It operates like many other auxiliary verbs, verbs which are sometimes called conditionals, but which we will call modal verbs. Examples of other modal verbs are can, may, should, or must.
Examples of modal verbs are: can, will, could, shall, must, would, might, and should.
We should list out the different types of verb and words used with examples for class. Easier to access and take look at so that we can reference it. I am starting to create a list of these.
May add to glossary as well.
Looking at these forms, the future seems very different While the present and the past are formed synthetically, that is by means of an inflection, the future is formed analytically, that is by means of an auxiliary verb.
In class we should definitely discuss this part. I am confused to what this section of the paragraph is talking about..
TenseExamplePresentwalksPastwalkedFuturewill walk
This category is much easier to understand and follow through. Suggestion is to use these types of tables and diagrams.
Form used in the present tense: ________________Form used in the past tense: ________________Form used in the future tense: ________________
(present tense): walking (past tense): has walked (future tense): would walk
Can we use would for future tense and has for past tense in this case?
For example, in a sentence like (1), there are two verbs, has and eaten, in the same phrase (1) Jonathan has eaten my sandwich The verb has in this sentence is a member of a subset of verbs called auxiliaryverbs.[1]
Suggestion: Indicate the example and correction in two separate lines. Bunching them up together is confusing.
So it could look something like this:
For example, in a sentence like (1), there are two verbs, has and eaten, in the same phrase.
(1) Jonathan has eaten my sandwich.
The verb has in this sentence is a member of a subset of verbs called auxiliary verbs.[1]
(8a) *The President’s of Liberia mistake
Maybe when giving examples of mistakes, underlining or just putting this in () may be easier to help us see the difference.
1.One-noun NPs, e.g., John, students,2.Determinative + N, e.g., that book, Alison’s divorce,3.Determinative + modifier + N, e.g., the unpleasant boy,4.Determinative + N + modifier, e.g., the dog on the sofa.
This is great way to explain, adding more of these types would help.
Heads and Projection
Can we get few examples of heads and projections even though there are examples added in the above, and also what does "percolation" mean?
Notes
After reviewing this chapter, I have a few questions and suggestions.
Questions/Suggestions:
I understood the sections but, I feel that if there were more examples and simplified sections would be great to easily understand. Some of the sections are very long, so maybe breaking them up and adding other examples would help.
Another thing is adding some counter examples and perhaps showing how this section is different from other syntax's like British and American can help me or others really better understand.
My questions are I understood the maximal projection, but I am still not understanding some parts of the chapter due to the amount of information is being thrown.
proper vs. common nouns, and count vs. non-count nouns.
We can keep in mind of these two examples of nouns.
Definition: Common nouns name any person, place, thing, or idea. They are not capitalized unless they come at the beginning of a sentence. Proper nouns are the names of specific people, places, things, or ideas. Proper nouns should always be capitalized.
This website is a great example to refer to:
https://www.englishgrammar101.com/module-1/nouns/lesson-2/common-and-proper-nouns
[2] In some grammar books, you will find verb-phrase adjuncts called adverbials. This label is meant to express the traditional notion that such prepositional phrases and other constituents function in the same roles that adverbs do, while keeping distinct the form (AdvP, PP, etc.) from the function (adverbial). Although the desire to distinguish form and function is sound, I don’t use the term because in practice I have found that the similarity in form between adverb and adverbial produces continuing confusion.
Can we go over this in class? I understood the concept but, I am a little confused with this whole section.
subject complements,
I like this definition, we should add it in the Glossary:
A subject complement is a word or phrase that follows a linking verb and identifies or describes the subject.
(Note: A linking verb is a verb used to link a subject to a new identity or description. Common examples are to be, to become, to appear, to feel, to look, to smell, and to taste.)
From: https://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/subject_complement.htm
adverbials.
of, relating to, or having the function of an adverb an adverbial phrase,
from: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/adverbial
I like this definition more, it makes sense and easy to follow.
(7b) *Margaret slept her bed.
How come it is not said this way: Margaret slept on her bed.
As we proceed, take note of when we are discussing form and when we are discussing function.
That is important, and let us keep this in mind.
grammatical roles
I am confused with this phrase.We should discuss this in class,, and how that relates to this section, and what it is trying to say..
clause
A clause is a constituent consisting of two parts: a subject and a predicate.
