#grammar

the-european-portuguese:

I decided to create this cheat sheet on Portuguese verbs because the most difficult part of learning romance languages for me has always been all the verb forms and conjugations. The idea was inspired by @studypuddles post on French verbs

I combed through for spelling errors & mistakes, but alas some do fall through the cracks, so let me know if you see anything!

Double check these when you proof your spec. They pop up all the time.

• Loose/Lose
• Peek/Peak
• Chord/Cord
• Rein/Reign
• Bare/Bear
• Brake/Break

The Performance Grammar Correspondence Hypothesis (PGCH) was put forward by John Hawkins (2004) as an explanation for why grammatical patterns and the frequencies of those patterns cross-linguistically are the way they are.

In essence, it says that linguistic constructions which are easier to process are more likely to be grammaticalised. Conversely, those which are harder to process are less likely to be grammaticalised. Furthermore, processing ease is hypothesised to underlie our preferences for certain constructions over others (where there is competition between constructions) in usage. Linguistic performance thus shapes the grammar.

Hawkins suggests that there are three principles behind the hypothesis. Simplifying horrifically:

Minimise Domains: this basically means make the distance between elements which go together syntactically and semantically as small as possible, e.g. if an adjective goes with a particular noun, put them as close together as possible.

Minimise Forms: this basically means make those elements mentioned above as small and as meaningful as possible, e.g. consider spoken English “I’mma be there” where “I am going to be there” has very much had its form minimised.

Maximise Online Processing: this basically means arrange those elements in such a way that a listener will be able to process the structure of what you’re saying in the most efficient way possible. This involves making structures easier to recognise but also avoiding potential misinterpretations of structure, e.g. “I looked the number up” – consider where you place the “up” as the object gets longer. “I looked the number of my friend who just moved in next door up” vs. “I looked up the number of my friend who just moved in next door”. If the object is going to be very long, it is better to put “up” straight after the verb so that the verb (and its idiomatic meaning) can be recognised sooner. When the object isn’t so long, as in “I looked the number up,” efficiency isn’t greatly affected.

Note that language users flout these principles all the time, e.g. for stylistic effect, and are not consciously aware of them.

Using these three principles, Hawkins’ theory makes some very strong and interesting predictions about the types of patterns found in the languages of the world, and about which patterns are more likely or unlikely to be found.

Reference

Hawkins, J. (2004). Efficiency and Complexity in Grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hello, this is Admin Hee. Today’s grammar will be regular conjugation.

Regular conjugation

The regular change of form of predicate in Korean grammar such as verbs and adjectives. At this point the predicate of a clause is the part of it that is not the subject and it consists of a stem and ending.

-Stem : unchanging part of the predicate

보- is the stem of the forms ‘보다’, ‘보니’, ‘보고’

-Ending : changing part

-다. -니, -고 is the ending of the forms ‘보다’, ‘보니’, ‘보고’

1. ‘ㅡ’ Elision  (’ㅡ’ 탈락)

‘ㅡ’ is elided in front of the stem ‘-아/어’, ‘-았/었-’

• 담그- + -아 = 담가
• 슬프- + -어 = 슬퍼
• 아프다 + 아서/어서 = 아파서

Such verbs or adjectives like 끄다, 크다, 바쁘다, 따르다 are examples.

2. ‘ㄹ‘ Elision (’ㄹ’ 탈락)

When the last sound of the stem ‘ㄹ’ meets ‘ㄴ,ㅂ,ㅅ,오’ , it gets elided too.

• 살- + -는 = 사는
• 살- + -ㅂ니다 = 삽니다
• 살- + -오 = 사오

살다, 놀다, 울다, 불다, 얼다, 멀다 and so on are the examples.

Additionally, nouns that ends up with consonant ‘ㄹ’, gets elided when it is combined with ‘ㄴ,ㅅ’ which is the first sound of the next word. This is not about the conjugation of verbs and adjectives but are also called ‘ㄹ’ 탈락.

• 버들+나무 = 버드나무
• 솔+나무 = 소나무
• 딸+님 = 따님

Written by Admin Hee

Edited by Admin Yu

Hi! This is Admin Hyun.

Today’s grammar I want to introduce is ‘same vowel elision’(동음 탈락). Same vowel elision is not an irregular conjugation. Under the conditions, it always happens.

