Naturally Exceptional English

Learning a foreign grammar mirrors our experience growing up.  First, we are told that there are rules of correct behavior.  Then, we discover that some people don’t have to follow them.  Similarly, students learn verb conjugation tables – er, ir, re in French, the famous binyanim in Hebrew, to name a few, and then continually run into verbs that do not exactly follow those rules.  Like the confused child, the learner gets the impression that the rules were a big lie.

The first logical question concerns the reason for the very existence of these exceptions.  The obvious but true answer is that because they were always there.  Native speakers, even today, learn most of their grammar through listening and imitating, not formal study.  Most first language native speakers cannot explain their choice of verb tense logically, knowing what is correct by what sounds “good.”  In other words, it is correct if we are used to it, not if it follows some academic rule.  On the other hand, if people rarely use and hear a given verb, rendering them unsure of the correct form, they will go with the general rule.  For example, the past simple in English is made by adding ed to a word.  Therefore, when unsure, about a form, the speakers generally follows the rule or looks for a similarly sounding  known verb.  So, while it is clear to Americans and Brits that the past of sit is sat, most speakers would say that the past of shit is shitted, although the phonetic similarity would lead some to say shat.

In practice, this means that the verbs people use regularly have a nasty tendency to remain irregular.  Speakers who say “I goed” are corrected even though the conjugation clearly follows the formal rule.  On the other hand, confusing exceptions such as lie (lay, laid) and lay (laid, lain) are often mistaken (except by English teachers, of course) without causing undue comment.  Therefore, the key to irregularity is use.

An example of an exception proviing a rule is Hebrew.  Hebrew was basically static for some two centuries.  This period allowed scholars to devise rules to explain almost all exceptions.  This structure, called binyanim effectively organizes all Hebrew verbs.  Most languages, especially English, have never had such a period to allow the scholars to catch up with actual use.

A deeper explanation of why English grammar in particular has so many exceptions will be the subject of another post.

Don’t tense up on tenses

Foreign students of English often feel that that the most frightening aspect of it is the sheer number of tenses.  Especially for people whose native language is structurally simple, i.e. three forms – past, present, future,  dealing with such a complex grammar structure is rather daunting.  In fact, despite English’s basic structure of 9 tenses (+ a few odds and ends), the construction of tenses tends to be rather simple and straightforward.

First, the raison d’etre of having many tenses is that writers and speakers can say exactly what they mean without adding words to clarify.  For example, I was winning the game does not mean the same as I won the game or I have won the game. So, while adding formal complexity, the learning process enriches the language and is a finite process. Compare that with Russian whose formal structure is simple, but the process of understanding the difference between perfective and imperfect active in any given situation never ends for a foreign learner.

As for building the verb, it is vital to remember that all languages add markers to the verb, generally the root, to signal its time and, often, person.  For example, the present tense is parle, parles, parle, parlons, parlez, parlent; говорю, говоришь, говорит, говорим, говорите, говорят; and אומר, אורמת, אומרים, אומרות in French, Russian, and Hebrew respectively.

English works in a similarly manner, using helping verbs instead of endings for the most part.  The progressive tenses mark time and person using the verb to be and the ing form of the word.  Therefore, present progressive uses am, are, and is; past progressive uses was or were; and future progressive uses will be.  Similarly, the perfect tenses uses the verb to have with the past participle, ie. have and has in the present, had in the past, and will have in the future.  As they say in Hebrew, dafka [dafka]or to be contrary, the simple is the least simple: in the negative and interrogative forms of the present and past, the helping verb is do, i.e. do and does in the present and did in the past, before the root.  The future marker is will.  In the positive form in the present tense, there are neither helping verbs or endings except for after s/he it, in which case an s is added while in the past, aside from the many and common exceptions, an ed added to the work marks the past.

The point is that students can concentrate on the actual meaning of the verb if they relax and learn how to recognize the form, which is not a stressful activity.

Articles of (Grammar) Faith

The surest way to identify a non-native speaker is by looking at their articles – a, an,  and the.  Russian does not have any articles, which mean Russian speakers often add them almost randomly.  Hebrew speakers only have the definitive one – the.   French use is similar, but with differences, including the requirement to place one before every noun in a list.  Compare the English I will take the fish, rice, and salad as compared to the French Je prendrai le poisson, le riz et la salade.

For a change, there are actually clear rules in English.

a.      All singular nouns must have an article, either the indefinite a (or an) or the definite the.

b.      Plural nouns if definite must be preceded by the; otherwise there is no article.

Examples: A friend of mine has the only copy of the book.  The books are important resources.

Exception:  Abstract nouns (uncountable to some of you) do not take articles:  You need patience and skill [in general] to succeed.  Since as abstract nouns, they can’t be plural, there is nothing to worry there.