Take a moment to study this diagram. We will refine it later with additional details, but it’s important that you recognize what information it’s trying to communicate. It shows that the whole noun phrase contains three parts: a determiner, the, the head noun, agreement, and a prepositional phrase, between the boards of the two companies. In turn, that prepositional phrase consists of its head word, between and a noun phrase, the boards of the two companies. That noun phrase contains yet another prepositional phrase, of the two companies, which contains its own noun phrase, the two companies. That’s what we mean when we say that phrase structure is hierarchical: one phrase can contain another phrase inside it.
This paragraph is using the diagram above to explain it. I am very lost. I think we should go over all of the diagrams. Perhaps some examples may help us.
damn
weird question but, curse words are interjections?
The technical term for this pointing function is deixis.
what are they referring to?
ordinal (first, second, third, etc.)
can we can that these are procedural in which it does not contain numbers, example with cardinal..
cardinal (one, two, three, etc.)
using numbers, so writing numbers in sentences. example as given..
preposition
I couldn't find a good definition, but we should take a look at this, and add it to the dictionary.
?
Correction.
‘s for singular nouns, s’ for plural ones
This can also be a review, and we can add it to the dictionary. Can you elaborate? So, using -s', -'s, and -s, -es.
For now, here’s a brief overview.
Where does "who" and "whom" fall under? Maybe this can be something added. Also, another thing is "I" and "Me".
So, My friend and I or Me and My friend etc.. And, example with whom and who, with whom are you speaking to or who are you speaking to..
(8a) *Brown’s denunciationed of the need to memorize grammatical definitions.(8b) *Brown’s can denunciation of the need to memorize grammatical definitions.(8c) *Brown’s denunciation the need to memorize grammatical definitions.
These sentences to me seems like it is grammatically correct, but then again each of these sentences has a different way of which they are categorized.
antecedents.
definition: a substantive word, phrase, or clause whose denotation is referred to by a pronoun that typically follows the substantive (such as John in "Mary saw John and called to him")
(taken from merriam webster dictionary)
auxiliary verb
definition: : a verb (such as have, be, may, do, shall, will, can, or must) that is used with another verb to show the verb's tense, to form a question, etc.
(taken from merriam-webster dictionary)
A grammar school.
We should also include the parts of speech, and here are a few:
Antecendent: a substantive word, phrase, or clause whose denotation is referred to by a pronoun that typically follows the substantive (such as John in "Mary saw John and called to him")
Noun: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noun we can check out this link, it talks about also collective nouns, and other forms of nouns.
to be
Capitalization
(4) !Whom shall I say is calling?
Alot of people use May I, Please, and Whom, and these similar types of words or phrases in their everyday life. I feel that the way they speak, shows in many ways where they came from and how they were influenced to speak. Common courtesy phrases also involve Sir, Madam..
For a prescriptivist, deciding that an utterance is ungrammatical is the first step in eliminating error. For a descriptivist, observing what native speakers do not do gives important clues to understanding the tacit rules of the language.
Something important to consider.
Pronunciation in particular can be a continuing source of difficulty, even when the speaker is otherwise fluent.
I agree with this because I speak Bengali and know some Hindi, but when I try to pronounce certain words, or even letters, I have an accent. I am so use to English, that when I speak in another language it takes time to really master the pronunciation.
I find the advanced units particularly useful for two purposes: first, they give you guidance in dealing with certain difficult questions that more advanced or curious students tend to bring up. Second, they provide additional training in how to evaluate and revise our prior theories when we’re confronted with evidence that complicates the story. It’s important to realize that this more detailed material is almost certainly inappropriate for direct use with younger students.
The last statement, I am asking, how so? How does it make it inappropriate for direct use with students?
Although not the work’s main focus, I also devote some attention to considering how these grammatical topics appear on standardized tests such as the SAT and the ACT.
Continuing on, I do feel that even state exams have a certain way of how they use grammar. I think this idea is important to explore, and would be interesting to learn about those forms.
Languages do not all employ morphology to a similar extent.
Question: how valuable/useful is morphology? Are we using this in our class? I am a little confused with this paragraph.
Not only does every language have syntax, but similar syntactic principles are found over and over again in languages. Word order is strikingly similar in English, Swahili, and Thai (which are utterly unrelated); sentences in Irish are remarkably parallel to those in Maori, Maasai, and ancient Egyptian (also unrelated); and so on.
Great example is two different languages, for example, I noticed that certain sentences when translated into another language sounds very different, and sometimes the meaning gets lost.
