|
 |
Annoying mistakes in your native language | ||
Tags: Native Language | Error | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| gdoyle1990 Groupie United States Joined 5430 days ago 52 posts - 60 votes  Speaks: English* Studies: Russian, Serbian, Estonian | Message 89 of 151 10 July 2009 at 5:19am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
I don't think that the use, or lack of use, of the subjunctive in English is a mistake, more of a personal decision. I love the subjunctive and try to use it whenever I can, even in situations where it wouldn't normally be used. However, many people feel that to use it is a mistake because it isn't actively taught in schools and English speakers are not used to different verbal moods.
The first time I was made aware of the subjunctive was my senior year of high school, when I asked my English teacher why verbs were conjugated differently in certain situations. She was one of the stereotypical eccentric English teachers who love English maybe a little too much, and she said I was the only student ever to ask that, I was soon her favorite pupil, and I have since fallen in love with typically "archaic" forms of English. Also, I cannot stand when people write "would of..." or "should of..." instead of the correct forms. I live in West Virginia and it makes me sick when I see it, because it only helps to perpetuate the myth that all West Virginians are uneducated. At least I can be comforted by the fact that it happens everywhere else as well. =] Speaking of "=]", the use of emoticons in hand-written text is another thing that really annoys me. Anyway, I will end my rant now. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| sprachefin Triglot Senior Member Germany Joined 5556 days ago 300 posts - 317 votes Speaks: German*, English, Spanish Studies: French, Turkish, Mandarin, Bulgarian, Persian, Dutch | Message 90 of 151 10 July 2009 at 6:48am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
Ok I was just reading through, and I saw that people were saying that English has a subjunctive. I had no idea. English changes verb endings and stems (except with strong verbs in the past tense), I thought that it would be impossible to do. I did a little reading and I think that the use of the subjunctive is more based on the context, and the actual form, is usually the past tense of the verb, ex: if she waited, if I saw, etc. I yes it would be nicer if people stopped using auxiliary verbs such as "have" to say: if she had waited, if I had seen, etc. I think the reason that people do not use this "subjunctive", is because they see no real distinction.
1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| gdoyle1990 Groupie United States Joined 5430 days ago 52 posts - 60 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Russian, Serbian, Estonian | Message 91 of 151 10 July 2009 at 7:29am | IP Logged | ||||||||
It's more than that, in phrases like "If I were you...", the "proper" conjugation of the verb, *was*, is not used, but rather the 2nd person past is used. "If she were to wait..." would be a much better example than "if she waited". 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| ofdw Diglot Newbie United Kingdom Joined 5665 days ago 39 posts - 47 votes Speaks: English*, Italian | Message 92 of 151 13 July 2009 at 11:51pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Sorry, but I can't resist - your last sentence is an example of one of *my* pet peeves: you should have used the past subjunctive instead of the conditional: "If people thought about it more, they would not make little mistakes like these." (Most English verbs show no difference between past indicative and subjunctive moods, with the occasional exception like "to be" - "If he were more attentive to detail, he would make fewer mistakes". I suspect this is why some people, especially foreigners, avoid it, as they might think it's an incorrect use of past indicative, but it's not!) 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| ofdw Diglot Newbie United Kingdom Joined 5665 days ago 39 posts - 47 votes Speaks: English*, Italian | Message 93 of 151 14 July 2009 at 12:09am | IP Logged | ||||||||
I should have read this before posting my other reply! There are both past and present forms of the subjunctive in English: present - "It is vital that the president remain [not "remains"] calm at all times" It's subjunctive, not indicative (remains), because it's not a statement of fact: we don't actually know if the president is going to remain calm or not! past - "If the president remained calm, he would be less likely to make enemies" Here there is no difference in the verb form, but again it is not a direct statement of fact - we are not stating that the president remained calm at a certain point, we are explaining the consequences if that condition (the president's calmness) is met. I'm sure there are other uses but they escape me for the moment. The present subjunctive is less common and sounds rather formal (though I rather like it, and it's fitting in situations where gravity is required); the past subjunctive is much more common, although not universal. (See also my previous post on incorrectly using the conditional instead of past subjunctive!). 3 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Chung Diglot Senior Member Joined 6966 days ago 4228 posts - 8259 votes 20 sounds Speaks: English*, French Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish | Message 94 of 151 14 July 2009 at 1:14am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
That is a problem with the English subjunctive for me even though I try hard to apply it properly because of my experience with languages that use it actively. The morphological distinction between the subjunctive and indicative forms in English is often blurred because participles or conjugated verbs do "multiple duty". (e.g. "It's vital that you stay calm" in subjunctive present, "Stay calm while I am talking" in imperative and "I stay while she is on vacation." in indicative present. Here are three instances of "stay" but each is used in a different mood or tense).
In Old English things probably weren't as ambiguous as in modern English since "double-duty" wasn't as prevalent given the greater vitality of Proto-Germanic inflection paradigms. Subjunctive in French or German seem to be clearer to me because of their variance from indicative forms in the same tense. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| GoingGoingGone Newbie United States Joined 5478 days ago 28 posts - 39 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Italian, French, Swedish, Mandarin | Message 95 of 151 17 July 2009 at 11:15pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
I get really annoyed when a list is being given of three or more things and commas are incorrectly used. Unfortunately, this is a VERY pervasive, common problem. A comma should always be used unless 2 of the things in the group "go together" like "bacon and eggs" separate from the rest of the list. Writing "Red, white and blue" should read "Red, white, and blue" because white and blue do not "go together" in a distinct way from red. Another example, "Paris, Boston and New York" is ok because the 2 without a comma in between go together - they are US cities while Paris in in France. But "Paris, Boston and Moscow" is incorrect. Edited by GoingGoingGone on 17 July 2009 at 11:16pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| franglaideutsch Newbie United States Joined 5762 days ago 2 posts - 2 votes Speaks: English* Studies: German, French | Message 96 of 151 20 July 2009 at 11:13am | IP Logged | ||||||||
I'm afraid this is a matter of personal preference. Some style manuals dictate that a comma must always be used before the conjunction at the end of a list: one, two, three, and four while others do not have this requirement thus: one, two, three and four is correct and does not necessarily classify three and four as being in the same group like "bacon and eggs." Of course, your assertion that things that go together to not need commas is correct. Thus: Bacon and eggs, catsup and mustard, and cheese and broccoli is grammatically correct when in a complete sentence. As for the subjunctive that everyone keeps ranting about, I didn't even know this was an issue before reading this thread, but I must say that over-application of subjunctive (which I didn't know was a separate mood in English before a few weeks ago) does annoy me, and I recognize dependent clauses that use conditional instead of subjunctive, when followed by an independent clause in the proper tense and mood as being perfectly acceptable. Thus:
and
are equally valid in my opinion. 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
