 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Languages Forum » correcting my son's grammar?... |
|
Page 8 of 10 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Oliver Cromm... |
 Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:03 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
* Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenbaum at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
[quote]And if brought an error to his attention
("Bringed?") he would immediately see that it needed correcting and
often supply the right form.
[/quote]
"Bringed"? My son and his best friend always say "brang". And I doubt he
can supply the usual form.
--
die gugelmänner schleppen leichen, kranke LILIENCRON
GRIMM, Deutsches Wörterbuch |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Evan Kirshenbaum... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:38 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Oliver Cromm <lispamateur at (no spam) yahoo.de> writes:
[quote]* Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenbaum at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
And if brought an error to his attention ("Bringed?") he would
immediately see that it needed correcting and often supply the
right form.
"Bringed"? My son and his best friend always say "brang". And I
doubt he can supply the usual form.
[/quote]
Josh tended (and still does occasionally) to overregularize irregular
verbs rather than pick the wrong irregular form. So "bringed",
"catched", "buyed", and the like. "Brang" never seemed to be common
among his cohort, either when he was little or now.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |It's like grasping the difference
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |between what one usually considers
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |a 'difficult' problem, and what
|*is* a difficult problem. The day
kirshenbaum at (no spam) hpl.hp.com |one understands *why* counting all
(650)857-7572 |the molecules in the Universe isn't
|difficult...there's the leap.
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | Tina Marie Holmboe |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:43 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 29, 1:38 pm, Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb... at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
[quote]Oliver Cromm <lispamat... at (no spam) yahoo.de> writes:
* Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb... at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
And if brought an error to his attention ("Bringed?") he would
immediately see that it needed correcting and often supply the
right form.
"Bringed"? My son and his best friend always say "brang". And I
doubt he can supply the usual form.
Josh tended (and still does occasionally) to overregularize irregular
verbs rather than pick the wrong irregular form. So "bringed",
"catched", "buyed", and the like. "Brang" never seemed to be common
among his cohort, either when he was little or now.
[/quote]
I think "brung" is more common than "brang" -- because of that
principle I mentioned that pasts are reanalyzed as participles rather
than preterites, as in "I played the piano" : "I rung the bell." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Oliver Cromm... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:10 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
* Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenbaum at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
[quote]Oliver Cromm <lispamateur at (no spam) yahoo.de> writes:
* Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenbaum at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
And if brought an error to his attention ("Bringed?") he would
immediately see that it needed correcting and often supply the
right form.
"Bringed"? My son and his best friend always say "brang". And I
doubt he can supply the usual form.
[/quote]
They are almost 8, by the way.
[quote]Josh tended (and still does occasionally) to overregularize irregular
verbs rather than pick the wrong irregular form. So "bringed",
"catched", "buyed", and the like. "Brang" never seemed to be common
among his cohort, either when he was little or now.
[/quote]
Indeed the interesting aspect of my observation seems to be that some
unconventional forms might be reinforced by children among themselves. I
only noticed that about vocabulary before.
Another candidate for that might be "mines" ("you bring yours and I
bring mines") - I thought that was a Germanism until I heard it from his
EFL friend.
This is of course just an informal impression, I would like to see more
solid data about that.
--
da kamen abermals in das Elsas uber die Zaberer steig ein volck, die
nante man auch die Engelländer und gugeler B. HERTZOG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 5:37 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 29, 10:04 pm, John Atkinson <johna... at (no spam) bigpond.com> wrote:
[quote]Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Oct 29, 1:38 pm, Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb... at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
Oliver Cromm <lispamat... at (no spam) yahoo.de> writes:
* Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb... at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
And if brought an error to his attention ("Bringed?") he would
immediately see that it needed correcting and often supply the
right form.
"Bringed"? My son and his best friend always say "brang". And I
doubt he can supply the usual form.
Josh tended (and still does occasionally) to overregularize irregular
verbs rather than pick the wrong irregular form. So "bringed",
"catched", "buyed", and the like. "Brang" never seemed to be common
among his cohort, either when he was little or now.
I think "brung" is more common than "brang" -- because of that
principle I mentioned that pasts are reanalyzed as participles rather
than preterites, as in "I played the piano" : "I rung the bell."
