Which is the most famous/most well done/etc. reference book for English grammar?
Grammar book
One of the most popular is Michael Swan's Practical English Usage.
I like it.
I like it.
If you're talking about a grammar book to use for learning English as a foreign language, I'd suggest that Engilsh grammar books in your native language might serve you better, especially if you haven't learned any other languages yet. A big reason that grammar is difficult to learn is interference from the grammar of your own native language, and a grammar book in your native language will be optimized for the specific problems that you face.
As an example for me as a learner of Spanish, the exact difference between the prepositions "por" and "para" might be described in great detail in a book written in English, because they're usually translated as "for" in English. A Spanish grammar book written in Spanish probably will not cover the distinction so much, in part because it may not even occur to the writers that such a thing might be necessary (after all, they've always had a good grasp of the distinction), and even if it did, they really can't accommodate every issue that a language learner might have, since the learner's native language could be anything.
- Kef
As an example for me as a learner of Spanish, the exact difference between the prepositions "por" and "para" might be described in great detail in a book written in English, because they're usually translated as "for" in English. A Spanish grammar book written in Spanish probably will not cover the distinction so much, in part because it may not even occur to the writers that such a thing might be necessary (after all, they've always had a good grasp of the distinction), and even if it did, they really can't accommodate every issue that a language learner might have, since the learner's native language could be anything.
- Kef
furrykef,
Of course, if you were following the Antimoon method (which, despite the fact that people who use it are often successful, is often derided and criticized and ignored), then what you mentioned above wouldn't be relevant. (I'm talking about your comment about applying the grammar of your native language to your target language.)
(The Antimoon method being followed so little by regulars of the Antimoon forum makes me wonder why those who don't follow it don't go elsewhere.)
Of course, if you were following the Antimoon method (which, despite the fact that people who use it are often successful, is often derided and criticized and ignored), then what you mentioned above wouldn't be relevant. (I'm talking about your comment about applying the grammar of your native language to your target language.)
(The Antimoon method being followed so little by regulars of the Antimoon forum makes me wonder why those who don't follow it don't go elsewhere.)
Michal who is another creator of this website had said somewhere in his postings that reading "22" books in your target language in his opinion is called "massive" input. Every learner should not settle for less than that.
beneficii, I do roughly follow the Antimoon method, but I don't follow it to the letter. Moreover, I think a good grammar book can easily accelerate one's understanding of grammar. Without a book like "A New Reference Grammar of Modern Spanish" by Butt & Benjamin, my understanding of Spanish, both actively and passively, would surely be much more limited. Moreover, that particular book is a great source of example sentences -- each section is *packed* with them -- so you can learn the grammar from the sentences, not merely the explanations.
Moreover, there's nothing in the Antimoon method that forbids using a grammar book, whether it be monolingual or bilingual. Perhaps they would recommend that I not use one as much as I do, but I don't think I'm doing anything fundamentally opposed to the Antimoon method.
Let's go back to my por vs. para example. It's possible to learn the distinction by osmosis, and, to some extent, you'll have to anyway... no grammar book can tell you every single case that will come up, and even if it did, you couldn't memorize all that. But I think you'll grasp it faster if you have an idea of what the distinction is about, even if it's an imperfect one. Your worst enemy in learning a language is when you ask yourself, "What the hell is that?"... when you see a sentence and you simply cannot understand what you're seeing. This makes it hard to ingrain the grammar pattern in your brain because you're not sure yet what the pattern *is*. Remember one of the rules for using SuperMemo, from the SuperMemo website: "Do not learn what you do not understand."
- Kef
Moreover, there's nothing in the Antimoon method that forbids using a grammar book, whether it be monolingual or bilingual. Perhaps they would recommend that I not use one as much as I do, but I don't think I'm doing anything fundamentally opposed to the Antimoon method.
Let's go back to my por vs. para example. It's possible to learn the distinction by osmosis, and, to some extent, you'll have to anyway... no grammar book can tell you every single case that will come up, and even if it did, you couldn't memorize all that. But I think you'll grasp it faster if you have an idea of what the distinction is about, even if it's an imperfect one. Your worst enemy in learning a language is when you ask yourself, "What the hell is that?"... when you see a sentence and you simply cannot understand what you're seeing. This makes it hard to ingrain the grammar pattern in your brain because you're not sure yet what the pattern *is*. Remember one of the rules for using SuperMemo, from the SuperMemo website: "Do not learn what you do not understand."
- Kef