For example, all languages have principles for constructing sentences that ask questions needing a yes or no answer, e.g. Can you hear me?, questions inviting some other kind of answer, e.g. What did you see?, sentences that express commands, e.g. Eat your potatoes!, and sentences that make assertions, e.g. Whales eat plankton.
Really reminds me of how we speak. Some people uses polite phrases which I call them. For example, "May you pass me the spoon" vs "Give me the spoon". Sometimes our upbringings impacts us to how we speak.
Is English falling apart, then, as some prescriptivists claimed in their efforts to help mend it? Well, the descriptivists' answer is that English is indeed changing, as it must, but that such change is not debilitating. In fact, English is now changing in exactly the same ways that have contributed to making it the rich, flexible, and adaptable language so popular throughout the world today. Living languages must change, must adapt, must grow. Shakespeare could not have understood Chaucer without study, nor Chaucer the Beowulf poet. Whether change is good or bad is not the question, descriptivists say, for change is inevitable. The only languages no longer in flux are those no longer in use. The job of grammarians is to describe language as it exists in real use. This includes describing the positive and negative values attached to different ways of speaking.
This now definitely reminds of English 272. I think that part of it is also that every Professor will always have their own style and beliefs of how they think what is appropriate and not. Along with the materials they decide to teach and cover. It's important that students should also have a chance and choice of what kinds of materials they would like to learn...
As to 'between you and me' and 'between you and I', descriptivists would note that both are used by educated speakers, though the latter seldom appears in edited writing. Prescriptivists would argue that, despite educated usage, pronouns should have objective forms after prepositions ("Give it to me/us/them"); thus, only 'between you and me' is correct.
Another great example.
By contrast, prescriptive grammarians would argue that 'go slowly' is the only correct grammatical form on the grounds that it is useful to distinguish the forms of adverbs and adjectives, and 'slow' is the only adjective form (a slow train), so 'slowly' should serve as the sole adverb form
This is a great example, of explaining which expressions are actually in use.
Because languages naturally adapt to their situations of use and also reflect the social identities of their speakers, linguistic variation is inevitable and natural. But given diverse forms, meanings, and uses, dictionary makers and grammarians must choose what to include in their works—whose language to represent and for use in which kinds of situations?
Why can't we just use any form of language? Also, we should discuss about "English vs english". (Reminded me of English 272).
Tom was happy and warm
physically, emotionally,=might be the opposite of happy and warm, despite the hard long hours of cleaning chimney's...
So if all do their duty, they need not fear harm.
they are working hard=no harm, they will end up like Dick, Joe, Ned, and Jack.
Then down a green plain, leaping, laughing, they run,And wash in a river and shine in the Sun.
heaven, the angel take them to paradise.
coffins of black
coffins of black=darkness, devil, evil, emptiness, death,
Dick, Joe, Ned, and Jack,
chimney sweepers, all inside a black coffin
lamb’
lamb= innocent, naive and young
curled like a lamb’s back
So his friends hair was curly, and they shaved his hair because it won't bother him when he sleeps in the soot?
‘weep! ‘weep! ‘weep! ‘weep!
So, the young boy's father sold him to a person who cleans chimney's before he was able to speak, so that suggests when he was very young.
soot
noun a black powdery or flaky substance consisting largely of amorphous carbon, produced by the incomplete burning of organic matter.
There would be no one to live for during those coming years; she would live for herself. There would be no powerful will bending hers in that blind persistence with which men and women believe they have a right to impose a private will upon a fellow-creature. A kind intention or a cruel intention made the act seem no less a crime as she looked upon it in that brief moment of illumination.
what kinds of emotions is she feeling? how do you know? how would you describe her so far? (Ms.Mallard)
“Free! Body and soul free!” she kept whispering.
perhaps she was in an abusive relationship? do you agree? any evidences that may show this?
do you think she is relieved that her husband died? any evidence that can show this?
heart disease
consider the word choice the author used. what does that suggest?
She did not hear the story as many women have heard the same, with a paralyzed inability to accept its significance. She wept at once, with sudden, wild abandonment, in her sister’s arms. When the storm of grief had spent itself she went away to her room alone. She would have no one follow her.
consider: the way the author worded Mrs. Mallard's emotional stasis of the news of her husbands death, what can we interpret? Why might the author use those words in particular to describe her state?
“killed.”
consider: why might the author use quotations around the word killed? what does this suggest?
Into this she sank, pressed down by a physical exhaustion that haunted her body and seemed to reach into her soul.
This line is very vivid, consider: what might be that exhaustion, and why is it haunting her?