Are there dialects that have bring/brung/brung, in just this verb, as
[/quote]
I doubt it.
[quote]opposed to the widespread tendency to replace every strong past with the
participle form when it's different? I know that there are many
dialects that have bring/brang/brung, both in the USA and Britain,
though I don't know offhand which ones they are, and of course don't
know whether one of them is spoken where Oliver's child and his friends
might have picked it up (as opposed to it being a personal innovation by
them).[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| John Atkinson... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 8:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
[quote]On Oct 29, 1:38 pm, Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb... at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
Oliver Cromm <lispamat... at (no spam) yahoo.de> writes:
* Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb... at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
And if brought an error to his attention ("Bringed?") he would
immediately see that it needed correcting and often supply the
right form.
"Bringed"? My son and his best friend always say "brang". And I
doubt he can supply the usual form.
Josh tended (and still does occasionally) to overregularize irregular
verbs rather than pick the wrong irregular form. So "bringed",
"catched", "buyed", and the like. "Brang" never seemed to be common
among his cohort, either when he was little or now.
I think "brung" is more common than "brang" -- because of that
principle I mentioned that pasts are reanalyzed as participles rather
than preterites, as in "I played the piano" : "I rung the bell."
Are there dialects that have bring/brung/brung, in just this verb, as[/quote]
opposed to the widespread tendency to replace every strong past with the
participle form when it's different? I know that there are many
dialects that have bring/brang/brung, both in the USA and Britain,
though I don't know offhand which ones they are, and of course don't
know whether one of them is spoken where Oliver's child and his friends
might have picked it up (as opposed to it being a personal innovation by
them).
John. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Joachim Pense... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 12:10 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
John Atkinson (in sci.lang):
[quote]Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Oct 29, 1:38 pm, Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb... at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
Oliver Cromm <lispamat... at (no spam) yahoo.de> writes:
* Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb... at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
And if brought an error to his attention ("Bringed?") he would
immediately see that it needed correcting and often supply the
right form.
"Bringed"? My son and his best friend always say "brang". And I
doubt he can supply the usual form.
Josh tended (and still does occasionally) to overregularize irregular
verbs rather than pick the wrong irregular form. So "bringed",
"catched", "buyed", and the like. "Brang" never seemed to be common
among his cohort, either when he was little or now.
I think "brung" is more common than "brang" -- because of that
principle I mentioned that pasts are reanalyzed as participles rather
than preterites, as in "I played the piano" : "I rung the bell."
Are there dialects that have bring/brung/brung, in just this verb, as
opposed to the widespread tendency to replace every strong past with the
participle form when it's different? I know that there are many
dialects that have bring/brang/brung, both in the USA and Britain,
though I don't know offhand which ones they are, and of course don't
know whether one of them is spoken where Oliver's child and his friends
might have picked it up (as opposed to it being a personal innovation by
them).
[/quote]
Interesting; there are west-middle-German dialects that have bringen -
gebrungen (no past tense in that area) instead of bringen - gebracht.
Joachim |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Chuck Riggs... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:38 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:19:42 +0000, Adam Funk <a24061 at (no spam) ducksburg.com>
wrote:
[quote]On 2009-10-28, tony cooper wrote:
There was a time when Catholic women were expected to cover their
heads when attending Mass. It was not uncommon to see a woman who had
forgotten her hat or scarf with a Kleenex atop her head. It was a
particularly amusing sight when beehive hairdos were popular.
I may have mentioned this previously in AUE, but I know who went to a
Roman Catholic school, was very good in maths, and occasionally
muddled words; she once said her mother wore a "mantissa" to mass.
[/quote]
Carrying a pocket calculator should be enough, today.
--
Regards,
Chuck Riggs,
An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Amethyst Deceiver... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 4:33 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:08:37 +0000, Nick
<3-nospam at (no spam) temporary-address.org.uk> wrote:
[quote]Adam Funk <a24061 at (no spam) ducksburg.com> writes:
On 2009-10-26, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
Children _understand_ "irregular" inflections before they can
_produce_ them.
