| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
johnslat
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 13859
Location: Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2011 1:44 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Dear sporal78,
You might could be right (Midwest)  .
Regards,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
spiral78
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 11534
Location: On a Short Leash
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2011 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dear John:
Holy Two-headed Modal Monsters!!
Another 'difference' that hasn't yet appeared in the grammar books!
cau
spiral |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2011 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Doesn't anyone else still subscribe to the notion that different grammar means a different language altogether? (Apart from certain regionalisms, that is, which don't really deviate too much from what the majority would say.) Where is there an English speaker who uses accusative suffixes? Or uses an VSO sentence structure? Where are the genders for all English noun forms? Agglutination? Where is the number beyond singular or plural?
Maybe I'm being an old fogey... But I truly believe that teachers who claim that their version of English uses 'different grammar' are overstating the case for reasons very little to do with linguistics, but more to do with the political need to be 'exceptional' a la a certain Noah Webster. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MotherF
Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1450
Location: 17�48'N 97�46'W
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2011 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sashadroogie wrote: |
Maybe I'm being an old fogey... But I truly believe that teachers who claim that their version of English uses 'different grammar' are overstating the case for reasons very little to do with linguistics, but more to do with the political need to be 'exceptional' a la a certain Noah Webster. |
I completely agree. But I did work with a guy who did his MA thesis on Middle Tennesse English. He also was in the habit of using the past particple as the simple past of certain irregular verbs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Cheers MotherF. Good to hear I am not alone. Or imagining these things.
As for your colleague from Tennessee - he done and seen stuff? Quite a typical colloquialism, and certainly not exclusive to any one region. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HLJHLJ
Joined: 06 Oct 2009
Posts: 1218
Location: Ecuador
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The only thing I can think of off hand is variations in 2nd person pronouns in the UK. So in parts of North West England there is an informal second person plural 'youse', and in parts of Yorkshire some people still use thou/thee/thine.
Also, in parts of Yorkshire, and possibly also South West England, people sometimes talk about themselves in 3rd person using their name rather than a pronoun. That takes a little getting used to, but again, I would hardly classify it as a different grammar system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spiral78
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 11534
Location: On a Short Leash
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| So in parts of North West England there is an informal second person plural 'youse', and in parts of Yorkshire some people still use thou/thee/thine. |
These appear in the English of New Jersey and the Amish country, respectively, on our side  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jonniboy
Joined: 18 Jun 2006
Posts: 751
Location: Panama City, Panama
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HLJHLJ wrote: |
| The only thing I can think of off hand is variations in 2nd person pronouns in the UK. So in parts of North West England there is an informal second person plural 'youse', and in parts of Yorkshire some people still use thou/thee/thine. |
Scotland and Northern Ireland too. I would use "youse" with my family and friends from Belfast as it's clearer who I'm talking to but had to get out of the habit of using it when I moved to London. We'd also use "ye" in some colloquial contexts in N.I. ("What about ye? Are ye well?")
I've also noticed that people from Belfast use went as the past participle of go. "We should have went there earlier."
While these quirks are interesting, students don't need to know them unless they're planning on living in the region in question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zero
Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 1402
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Or uses an VSO sentence structure |
Well there's Yoda ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zero
Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 1402
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| spiral78 wrote: |
If we want to assume different grammars, there is certainly something that could be termed 'different grammar' in some parts of the US - though I'd tend to call it 'uneducated' or 'common' English and simply consider it officially unrecognised structures, which should not be used in most contexts.
For example, in the Southeast one can encounter yet another tense structure, the 'fixin' to future.' It's not a corruption of 'going to.' 'Going to' involves plans, which can be at basically any future point. 'Fixin' to' means that I'm just beginning the motions required to accomplish something.
Picture: 'Maw, whur's thet-thar beer you was gonna git me?' 'I'm fixin' t go t the kichen raht now, Paw.' ....as Maw puts her hands on the armrests of the chair and gets ready to rise to her feet and shuffle off refridgerator-wards.
I wouldn't suggest that this should be dignified with the appelation of 'different grammar'. It's clearly just a regional quirk, IMO. If it ever appears in some grammar book, perhaps designed for Asian students planning to study in Birmingham or Atlanta, I'll be sorely disappointed in the ESL coursebook system. |
Why look down on it? This is linguistic diversity and, despite the stigma, it is as valid a form of expression as Tom Brokaw English. It's not only uneducated people who speak this way. Lots of educated people choose to hang onto their native way of speaking, as it is an identity marker.
Lots of black people all throughout the U.S. use this way of speaking, also, if they speak African American Vernacular English. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jonniboy
Joined: 18 Jun 2006
Posts: 751
Location: Panama City, Panama
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Zero wrote: |
| spiral78 wrote: |
| I wouldn't suggest that this should be dignified with the appelation of 'different grammar'. It's clearly just a regional quirk, IMO. If it ever appears in some grammar book, perhaps designed for Asian students planning to study in Birmingham or Atlanta, I'll be sorely disappointed in the ESL coursebook system. |
Why look down on it? This is linguistic diversity and, despite the stigma, it is as valid a form of expression as Tom Brokaw English. It's not only uneducated people who speak this way. Lots of educated people choose to hang onto their native way of speaking, as it is an identity marker.
Lots of black people all throughout the U.S. use this way of speaking, also, if they speak African American Vernacular English. |
I don't think it's a case of looking down on it, it's just that there's a time and place for everything. A.A.V.E. is perfectly valid in an American city with a predominantly Afro-American population but the average class of students in a European classroom is unlikely to visit those places where it's spoken and therefore devoting classroom time to explaining such nuances is generally a waste of the learners time and money. I do use aspects of Hiberno-English with friends and family but wouldn't teach them to a learner who's planning to move there, though I might point out that they're likely to hear certain words pronounced in certain ways. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