A phenomenon where an ending(어미) that starts with ‘-아’ or ‘어’ follows after verb’s or adjective’s(용언) stem(어간) that end with ‘-아’ or ‘어’, and as a result, the same vowel ‘아’ or ‘어’ is repeated(comes consecutively), one of the same vowels is omitted(elision)

ㅏelision (ㅏ 탈락)

• 가+아서 가서(go and-)
• 가+아  가(go)
• 가+았 + 다  갔다(went)
• 차+아서 차서(kick and-)
• 차+아  차(kick)
• 차+았 + 다  찼다(kicked)

ㅓ elision (ㅓ 탈락)

• 건너+어서 건너서(cross the street and-)
• 건너+어  건너(cross the street)
• 건너+었 + 다   건넜다(crossed the street)
• 나서+어서  나서서(take the lead and-)
• 나서+어 나서(take the lead, step ahead)
• 나서+었 + 다  나섰다(took the lead)

Keep in mind that if the stem ends with a consonant, same vowel elision doesn’t take place. For example,

• 먹 + 어  먹어(eat)
• 먹 + 었 + 다  먹었다(ate)
• 잡 + 아  잡아(catch)
• 잡 + 았 + 다  잡았다(caught)

Elision of vowels is a kind of ‘elision of phoneme(음운)’. Not only vowels but also consonants are subject to elision. For example, if in 딸(daughter)+님(honorific ending), ‘ㄹ’ is omitted when it is followed by ㄴ and becomes 따님(honorific form of daughter). Elision of phoneme is one of many ‘changes in phoneme’ which include alteration, elision, addition and contraction.

Written by Admin Hyun

Edited by Admin Yu

Hi! 안녕하세요. This is Admin Na. And today I’m going to talk about the causative expression.

What is the causative expression?

The causative expression is having the subject make another person do a motion or act.

Ex)

• Heedo makes Seongyu laugh.: 희도가 선규를 웃긴다.
  

The causative expression can be divided into two, the derivative causative expression, and the syntactic causative expression. And the derivative causative can be divided again, into a causative verb by the causative expression and a causative verb by ‘-시키다’.

1. Suffix

A causative verb by the causative expression: The stem of a main verb+causative suffix ‘-이-, -히-, -리, -기-, -우-, -구-, -추-’

Ex)

• A mother feeds Kyung-soo.: 어머니가 경수에게 밥을 먹인다.
• Young-mi woke her sleeping sister up.: 영미가 자고 있는 언니를 깨웠다.
• The mother dressed the child.: 엄마가 아이에게 옷을 입히었다.
• Young-hee put the baby in a chair.: 영희가 아기를 의자에 앉혔다.
• Feed a bird for food.: 새에게 모이를 먹이다.
• Mother Dresses Hee-Leong.: 엄마가 희령이에게 옷을 입히다.
• The woodcutter hides the deer behind the tree.: 나무꾼이 사슴을 나무 뒤에 숨기다.

2. 시키다

A causative verb by ‘-시키다’: Noun+’-시키다’

Ex)

• The police stopped the car.: 경찰이 차를 정지시켰다.
• The doctor hospitalized Min-Kyung.: 의사가 민경이를 입원시켰다.
• pollute오염시키다.

3. -게 하다

The syntactic expression, the causative verb by ‘-게 하다’: The stem of a main verb+’-게 하다’

Ex)

• My mother made my brother eat.: 어머니께서 동생에게 밥을 먹게 하셨다.
• The mother made the child wear clothes.: 엄마가 아이에게 옷을 입게 하였다.
• Hyuna let the bird fly.: 현아가 새를 날게 하였다.
• To cause to eat.: 먹게 하다.

Causative verb

A verb that indicates that the subject of a sentence does not act on his own, but causes others to act.

Ex)

• 속이다
• 넓히다
• 울리다
• 숨기다
• 피우다
• 솟구다
• 늦추다

A ’-이우-’ combination of two causative suffixes makes a causative verb.

Ex)

• 재우다
• 태우다
• 키우다

Thank you all for reading this post! I really hope this was helpful for you, and always stay safe:D

참조 사진 및 출처

• 신영균 국어 연구실
  

-Written by Admin Na

-Edited by Admin Yu

What’s the best way to form a compound possessive with a first person pronoun?

Context: I saw a sentence that said “If you would like to be invited to Tommy and I’s wedding please let me know.”

It is Tommy and I’s, Tommy and My’s, Tommy and Mine (? Mine’s)

The best rephrasing I could come up with was “My and Tommy’s” but that changes the word order

Any thoughts?

arguablyrandom:

lavamamma:

Who killed the evil King?
He killed the evil King!
If you can rewrite the question using the word “he” the word will be “who”
ToWhom did you send the King’s head?
Tohim I sent the King’s head.
If you can rewrite the question using the word “him” the word will be “whom”

fuck that’s useful

theredscreech:

I got super bored last night, so I started a list of English homonyms (words that sound the same, but are spelt differently). I am now up to 183 sets of words, and I haven’t even googled a full list yet; they’re all from memory.

