Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums

[Philo Kevetch]

Lotus - I always enjoy your posts and have found them to be most instructive.

Given that there is no governing body for the English language, changes in accepted usage do occur over time. Perhaps "ain't", "he be", etc. will be acceptable in the future......?

However, I would suggest that you remind the readers of this forum that "more better" should not be used when taking (sitting) an exam, or in formal or academic discourse.

Philo

[lotus]

Thank you Philo. I appreciate your comments.

Hi Yinglish:

Keen observations by learner Tcxch. It has been my experience throughout:

...most learners attempt to learn a foreign language (especially English) through memorizing vocabulary and grammar rules. This approach is perhaps the longest and the most difficult of all. Students who do this and succeed in passing English exams are abundant, but also plenty of these students�at least in China where I am located�have a really tough time communicating with native speakers of English.

If we have a perfect knowledge of grammar but can hardly use it in conversation, the grammar is lifeless.

How often have we seen students pass all the tests with flying colors, yet be barely able to carry a conversation with someone in English?

I think one of the reasons why this forum is so popular is because students have the opportunity to get feedback from users of the language, not just instructors of the language. Experienced users of the language are often more in tune with the subtleties of the language than an objective instructor or a textbook.

Basic rules of the language are broken every day in conversational and even written English. Those who understand the language well know that these rules are really guidelines which can sometimes be judiciously broken to express oneself better. You'll occasionally see things like double negatives, redundancies, split infinitives, dangling prepositions, etc., from informal conversation to advanced writing. They're not "wrong." They're simply the best way to express what the person wanted to say or convey at the time. But, one should be fairly familiar with the rules before breaking them. When one is comfortable enough to break the rules, it usually means that he/she has a fairly good command of the English language. The rules of the language are there to guide us, not to constrain us.

The answers and presentations in this forum are often better than the way any textbook could explain them. That's because they come from real people with real experience on how they would use the language. Their responses are usually based on usage as well as grammar.

Novice learners - as well as intermediate and advanced learners - are lucky to be able to tap from the very diverse and talented pool of respondents in this forum. I must add that this is due to their kindness. It's truly an altruistic act. None of us are paid to help anonymous students. We do it (at least I do) because we enjoy it and it makes us feel good.


--lotus
_________________
War does not make one great --Yoda

[CP]

[lotus]

I don't have anything against anyone saying "more better" either. My way of saying things ain't no more superior than anybody else's.


--lotus
_________________
War does not make one great --Yoda

[asterix]

If you want to be thought ignorant and uneducated, go around saying MORE better, MORE superior, MORE bigger, MORE braver and more with any other comparative.
It is always ungrammatical English and can only legitimately be used in dialogue, or for comic effect.

[lotus]

Strange, I always thought that we should use the language and not have the language use us.

I remember a while back, there was a member of Dave's forum who was absolutely inscrutable. He knew a great deal about grammar and linguistics, and was absolutely unbending in his views on grammar and etymology. He put himself on a pedestal higher than the clouds. He fell just as far.

The English I was taught was a friendly English. After I learned the basics, I began to learn about the exceptions to the rule. It was then that I truly understood the language. An analogy would be Picasso. He could paint realistic portraits with the best of them. But, he challenged himself and went beyond the boundaries of the medium. He didn't let the medium use him. Instead, he manipulated and willed the medium to express his thoughts, ideas and emotions. The medium became part of him. That takes great skill.

No painting or words can express the way we truly feel. But, when something comes close, we say "Wow!" We are not Picasso, nor are we Shakespeare. But, we do have the canvas of English to help us communicate and express. English is an art. There are no axioms in English. That's because it is interpretive. We use it to express and interpret - with latitude in both. Grammar is simply a contrived structure used to help compose the canvas of English. Its framework is a reference for us to build on. Once we are familiar with the framework, we can tug and pull at its components to try to make it work for us. We can even try to change and expand the framework to fit our needs. Using the framework of English to express what we really want to say requires time, thought and sheer will. Advanced writers attempt to achieve this to no end. They understand that grammar is there to guide us, not to constrain us.

1) They have superior weapons. (ok)
2) Their weapons are superior. (more common)
3) Their weapons are far superior. (a little awkward)
4) Their weapons are superior, by far. (better)
5) Their weapons were far more superior than ours. (to the point)

I would choose #5 if I wanted to emphasize weapons superiority with relative comparison. Perhaps our framework might get bent a little, but I would've expressed myself a little better. And isn't that the reason why we use language in the first place?

Everyone's opinion is different. I welcome and respect that. It's all part of the jostling of the English language.


--lotus
_________________
War does not make one great --Yoda

[Eric Thompson]

Dear Nawee: Since this topic has become an event, let me add my vote: with CP and sticking with the traditional use of 'superior', which is already a comparative adjective. 'More superior' = 'more better' = a slap on the wrist. --Eric T

[nawee]

Dear All Contributors,

Once again, it seems that I have unintentionally sparked a debate. I am grateful for all your replies on this thread. You have all answered my original question.

My textbook grammar told me it should be "far superior", but "far more superior" sounds familiar to me and Google showed me that it was quite widely used. So I needed native speakers' take on this.

Thank you CP, Lorikeet, Philo and Asterix, for keeping my grammar in check.

Thank you Yinglish and Lotus for confirming that I wasn't imagining things when I thought that "far more superior" sounded quite familiar to me.

And I will remember to tell who ever asks me about this that, to be on the safe, use "far superior" and to reserve "far more superior" to informal and conversational English.

Thank you all,

Nawee

[Yinglish]

When you ask a question in Google search, the results can be amusing:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=What+is+the+meaning+of+superior%3F&btnG=Google+Search

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=How+much+wood+would+a+woodchuck+chuck+if+a+woodchuck+could+chuck+wood%3F&btnG=Google+Search

[asterix]

Their weapons are far more superior to ours may sound right to you, Lotus, but it is lousy grammar.
Your sally that we should use the language, and not let the language use us is a non-starter, just as a car without a driver is a non-starter.

[lotus]

Hi Nawee,

Your comments are nice. Don't be shy in continuing your great questions.


--lotus
_________________
War does not make one great --Yoda

[Swim4life]