ISTR reading that children understand lots of linguistic phenomena
before they can produce them, including phonemes that they can't
articulate yet. I came across examples (in a book by David Crystal, I
think, but I'm not certain) in which a small child mispronounces a
word, then gets annoyed when the parent repeats the mispronunciation
and says "No, I said ____!" with the same mispronunciation.
"My fiss".
[/quote]
Doesn't he also give the "wok/rock" example - child can't pronounce r
but when parent talks about finding a 'wok' in the garden, child is
cross because while he can't pronounce the difference, he can still
hear it.
"Listen to your child", I think the book is. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Amethyst Deceiver... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 4:33 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:46:55 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
<grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 26, 7:10 pm, Alan Munn <am... at (no spam) msu.edu> wrote:
In article
be4901d8-f8c9-4339-8a02-6413a40ef... at (no spam) u16g2000pru.googlegroups.com>,
"Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
No, it doesn't, because no child would or could say "When did your
brother hitted you?", because any child who can make do-support
questions knows that do-support operates on the infinitive, not on the
preterite.
Not completely true. With irregular verbs, (and even some regulars)
these kinds of errors definitely arise. Here are some real examples
from the Brown corpus (Adam, Age (in the cited examples) 3;4 - 3;10, Eve
2;2, Sarah 4;5-5;0)
Of course I agree with the general sentiment that the child will figure
it out her own. Somehow, given the disappearance of the OP, I wonder if
this is simply a troll.
Alan
Yes/No questions:
*** File "adam29.cha": line 1261. Keyword: did
*CHI: oh (.) did I caught it ?
*** File "adam30.cha": line 2207. Keyword: did
*CHI: did you broke that part ?
*** File "adam31.cha": line 3423. Keyword: did
*CHI: did the milk broke ?
*** File "adam31.cha": line 3810. Keyword: did
*CHI: did you made a mistake ?
And with wh-questions:
*** File "adam36.cha": line 4637. Keyword: did
*CHI: what movie did I saw ?
*** File "eve17.cha": line 4506. Keywords: did, did
*CHI: what did you doed [: did] [* +ed] ?
*** File "sarah111.cha": line 110. Keyword: did
*CHI: how did I untangled it ?
*** File "sarah127.cha": line 1449. Keyword: did
*CHI: how did you caught him ?
And some even wackier ones:
*** File "adam34.cha": line 2001. Keyword: did
*CHI: did was it be a comb ?
*** File "adam39.cha": line 1404. Keyword: did
*CHI: did there be some ?
*** File "adam39.cha": line 1407. Keyword: did
*CHI: did it be there ?-
That's one weird kid.
[/quote]
Pretty normal, in my experience. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Oliver Cromm... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:32 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
* John Atkinson <johnacko at (no spam) bigpond.com> wrote:
[quote]Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Oct 29, 1:38 pm, Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb... at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
Oliver Cromm <lispamat... at (no spam) yahoo.de> writes:
* Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb... at (no spam) hpl.hp.com> wrote:
And if brought an error to his attention ("Bringed?") he would
immediately see that it needed correcting and often supply the
right form.
"Bringed"? My son and his best friend always say "brang". And I
doubt he can supply the usual form.
Josh tended (and still does occasionally) to overregularize irregular
verbs rather than pick the wrong irregular form. So "bringed",
"catched", "buyed", and the like. "Brang" never seemed to be common
among his cohort, either when he was little or now.
I think "brung" is more common than "brang" -- because of that
principle I mentioned that pasts are reanalyzed as participles rather
than preterites, as in "I played the piano" : "I rung the bell."
Are there dialects that have bring/brung/brung, in just this verb, as
opposed to the widespread tendency to replace every strong past with the
participle form when it's different? I know that there are many
dialects that have bring/brang/brung, both in the USA and Britain,
though I don't know offhand which ones they are, and of course don't
know whether one of them is spoken where Oliver's child and his friends
might have picked it up (as opposed to it being a personal innovation by
them).
[/quote]
That's a possibility of course. I haven't noticed it in adults around
here (Montreal, Quebec), but then, I don't have contact with that many
native speakers of English. Especially my son's friend, being a native
speaker himself, will have a broader exposure to dialects.