Why is English like this??

Why am I like this??

UPDATE: 203

UPDATE: 222

UPDATE: 242

Apparently these are actually called homophones (I am such a fraud!) and apparently finding a full list is ridiculously stupid because it’s all British. I am Canadian, not British, so I know that words like ‘farther’ and ‘father’ do not, in fact, sound the same.

Also, ‘draft’ and ‘draught’ are not the same.

Andapparently ‘draught’ isn’t even an American word, since Tumblr has so kindly decided to underline it in bright red.

English is so freakishly stupid.

UPDATE: 254

UPDATE: 285 [insert crying emoji here]

Like most of you, I spend a lot of time reading random stuff on the internet and I’ve noticed a really curious trend as of late. Somewhere along the line, people have started using “sat” instead of “sitting”.

Example: while sitting outside a noodle shop -> while sat outside a noodle shop

Example: He was sitting -> he was sat

This isn’t “proper” English and I was stumped as to where it was coming from because I never heard people say it out-loud. I was only finding it online and it was slowly driving me crazy.

A little research led me to discover that this is a regional thing in parts of the UK, which is kind of fascinating because they only do this for sat. No one says “he was run”, they say “he was running”. 

Why is sat specially? Because dialects (regionally-based variations of a standard language) are weird.

Obviously the UK doesn’t have a monopoly on regional quirks. If you’re from the Midwestern regions of the USA, we often drop our helping verbs after the word “needs”.

Example: Needs to be washed -> needs washed

Example: My hair needs to be cut -> my hair needs cut

Unlike many other regional quirks where the dialectic strangeness is only found in the spoken word, deviations such as these can be dangerous. They’re not weird words, they’re weird grammar. When we have minor grammatical deviations in our dialect, we often don’t realize that we’re deviating from standard English. 

That’s all well and good when we’re talking to friends or posting on Tumblr, but if you’re writing something in a more formal context, its easy for this regionalisms to slip in and leave someone with a poor opinion of your grammar. That’s especially true if your audience isn’t familiar with your dialect. So, be careful! I actually have a note on my computer to remind me about the helping verbs quirk because it’s the dialect that I grew up with and I often don’t notice it unless someone points it out.

If you know of other quirks that often slip into writing, I’d love to hear about them! When things become a part of your standard lexicon, it takes someone pointing it out for you to know that you’re writing with non-standard grammar.

ebookporn:

• An Oxford comma walks into a bar, where it spends the evening watching the television, getting drunk, and smoking cigars.

• A dangling participle walks into a bar. Enjoying a cocktail and chatting with the bartender, the evening passes pleasantly.

• A bar was walked into by the passive voice.

• An oxymoron walked into a bar, and the silence was deafening.

• Two quotation marks walk into a “bar.”

• A malapropism walks into a bar, looking for all intensive purposes like a wolf in cheap clothing, muttering epitaphs and casting dispersions on his magnificent other, who takes him for granite.

• Hyperbole totally rips into this insane bar and absolutely destroys everything.

• A question mark walks into a bar?

• A non sequitur walks into a bar. In a strong wind, even turkeys can fly.

• Papyrus and Comic Sans walk into a bar. The bartender says, “Get out – we don’t serve your type.”

• A mixed metaphor walks into a bar, seeing the handwriting on the wall but hoping to nip it in the bud.

• A comma splice walks into a bar, it has a drink and then leaves.

• Three intransitive verbs walk into a bar. They sit. They converse. They depart.

• A synonym strolls into a tavern.

• At the end of the day, a cliché walks into a bar – fresh as a daisy, cute as a button, and sharp as a tack.

• A run-on sentence walks into a bar it starts flirting. With a cute little sentence fragment.

• Falling slowly, softly falling, the chiasmus collapses to the bar floor.

• A figure of speech literally walks into a bar and ends up getting figuratively hammered.

• An allusion walks into a bar, despite the fact that alcohol is its Achilles heel.

• The subjunctive would have walked into a bar, had it only known.

• A misplaced modifier walks into a bar owned by a man with a glass eye named Ralph.

• The past, present, and future walked into a bar. It was tense.

• A dyslexic walks into a bra.

• A verb walks into a bar, sees a beautiful noun, and suggests they conjugate. The noun declines.

• A simile walks into a bar, as parched as a desert.

• A gerund and an infinitive walk into a bar, drinking to forget.

• A hyphenated word and a non-hyphenated word walk into a bar and the bartender nearly chokes on the irony

- Jill Thomas Doyle