What are grammar rules and why are they bad?

puji   Thursday, December 13, 2001, 04:00 GMT
Could you inform me the title of novel (the English playwriter shakespeare)?
Where can I buy them ? Because I live in Indonesia.
And then, if I have one and I read the slang word in it, How can I find the meaning of the word ? the slang word usually is not in dictionary.
Mohammed Asad Khan   Thursday, December 13, 2001, 19:18 GMT
You are quite right you can not find out slang words in enormous amounts in a normal dictionary along with full sentences of them.
The best solution is that " to search slang webs over the internet".You can go to the search engine of " yahoo.com" or "msn.com" and what do you have to need just type "slang words".you can get so many links of slang dictionary.Here are some from my side :

.Nuts(person who are very crazy about a particular field) - Computer nuts.

. A couch potato(a person who spends most of his time to sit infront of the Tv).

. Techies(person who are well interseted to learn everything about computers).This word is inferred from "technology".

. A back seat driver( a person who gives unwanted advice to the people).

. Netizens(we say use this term for computer users).

. Paint the town red(go out and have a fun with folks).

.Thats not my cup of tea ( thats not a way of doing which i prefer - disagree)....etc

Visit to the local libraries you can find out a one of shakespare's novel.
Otherwise - Check it out over internet.


Allisha   Saturday, December 15, 2001, 17:01 GMT
to Tom,

(in reference to the message about adjective order)

First, the rule for adjective order you've given is incomplete. You, or perhaps the source that you quoted, missed one type of adjectives - adjectives of purpose. Riding (shoes), sports (cars), racing (boats) are all examples of purpose adjectives.


The complete rule should look like this:

opinion adjectives: general/specific
descriptive adjectives: size/age/shape/colour/nationality/material/purpose


Second, we can make the rule easy to remember if we give the category "nationality" another name - "origin", and then use
a memory technique called 'chunking'.

Size Age Shape Colour Origin Material Purpose

The initial letters of words in the sequence above form two familiar-looking words: SAS and COMP.
Now, if we remember these two words, we can easily derive from them the rule for adjective order.

I absolutely agree that the coursebook should have given more than two examples to illustrate the rule.
But I want to stress the importance of the rule itself, apart from examples that accompany it. This importance follows from the fact that we seldom meet noun phrases preceded by more than three-four adjectives in the course of learning a foreign language, which means that we can't develop intuition about adjective order. Rules, like the one given here, can be very useful when there is too little linguistic experience, understood as 'language input'.
Michal Ryszard Wojcik   Saturday, December 15, 2001, 18:44 GMT
to Allisha:

Thanks for writing!
You are bringing the discussion to a higher level.
If only we had more people like you contributing to our discussions, we could sort out our ideas about grammar rules.

You write that you want to stress the importance of the rule itself. So I have a personal question to you:
Did you ever think of this rule when you were composing a sentence?
Tom   Saturday, December 15, 2001, 23:18 GMT
to Allisha:

>>>>
Size Age Shape Colour Origin Material Purpose

The initial letters of words in the sequence above form two familiar-looking words: SAS and COMP. Now, if we remember these two words, we can easily derive from them the rule for adjective order.
>>>>
I'm afraid there's nothing that would stop me from confusing "size" with "shape" (both start with an S). :-)

>>>>
But I want to stress the importance of the rule itself, apart from examples that accompany it. This importance follows from the fact that we seldom meet noun phrases preceded by more than three-four adjectives in the course of learning a foreign language, which means that we can't develop intuition about adjective order. Rules, like the one given here, can be very useful when there is too little linguistic experience, understood as 'language input'.
>>>>
Hey, would you want to write a sentence in which there are more than 4 adjectives in front of a noun? I know I wouldn't. ;-) And my intuition is okay for up to 4 adjectives.

Even if I wanted to learn how to order 7 adjectives in a sentence, I wouldn't memorize a rule. I would find a few example sentences with 7 adjectives and repeat them with SuperMemo. That way, I would meet such sentences more frequently than normal.

It is true that you can make up for insufficient input with grammar rules. But instead of learning a rule, you can get more input. And it is better to rely on intuition rather than this rule, because the rule has problems:

1. It's not even clear what the rule is. The textbook gives one rule, you quoted another, and e.g. Thomson/Martinet's "A Practical English Grammar" gives the following one:

size, general description, age, shape, colour, material, origin, purpose

There is one more category ("general description") and "material" comes before "origin" rather than after it.