--
es sol kain leitgeb eim paurnknecht nicht mer parigen
dann sein gurtelgewant, ... swert und gugel wert ist
österr. weist. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 5:36 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 5, 10:27 am, Adam Funk <a24... at (no spam) ducksburg.com> wrote:
[quote]On 2009-10-29, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Oct 29, 10:15 am, Adam Funk <a24... at (no spam) ducksburg.com> wrote:
On 2009-10-28, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
Or that dropping a final stop isn't just a French bizarrerie? It's
normal in AAVE.
Are these omissions over time considered to be derived from issues
like that in child language acquisition?
Well, "over time" _every_ change has something to do with language
acquisition: it's simply the constant battle between ease of
articulation and difficulty of comprehension.
I can see that for many types of language change, but not all of them.
Ease of *articulation* doesn't explain the issue that started this
thread ("me and Bob did it" vs "Bob and I did it") --- I guess you
could say that something like "ease of syntactic generation" is
driving that?
[/quote]
Analogy?
[quote]Of course, such arguments provide ammunitition to those who argue that
dropping phonemes and making these grammatical errors (prescriptively
speaking) result from "laziness".
[/quote]
A condition that affects every speaker in the world, no matter their
industriousness. It is at every step confronted by intelligibility. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:38 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 5, 11:22 am, Alan Munn <am... at (no spam) msu.edu> wrote:
[quote][1] I'm using subject here purely syntactically: in "The army destroyed
the city", "the army" is the subject and in "The city was destroyed by
the army", "the city" is the subject. By analogy, in "the army's
destruction of the city", "the army" is the 'subject' of the noun
phrase, and in "the city's destruction by the army", "the city" is the
subject. Feel free to replace this term with one more to your liking,
such as "Possessor", as I'm not interested in debating this point.
[/quote]
Noun phrases don't have subjects. If they did, they'd be verb phrases. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:46 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 5, 12:40 pm, Alan Munn <am... at (no spam) msu.edu> wrote:
[quote]In article
16e5c591-e126-45d3-99fb-35123a811... at (no spam) m35g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>,
"Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
On Nov 5, 11:22 am, Alan Munn <am... at (no spam) msu.edu> wrote:
[1] I'm using subject here purely syntactically: in "The army destroyed
the city", "the army" is the subject and in "The city was destroyed by
the army", "the city" is the subject. By analogy, in "the army's
destruction of the city", "the army" is the 'subject' of the noun
phrase, and in "the city's destruction by the army", "the city" is the
subject. Feel free to replace this term with one more to your liking,
such as "Possessor", as I'm not interested in debating this point.
Noun phrases don't have subjects. If they did, they'd be verb phrases.
What part of "I'm not interested in debating this point" did you not
understand?
[/quote]
(a) Your apparent sole purpose in your occasional postings to sci.lang
is to use technical terms in ways that are not known to other
linguists.
(b) I believe that what you did is called a "pseudo-sorites" -- you
state that you are not interested in discussing some statement that
you set forth in considerable detail. Along the lines of Smith saying
"I am not going to claim that my opponent Jones is an alcoholic! I am
not going to state that Jones is seen to come staggering out of
watering holes at closing time nearly every night!"
(c) Then why did you respond? _Other_ people may be interested in
setting forth criteria for various linguistic categories, even if
you're not interested in defending your unorthodox uses of them. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Adam Funk... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 10:27 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 2009-10-29, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
[quote]On Oct 29, 10:15Â am, Adam Funk <a24... at (no spam) ducksburg.com> wrote:
On 2009-10-28, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
Or that dropping a final stop isn't just a French bizarrerie? It's
normal in AAVE.
Are these omissions over time considered to be derived from issues
like that in child language acquisition?
Well, "over time" _every_ change has something to do with language
acquisition: it's simply the constant battle between ease of
articulation and difficulty of comprehension.
[/quote]
I can see that for many types of language change, but not all of them.
Ease of *articulation* doesn't explain the issue that started this
thread ("me and Bob did it" vs "Bob and I did it") --- I guess you
could say that something like "ease of syntactic generation" is
driving that?
Of course, such arguments provide ammunitition to those who argue that
dropping phonemes and making these grammatical errors (prescriptively
speaking) result from "laziness".
--
History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of
urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.
(Thurgood Marshall) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:13 am
|
|