"There was two Mini Cooper parked in front of my house", or "there WERE two mini coopers"?

@ossobuco,

It's all right, no worries. I am open to criticisms and gladly welcome it. That's one way I learn. :-D

0 Replies

@MattDavis,

Quote:

I don't know if your suggestion is this, but do you think that it is never appropriate to teach children a falsehood?

That's an interesting question that could go many directions. With regard to the present situation, it's patently silly to do so. Tell lies to advance what were falsehoods to begin with.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Silly shmilly...

Could those lies be necessary toward later understanding?
A necessary pedagogical step.
Like the steps in Wittgenstein's ladder, or the Buddhist notion of an upaya?
The concept is also called a "lie to children". Normally, the name is misleading, in this case we are actually talking about children.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie-to-children

I don't know enough about education or linguistic to weigh in on whether the dispute is regarding a "lie to children" but maybe worth a look if you think that honesty is always the best policy. Very Happy

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Quote:

another thing is at what point is non-standard speech acceptable?

On a personal level, whenever one chooses to do so. But this is such an open ended question, Infra, that it's impossible to answer it.

Quote:

A three year old speaks logically when for the past tense of "run" he says "runned," because "-ed" is the English phoneme for past action, and no one is mistaken about what exactly he is trying to say, but is it really something acceptable as regular, everyday speech?

For the three year old, most assuredly. There's no danger of 'runned' becoming the lifelong past tense for him. His internal grammar will adjust just as all children's internal grammars adjust to the irregular forms.

Quote:

Do you propose to let that three year old continue speaking that way because the standard form of the past tense of the word "run" is irregular, comes from a dead version of the language, and what's more, is illogical? If you don't, then where do you draw the line?

I'm at a loss to understand what you are driving at. Children learn the language of their dialect. I'm not sure what's illogical about the past tense of the verb 'run'. I've never heard anything to suggest it was.

2 Replies

@JTT,

I think maybe a more pertinent question is how to keep Americans like me from running off and doing nasty nasty things to the Queen's English. Wink

0 Replies

@MattDavis,

Quote:

Could those lies be necessary toward later understanding?
A necessary pedagogical step.

Not in the least, Matt. They lead to lifelong confusion, a dismal grasp of the workings of the English language and frequently horrible cases of hives.

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Quote:
Could those lies be necessary toward later understanding?
A necessary pedagogical step.
Not in the least, Matt. They lead to lifelong confusion, a dismal grasp of the workings of the English language and frequently horrible cases of hives.

Which of course leads me to another thought...
How do we know that hives and other manifestations of irritations are not also necessary in developing mental fecundity?
Are hives a cause of creativity, or are they a symptom of it?

1 Reply

@JTT,

As an ex-researcher in psycholinguistics, and as an active presenter of philosophical papers, I would comment that phrases like "How language works" is a simplistic one-liner whose status depends entirely on where you are coming from.

Chomsky. the authority who underpins "descriptive grammar" rather than "prescriptive grammar" was originally funded by the US Defense Department to investigate computational linguistics. Hence his theoretical substrates relate to "finite state machine theory"and other proto-scientific models. His concentration on abstract competence as opposed to actual performance has no bearing on the social and intellectual factors which affect performance. Nor does "descriptiveness" tackle the primary roles of language in either communicative or cognitive functioning. For that you might to turn to writers like Halliday, Sapir, Heidegger, Bernstein, Wittgenstein, Rorty and Derrida.

In essence, "the reaching of English" to native speakers, like all "teaching" has tried to establish itself as an authoritative "profession" by reference to transient paradigmatic theoretical substrates. The full range of the functions of language, including its reflections of social hierarchies, conditioning and tribalism is rarely embraced. At the end of the day, the measure of "education" especially language teaching is ultimately socio-political and economic.

3 Replies

@fresco,

TYPO 1st line, last paragraph

In essence, the "teaching of English" to....

0 Replies

@fresco,

The "descriptivist/prescriptivist" dodge fails to embrace its own cognitive dissonance. So, for example, if a group condemns double negatives, and the descriptivist puritan runs up wagging her finger, she is herself being prescriptivist because she fails to acknowledge the large community of Enlgish speakers who condemn double negatives--she fails to describe them. This descriptivist happy horse **** only works if one embraces the cognitive dissonance and describes both sides of any language contentiousness. The descriptivists end up being prescriptivists themselves. Communicative competence is what matters, and that will often be much different when addressing a well-educated audience than when speaking to the shoe repair man.