Clarification: a and an

Contrary to what many have you been taught in school, the word an does NOT go before a vowel.  It goes before a VOWEL SOUND!

Appearances can be deceiving.  Some vowels (AEIOU) can SOUND like a consonant while some consonants can sound like a vowel.

An egg but A European egg:  The word European sound like [yu], meaning a consonant sound.

An ugly building at a university:  [u]gly as compared to [yu]niversity.

You’ll be a happy person in an hour:  The word happy has a voiced h, while hour doesn’t.

Police look for an MO:  You say [em] and therefore write an.

If you are unsure whether to write a or an, say the word.

If you are unsure whether to use an article, remember that unless the noun is plural and indefinite, there must be an article.

As they say in Hebrew, הבנת את זה. ברוך?  or, more seriously, if you explain it to me slowly, I’ll understand it quickly.

Run on sentences - How I hate thee!

Whether it is because of poor teaching or a natural love of stream of consciousness writing, many people, even the most intelligent and organized, write horrible run on sentences.  They sound like a hysterical five year old telling his mother about his day:  I walked in the class and Johnny threw a brick at me and I cried and the teacher came and asked me what was wrong and I hit Johnny and I was punished.

To set the record straight, a sentence is ONE idea structurally consisting of one SUBJECT, which may have more than one part, and one VERB, which may have more than one action as long as they all relate to the same subject.

In simple terms, the subject can be simple, as in Boys, or compound, as in Boys and girls.  The verb can simple, as in laugh, or compound, as in laugh and cry.  You cannot have two separate sets of subjects and verbs.  Therefore, Boys and girls laugh and cry is grammatically correct while Boys laugh and girls cry is incorrect.  Instead of the word and, you can use the conjunction while: Boys laugh while girls cry; Alternatively, you can use the word with and put the verb in the ing form: Boys laugh, with girls crying.    Finally, you can write two sentences: Boys laugh. Girls cry.  That is the stereotype of children’s reaction to violence.

So, the next time you write a sentence in an email or composition, make sure there are one subject and one verb.  If not, please make the changes and make your teacher/editor much happier!

The Future Is Obvious

Native language speakers, especially ESL teachers, quickly learn to identify non-native speakers.   Accent is less important than what is termed translation errors, meaning structures translated literally from the speaker’s native tongue.

A classic Hebrew speaker mistake is the use of the future tense in temporal clauses, i.e. after the words when, after, as soon as, etc.  Hebrew is a quite straight forward language regarding tenses.  When the meaning is in the future, you put the verb in the future.  By contrast, English avoids use of the future tense as much as possible, almost entirely limiting to the use in the independent clause, the main verb in the sentence.  Dependent parts are assumed to be in the same tense as the main verb and are thus written in the present simple.  Native speakers take this fact for granted, but English as a second language speakers often struggle with this tendency.

For example, in Hebrew, one would write .כאשר אבין את המאמר הזה, אסביר לך, with the two underlined verbs in the future, as compared to the English version:  When I understand this article, I will explain it to you.  The independent part of the sentence is the future, making it obvious that the whole sentence is in the future.

Isn’t that clear?

Present Perfect I

English with all of its tenses poses many learning problems for students, none of which are worse than that strange creature, the present perfect.  For those who were sleeping during that lesson, that is the tense that has the verb to have in the present tense followed by the V3 (or past participle), i.e. the sun has risen. 

The problem with this tense is that it only basically exists in English.  The French passé compose is really a past of completed action, as in J’ai vu le film.  In other words, the English past simple is its equivalent.  Russian, Hebrew, and Arabic, to name just a few, don’t even anything like it. 

This means that it is hard for English language learners to intuitively understand what it means while native English speakers never formally study it, absorbing it from the air.  I would suggest a comparative approach.  Examine the following three sentences:

a.      I ate hot chilies.

b.      I eat hot chilies.

c.       I have eaten hot chilies.

To confirm what you think, the first in the past simple;  the second in the present simple; and the third is in the present perfect.  The issue in hand is to define the difference between them.

a.      The first describes in a neutral fashion what you did in the past.  For example, someone wanted to know in which food contest you participated.   You indicate that you joined the chili eating contest (what hot fun!).

b.      This describes a habitual action.  For instance, if someone is preparing Kung Pao chicken, you explain that you have no problem with that.

c.       This describes something that is relevant NOW, no matter when you did it in the past.  For example, if your friend accuses you of being a wimp because you don’t like hot food, you feel attacked and defend yourself. 

As you can see, the present perfect in this meaning is an emotional statement about now: I have finished and I want to go home; I have seen the movie and can recommend it; I have eaten and am not hungry.  In this sense, the reader or listener will read a meaning into verb.

There is another use for the present perfect, but that is the subject of another blog.