sentence, i.e. "I want to structure every word so (as to) the strung sentence can be understood without interpreting"... what is your definition of 'structure"? Also, If we remove 'as to' and make 'string' in the past tense, 'strung' sentence, although not completely clear, will make better sense.

You conclusion, 'understood without interpreting', is understood when the words used are the correctly used words. Also, any writer's hoping to be understood would apply to any writer using any language. The very purpose of writing is to transmit to the reader the writer's intent, is it not?
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12313
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by Arising_uk »

pljamesone@att.net wrote:The first word in a sentence seems to be the subject of the sentence, The words in the sentence relate to each other as in a string. I want to structure every word so as to the string sentence can be understood without interpreting. Paul
Interpreting what?

In general it's the first noun that is the subject but this differs with the language being used.
bergie15
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 12:18 am

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by bergie15 »

Yes, the first noun is usually the subject. -You spelled grammar incorrectly in the subject line. It is spelled with two a's.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 9306
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

bergie15 wrote:Yes, the first noun is usually the subject. -You spelled grammar incorrectly in the subject line. It is spelled with two a's.
And you spelt 'spelled' incorrectly.
User avatar
mtmynd1
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:43 pm
Location: TX, USA

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by mtmynd1 »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: And you spelt 'spelled' incorrectly.

Correction
- (if Bergie is not English ;) )
Spelled vs. spelt

In American English, spelt primarily refers to the hardy wheat grown mostly in Europe, and the verb spell makes spelled in the past tense and as a past participle. In all other main varieties of English, spelt and spelled both work as the past tense and past participle of spell, at least where spell means to form words letter by letter or (with out) to make clear. Outside the U.S., the two forms are interchangeable in these uses, and both are common.

But when spell carries the sense to temporarily relieve (someone) from work, spelled is the preferred form throughout the English-speaking world. This is a minor point, though, as this sense of spell is rarely used outside the U.S., where it is most common.
Related

Learned vs. learnt
Spilled vs. spilt

Spelled is not a recent Americanism, as many people assume (including some who have commented on this post). Both spelled and spelt are old, and examples of each are easily found in historical Google Books searches covering the 17th and 18th centuries. It is true, however, that spelt was ascendant everywhere through most of the 19th century. This ended when Americans permanently settled on spelled around 1900.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 9306
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

mtmynd1 wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: And you spelt 'spelled' incorrectly.

Correction
- (if Bergie is not English ;) )
Spelled vs. spelt

In American English, spelt primarily refers to the hardy wheat grown mostly in Europe, and the verb spell makes spelled in the past tense and as a past participle. In all other main varieties of English, spelt and spelled both work as the past tense and past participle of spell, at least where spell means to form words letter by letter or (with out) to make clear. Outside the U.S., the two forms are interchangeable in these uses, and both are common.

But when spell carries the sense to temporarily relieve (someone) from work, spelled is the preferred form throughout the English-speaking world. This is a minor point, though, as this sense of spell is rarely used outside the U.S., where it is most common.
Related

Learned vs. learnt
Spilled vs. spilt

Spelled is not a recent Americanism, as many people assume (including some who have commented on this post). Both spelled and spelt are old, and examples of each are easily found in historical Google Books searches covering the 17th and 18th centuries. It is true, however, that spelt was ascendant everywhere through most of the 19th century. This ended when Americans permanently settled on spelled around 1900.
I don't acknowledge manglish at all. Do they say 'meaned' for meant? Or wize, like size? Besides, you can google anything and find someone, somewhere saying it's ok, not ok......
User avatar
mtmynd1
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:43 pm
Location: TX, USA

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by mtmynd1 »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:I don't acknowledge manglish at all. Do they say 'meaned' for meant? Or wize, like size?
I take that as a denial of anything not English 'proper'. If that is true, you certainly are limiting your access to a world of information the Universities and their graduates have put forth for the interested to digest and think about without having that limitation imposed upon not only professors but the entire catalog of "Americana".

"Manglish" is no more than a cheap shot to get a giggle from a tiny fraction of elitists, I would conclude.

But carry on, vt, I will still read your replies that pertain to something or another I find an interest in... like this post. ;)
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 9306
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

mtmynd1 wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:I don't acknowledge manglish at all. Do they say 'meaned' for meant? Or wize, like size?
I take that as a denial of anything not English 'proper'. If that is true, you certainly are limiting your access to a world of information the Universities and their graduates have put forth for the interested to digest and think about without having that limitation imposed upon not only professors but the entire catalog of "Americana".

"Manglish" is no more than a cheap shot to get a giggle from a tiny fraction of elitists, I would conclude.

