Page 1 of 3
Adult native English speakers do not commit errors in usage
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 9:39 am
by metal56
I keep hearing "adult native English speakers do not commit errors in usage".
Do you agree with that "quote"?
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:01 am
by jotham
If true, we can rid the world of highly paid editors.
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 12:31 pm
by metal56
jotham wrote:If true, we can rid the world of highly paid editors.
Were would we send 'em?
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 1:43 pm
by jotham
To linguistics school, so we can indoctrinate them about the real deal, of course.
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 3:19 pm
by metal56
jotham wrote:To linguistics school, so we can indoctrinate them about the real deal, of course.
It'd serve them right.
Re: Adult native English speakers do not commit errors in us
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 4:10 pm
by Miss Elenious
metal56 wrote:I keep hearing "adult native English speakers do not commit errors in usage".
Do you agree with that "quote"?
I don't know about native English speakers but native Greek speakers certainly do: errors in tenses, collocations, spelling... But, to err is human. Have the English gone a step further?
Where do you 'keep hearing' such quotes?
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 4:13 pm
by Miss Elenious
oh yes, I wanted to ask you something else...is there a difference between a native Greek speaker and a Greek native speaker. Is the second ungrammatical?
native Greek speaker and Greek native speaker?
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 10:32 pm
by azamouri
if we consider the grammatical rules, especially the order of adjectives modifying a noun, we can say that the second is ungrammatical. However, if we focus on their meaning, so there is a little difference: the first phrase [b]native Greek speaker[/b] can mean: [i]the speaker who speaks Greek is native[/i] but the second can mean [i]the native speaker is Greek[/i].
Abdelhak,
Re: Adult native English speakers do not commit errors in us
Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 7:01 am
by metal56
Miss Elenious wrote:
I don't know about native English speakers but native Greek speakers certainly do: errors in tenses, collocations, spelling... But, to err is human. Have the English gone a step further?
I don't think so.
Where do you 'keep hearing' such quotes?
All over language fora - and mostly from native speakers.
Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 7:07 am
by metal56
Miss Elenious wrote:oh yes, I wanted to ask you something else...is there a difference between a native Greek speaker and a Greek native speaker. Is the second ungrammatical?
Greek native speaker = the person is probably born into a Greek family and speaks Greek.
native Greek speaker = he/she speaks the Greek of Greece.
There are more possibilities of course.
Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 7:22 am
by metal56
if we consider the grammatical rules, especially the order of adjectives modifying a noun, we can say that the second is ungrammatical.
The "rule" about the order of adjectives is not a rule, it is only a guideline.
Native Greek/English/Spanish, etc. are the forms of a language originated in a certain area.
In your
order of adjectives, that would be native (origin) + noun (Greek).
Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2007 3:50 am
by womblingfree
Everyone makes errors in language usage whether through laziness, abbreviation, vernacular, coloquialism, slang, whatever.
You could argue that if it's being spoken by a native or non-native speaker and becomes a regular part of use then it's not a mistake anyway just a variation.
Spoken language often bears little resemblance to written structure.
Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:44 am
by jotham
womblingfree wrote:Spoken language often bears little resemblance to written structure.
True. But at the same time, spoken language often bears much resemblance to written structure, especially in literate societies. Both statements are true.
Not that this had anything to do with the flow of the thread...
Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:12 am
by metal56
But at the same time, spoken language often bears much resemblance to written structure, especially in literate societies.
!!! Do you have any examples of such?
Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:56 am
by jotham
I don't have any specific examples since it's a general influence. Well-developed writing has a conservative effect on language; compared to societies lacking such a literary tradition. I'm surprised you never heard this.
This site may have a little bit on it.
The permanent nature of print also led to the preservation of language. The mass dissemination of printed texts meant both fixity and standardization of content (Eisentsein, 1983).
Print arrested linguistic drift, standardized language, and eventually led to the deliberate codification of written language.