2. The rule is hard to use. You have to classify all the adjectives you plan to use. This seems hard to do. For example, suppose I want to describe a towel as "white", "large", and "made of paper". If I want to apply the rule, I need to attach a label to each of the adjectives ("white-color", "large-size", "paper-material"). Then I have to think "SAS-COMP", let's see... first size, then color, then material. So the proper order is "large white paper towel".

3. There are plenty of exceptions and nuances. For example (I am copying from Thomson & Martinet's book):

- "little" is ordered as if it was an adjective of age, not size ("an expensive little hotel")

- there is yet another kind of adjectives called "adjectives of personality and emotion", which can either precede or follow adjectives of age ("a young ambitious man", "an ambitious young man").

- "Dark", "fair", and "pale" are treated as adjectives of general description, and not of color. Etc.


MY PERSONAL CONCLUSION:
The rule is not easy to remember and not easy to use. I think it is better to get example sentences (e.g. by reading), which should enable you to compose sentences with strings of up to 4 adjectives. If you absolutely need to learn how to order more than 4 adjectives, you can find relevant example sentences, and repeat them especially frequently (e.g. with SuperMemo) until you develop an intuition for it.
Allisha   Sunday, December 16, 2001, 22:07 GMT
to Tom,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm afraid there's nothing that would stop me from confusing "size" with "shape" (both start with an S). :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Well then, how about SASh COM?


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hey, would you want to write a sentence in which there are more than 4 adjectives in front of a noun? I know I wouldn't. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I wouldn't either, but our personal likes and dislikes aren't enough to discredit the rule, I'm afraid.
Actually, I believe there are people who may find this rule useful and worth knowing. Let's take advertisers, trying to encourage you to BUY NOW their "elegant, inexpensive, small but capacious, black, leather purse". This description, serving marketing purposes, doesn't even strike me as unduly long, even though as many as 6 different type adjectives were used.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even if I wanted to learn how to order 7 adjectives in a sentence, I wouldn't memorize a rule. I would find a few example sentences with 7 adjectives and repeat them with SuperMemo. That way, I would meet such sentences more frequently than normal.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

First, you would have to come across the rule to realize that such a problem as adjective order even exists.
Second, if you decided to append example sentences to SuperMemo, it would be a good idea to relate them to the rule to see if they are correct. Having done that, you would remember the rule willy-nilly.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's not even clear what the rule is. The textbook gives one rule, you quoted another, and e.g. Thomson/Martinet's "A Practical English Grammar" gives the following one

size, general description, age, shape, colour, material, origin, purpose
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

True, but one complicated grammar rules doesn't necessarily mean that all grammar rules are bad.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The rule is hard to use. You have to classify all the adjectives you plan to use. This seems hard to do.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

That's right. But let's not forget that luckily the rule has very limited application, which means we don't have to worry about it too often. The laborious intellectual process of adjective ordering is limited to a few instances when we want to or have to use more than four adjectives before a noun, and be sure we do it in the right order.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There are plenty of exceptions and nuances.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Again, this doesn't mean that all of them grammar rules are bad.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If you absolutely need to learn how to order more than 4 adjectives, you can find relevant example sentences, and repeat them especially frequently (e.g. with SuperMemo) until you develop an intuition for it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Those people who absolutely need to learn how to order more than 4 adjectives are, in all likelihood, absolutely interested in grammatical accuracy. They should check if the example sentences they plan to repeat with SuperMemo are 100 percent correct. Of course, they can only do that by relating these sentences to the rule, which means the rule is indispensable.
Allisha   Sunday, December 16, 2001, 23:29 GMT
to Michal,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You write that you want to stress the importance of the rule itself. So I have a personal question to you:
Did you ever think of this rule when you were composing a sentence?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

No, I didn't, but I have known this rule since I was in the first grade in college. We were preparing for the CAE type final exam, and the rule was one of the things we were expected to know.

Tom chose this particular rule because it's hard to remember and hard to use, and thus serves well his purpose of discrediting all grammar rules. I agree with him that the rule is really nasty. People rarely use more than four adjectives before nouns so they shouldn't be required to know the rule for adjective order. Editors, journalists, writers and grammarians - who are both native speakers of English and language authorities - are the only ones who ought to be familiar with this rule.