But carry on, vt, I will still read your replies that pertain to something or another I find an interest in... like this post. ;)
Here's a good example of the American determination to stupid-down the language. Practice and practise are two different words. One is a noun, the other a verb. Ditto licence and license. Same with advise and advice (I think they might acknowledge that one, probably because they sound different and it's not so confusing for them). Their stupiding-down is destroying the beauty and complexity of the language. I'm sure there are countless other examples.
Catalog instead of catalogue. You can't tell me that isn't stupiding-down. America won't be satisfied until the whole planet is 'americanised'. I'm just making one small stand against it. I'm not one to go with the flow. Even Windows keeps effing-well 'correcting' my spelling. What a bloody cheek. I had to go to the tax department the other day and wondered why everyone was wearing jeans and trainers. 'Oh, it's casual Friday' I was told. Another effing American tradition. The next time anyone tries to 'high-five' me I will 'accidentally' miss, and hit their face instead.
User avatar
mtmynd1
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:43 pm
Location: TX, USA

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by mtmynd1 »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:/quote]
Here's a good example of the American determination to stupid-down the language. Practice and practise are two different words. One is a noun, the other a verb. Ditto licence and license. Same with advise and advice (I think they might acknowledge that one, probably because they sound different and it's not so confusing for them). Their stupiding-down is destroying the beauty and complexity of the language. I'm sure there are countless other examples.
Catalog instead of catalogue. You can't tell me that isn't stupiding-down. America won't be satisfied until the whole planet is 'americanised'. I'm just making one small stand against it. I'm not one to go with the flow. Even Windows keeps effing-well 'correcting' my spelling. What a bloody cheek. I had to go to the tax department the other day and wondered why everyone was wearing jeans and trainers. 'Oh, it's casual Friday' I was told. Another fucking American tradition. The next time anyone tries to 'high-five' me I will 'accidentally' miss, and hit their face instead.
You know your "americanisms" I see, vt... good for you! You've been practicing (or as you prefer "practising"). However, I feel your insistence to retain your native tongue is limited due to the globalization of our world and the influence of the internet, the media (movies, music, books on science, history, philosophy, technology, etc) has brought us (all of us globally) closer and closer to an more common language. English was brought to my shores as you are well aware of, and along with so many other languages being assimilated into our language, English remains the dominate tongue but well-spiced by other languages. This is an evolution of language which may surprise you... it's been happening before their was a Britain or America. Shock, eh!

Change is inevitable in all things and language is no exception, altho it may be the slowest to respond to change based upon generational differences. As one generation fixed on their language will not normally change but their offspring, due to globalization, will learn new words, new expressionisms, new way of seeing things because of technology and sciences... those being most fluid in the ongoing insistence of change.
Wyman
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 2:21 pm

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by Wyman »

Even Windows keeps effing-well 'correcting' my spelling.
Then get a non-American operating system.

By the way, you can set the language preference to 15 different varieties of English on Windows 8.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 9306
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: different way of understanding grammer.

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

mtmynd1 wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:/quote]
Here's a good example of the American determination to stupid-down the language. Practice and practise are two different words. One is a noun, the other a verb. Ditto licence and license. Same with advise and advice (I think they might acknowledge that one, probably because they sound different and it's not so confusing for them). Their stupiding-down is destroying the beauty and complexity of the language. I'm sure there are countless other examples.
Catalog instead of catalogue. You can't tell me that isn't stupiding-down. America won't be satisfied until the whole planet is 'americanised'. I'm just making one small stand against it. I'm not one to go with the flow. Even Windows keeps effing-well 'correcting' my spelling. What a bloody cheek. I had to go to the tax department the other day and wondered why everyone was wearing jeans and trainers. 'Oh, it's casual Friday' I was told. Another fucking American tradition. The next time anyone tries to 'high-five' me I will 'accidentally' miss, and hit their face instead.
You know your "americanisms" I see, vt... good for you! You've been practicing (or as you prefer "practising"). However, I feel your insistence to retain your native tongue is limited due to the globalization of our world and the influence of the internet, the media (movies, music, books on science, history, philosophy, technology, etc) has brought us (all of us globally) closer and closer to an more common language. English was brought to my shores as you are well aware of, and along with so many other languages being assimilated into our language, English remains the dominate tongue but well-spiced by other languages. This is an evolution of language which may surprise you... it's been happening before their was a Britain or America. Shock, eh!

Change is inevitable in all things and language is no exception, altho it may be the slowest to respond to change based upon generational differences. As one generation fixed on their language will not normally change but their offspring, due to globalization, will learn new words, new expressionisms, new way of seeing things because of technology and sciences... those being most fluid in the ongoing insistence of change.
It's just a shame it's the inferior 'culture' that is the most dominant. It's not just the language that's being stupided-down. Your own country is but a shadow of what it used to be.
Post Reply