3 Replies

@Setanta,

Agreed . Communicative competence as opposed to grammatical competence is what matters in the real world.

1 Reply

If a person comes into this forum and ask a grammar or language question...that person, more than likely, is asking for a "prescriptive" answer. We can discuss this all we want...but to answer the question asked (or inferred)...we must go to the prescriptive answer to be of help.

And if one is busting balls by calling a "prescriptive" error to another person's attention...it only works if the notion of "prescriptive grammar rules" am important to the person whom's balls was being busted give a damn.

Said another way: All sound can be considered music...but some music sounds better than other music.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

More bullshit from the chickenshit Setanta.

Quote:

So, for example, if a group condemns double negatives, and the descriptivist puritan runs up wagging her finger, she is herself being prescriptivist because she fails to acknowledge the large community of Enlgish speakers who condemn double negatives--she fails to describe them.

This is absolutely ludicrous, but I must note that it is par for the course for Setanta. Methinks he is trying to revive the pet peeves of English thread so he can wax ignorantly on about things he knows so little about.

Read Steven Pinker's article Grammar Puss. Therein he specifically and numerously mentions "the large community of Enlgish[sic] speakers who condemn double negatives".

Here's just one example.

Quote:

The legislators of "correct English," in fact, are an informal network of copy-editors, dictionary usage panelists, style manual writers, English teachers, essayists, and pundits. Their authority, they claim, comes from their dedication to implementing standards that have served the language well in the past, especially in the prose of its finest writers, and that maximize its clarity, logic, consistency, elegance, precision, stability, and expressive range. William Safire, who writes the weekly column "On Language" for the [New York Times Magazine], calls himself a "language maven," from the Yiddish word meaning expert, and this gives us a convenient label for the entire group.

To whom I say: Maven, shmaven! [Kibbitzers] and [nudniks] is more like it.

http://pinker.wjh.harvard.edu/articles/media/1994_01_24_thenewrepublic.html

Quote:

This descriptivist happy horse **** only works if one embraces the cognitive dissonance and describes both sides of any language contentiousness.

Again, what an incredibly inane argument. How could one discuss these silly prescriptions if the prescriptions weren't mentioned, weren't discussed?

The real dodge, and it is one that has been described before - no, Set isn't an original thinker - is making a pretense that the prescriptive idea has any credence, any merit. These silly notions most assuredly do not.

Let's take the double negatives issue as just one good example. The prescriptivists tell us that using a double negative makes the statement a positive. They say this in complete defiance of reality.

Setanta, himself, discussed double negatives in the Pet Peeves of English thread. Why would anyone want to listen to, give the slightest bit of credence to, a group that is so completely out to lunch, a group that has such a tenuous grasp on reality?

I cannot understand why anyone would want to hitch their wagon to such another of Setanta's cribbed completely vacuous arguments.

Quote:

The descriptivists end up being prescriptivists themselves.

After all this time, Setanta still doesn't have the foggiest idea. And yet this boy fancies himself a thinker. Rolling Eyes

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

If a person comes into this forum and ask a grammar or language question...that person, more than likely, is asking for a "prescriptive" answer. We can discuss this all we want...but to answer the question asked (or inferred)...we must go to the prescriptive answer to be of help.

1) You've never explained how lying to that person would be of help, Frank.

2) What part of prescriptions are "bits of folklore that originated for screwball reasons several hundred years ago and have perpetuated themselves ever since" don't you understand?

3) Actually, when you notice [don't know how you've missed this either, except for your plain pigheadedness] just how bad you are at describing the workings of language, one wonders why you wouldn't try to bring yourself up to speed before offering advice.

1 Reply

@JTT,

That's an assertion orgy JTT.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

And if one is busting balls by calling a "prescriptive" error to another person's attention...it only works if the notion of "prescriptive grammar rules" am important to the person whom's balls was being busted give a damn.

This is illustrative what comes from those who have done nothing but simply memorize these silly prescriptions.

Pretty impressive.

0 Replies

@fresco,

Quote:

Communicative competence as opposed to grammatical competence is what matters in the real world.

Communicative competence has no need of grammatical competence, Fresco?

2 Replies

@spendius,

You forgot a comma, Spendi.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

Communicative competence has no need of grammatical competence, Fresco?

It has if what is being communicated is a clause in a tariff agreement.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

You forgot a comma, Spendi.

You're getting a tad prescriptivist JT.

1 Reply

"There was two Mini Cooper parked in front of my house", or "there WERE two mini coopers"?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know