However, there are many grammar rules that English learners may find really helpful.
I'll give you some that I use very often:

1. The rule for defining and non-defining clauses (when to use commas; 'that' instead of 'which", etc.)
2. The rule for the third conditional (to check if its use in a given situation is correct)
3. The rule for using the past simple tense with certain expressions (yesterday, two years ago, etc.)

Moreover, sometimes I even feel that I should know more rules concerning Polish grammar. I'm a native speaker of Polish but there are cases when I'm doubtful about inflectional endings. For instance, I'm not sure which demonstrative is used in the accusative case before a feminine noun: I can see this book a) Widze ta ksiazke b) Widze te ksiazke. I'm exposed to Polish and I have plenty of input, and I still need grammar rules to solve problematic cases like the one above.

I imagine Tom say: 'find example sentences'.
I would, if only I was sure they were correct. Other users of Polish may be have exactly the same problem as I.
Tom   Monday, December 17, 2001, 02:18 GMT
<<<<
Actually, I believe there are people who may find this rule useful and worth knowing. Let's take advertisers, trying to encourage you to BUY NOW their "elegant, inexpensive, small but capacious, black, leather purse". This description, serving marketing purposes, doesn't even strike me as unduly long, even though as many as 6 different type adjectives were used.
>>>>
Any sentence with more than 5 adjectives in front of a noun is BAD STYLE.

<<<<
===
Even if I wanted to learn how to order 7 adjectives in a sentence, I wouldn't memorize a rule. I would find a few example sentences with 7 adjectives and repeat them with SuperMemo. That way, I would meet such sentences more frequently than normal.
===
First, you would have to come across the rule to realize that such a problem as adjective order even exists.
>>>>
I don't have to realize there is a problem. I just have to be able to produce good sentences. (If you are interested in the "problems of English grammar", then read grammar rules every day.)

<<<<
True, but one complicated grammar rules doesn't necessarily mean that all grammar rules are bad.
>>>>
Of course not.

<<<<
Those people who absolutely need to learn how to order more than 4 adjectives are, in all likelihood, absolutely interested in grammatical accuracy. They should check if the example sentences they plan to repeat with SuperMemo are 100 percent correct. Of course, they can only do that by relating these sentences to the rule, which means the rule is indispensable.
>>>>
Yes, if you are interested in "correct English" (where "correct" means "conforming to the rules written by a particular grammarian according to his individual taste"), by all means you should check if real sentences written by native speakers conform to the rules. (After all, many native speakers may have different taste than the grammarian you follow.)

If your goal is to conform to grammar rules, then grammar rules are indispensable. If you just want to speak English like a native speaker, they're not. Real-life input will do. If real-life input is not good enough for you (because it's not "grammatically correct"), do study grammar books.
Allisha   Monday, December 17, 2001, 09:09 GMT
to Tom,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes, if you are interested in "correct English" (where "correct" means "conforming to the rules written by a particular grammarian according to his individual taste"), by all means you should check if real sentences written by native speakers conform to the rules. (After all, many native speakers may have different taste than the grammarian you follow.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Don't make it "the rules" all of a sudden. As far as I can remember, we were talking about ONE particular rule.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If your goal is to conform to grammar rules, then grammar rules are indispensable. If you just want to speak English like a native speaker, they're not. Real-life input will do. If real-life input is not good enough for you (because it's not "grammatically correct"), do study grammar books.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

What if this real-life input is inconsistent?
In the case of the rule for adjective order, you may have a collection of sentences, in which two sentences give you two different models.
For example, one sentence suggests that color adjectives are used in the very beginning, the other sentence - that they are placed between adjectives of size and shape. Wouldn't you consult the rule to check which sentence is better?
Tom   Monday, December 17, 2001, 11:43 GMT
<<<<
In the case of the rule for adjective order, you may have a collection of sentences, in which two sentences give you two different models.
For example, one sentence suggests that color adjectives are used in the very beginning, the other sentence - that they are placed between adjectives of size and shape. Wouldn't you consult the rule to check which sentence is better?
>>>>
NO. If each model occured with "enough" frequency in "reputable" sources, I would accept both as valid in the English language.
Tom   Monday, December 17, 2001, 13:52 GMT
<<<<
However, there are many grammar rules that English learners may find really helpful. I'll give you some that I use very often:

1. The rule for defining and non-defining clauses (when to use commas; 'that' instead of 'which", etc.)
2. The rule for the third conditional (to check if its use in a given situation is correct)
3. The rule for using the past simple tense with certain expressions (yesterday, two years ago, etc.)
>>>>

In my experience, rules 1 and 3 are relatively easy to master intuitively through example sentences. You can get the hang of it just by reading a lot and generally surrounding yourself with input.

(As for rule 1, I know it, too, and I just realized I used to apply it by comparing my sentence with the "model" sentences demonstrating defining and non-defining clauses. Now I don't need the rule -- I think I do it right unconsciously. How do you apply it?)

Rule 2 is harder to replace. The third conditional occurs rarely in input. I think I can now use it correctly more or less intuitively. However, sometimes I still check with the rule to be on the safe side (when writing). Perhaps this is one of the few rules worth knowing.

Yes, you can substitute grammar rules for intuition. But you can only remember so many rules. It would also be time-consuming to use two or more rules when writing a single sentence. In other words, the majority of your knowledge should be intuitive.

Also, I believe there is a better way than learning rules. You can build your intuition by artificially increasing the frequency with which you encounter a given grammar structure. You can add 20 sentences based on the third conditonal to your SuperMemo collection.

Maybe I will try appending 50 examples with the 3rd conditional to my SuperMemo collection to see if my intuition gets even better. On the other hand, I wouldn't get to test my intuition very often. Like I said, the third conditional is quite rare.


<<<<
I'm not sure which demonstrative is used in the accusative case before a feminine noun: I can see this book a) Widze ta ksiazke b) Widze te ksiazke. I'm exposed to Polish and I have plenty of input, and I still need grammar rules to solve problematic cases like the one above.
>>>>

The reason is that both versions are present in the input. Personally, I consider both to be correct (I don't care which version is currently preferred by linguists).

I try to avoid "ta" when I write just to humor those who like others to be "grammatically correct". However, I would never object to someone's use of "ta". I have no problem with it, but I avoid it in writing because of all the people who do have a problem.

The rule I personally use is simple: Whenever both "ta" and "te" are possible, choose "te" when writing to a stupid anal-retentive grammar freak. :-)

<<<<
I imagine Tom say: 'find example sentences'.
I would, if only I was sure they were correct.
>>>>
You can look for examples in books. "Ta" would never be used in literary language. You don't need a rule to check your example sentences. Just check the source.

The conclusion for English learners would be:
Even native speakers use grammar rules sometimes, but only if they want to be especially "correct". They build almost all their sentences intuitively. Do the same.
Michal Ryszard Wojcik   Friday, December 21, 2001, 14:21 GMT
to Tom:

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
The conclusion for English learners would be:
Even native speakers use grammar rules sometimes, but only if they want to be especially "correct". They build almost all their sentences intuitively. Do the same.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The idea of a grammar rule is to help learners write intuitively. In the beginning they don't have intuition and they don't know the rule. In the first step they learn the rule and look at example sentences which demonstrate the rule. For some time in their lives they write similar sentences by consciously thinking about the rule. At some stage they begin to write such sentences without thinking about the rule. This is what you call intuition.

I think that grammar rules can be helpful for developing intuition. Grammar rules can be a road to intuition.
Mohammed Asad Khan   Saturday, December 22, 2001, 22:01 GMT

Pretty + adjective/adverb

- Adela thinks the PTA will write her a good recommendation. She's pretty sure.

- Tom is a good cook, but not a great one. He cooks pretty well.

Example :
How cold are the winters in dallas? // chicago

S1: How cold are the winters in Dallas ?

S2: they're pretty cold ,but not as cold as the winters in chicago.

1. How hot are the summers ? // Houstan
2. How expensive are houses? // California
3. How good are the museums ?// New york

The whole phenomena of learning a word is called " grammar rule " among our students.we call it a grammar rule. you can see above examples.
Tom   Sunday, December 23, 2001, 13:51 GMT
to Michal:

<<<<
For some time in their lives they write similar sentences by consciously thinking about the rule. At some stage they begin to write such sentences without thinking about the rule.
>>>>

It's likely that you gain an "intuition" simply because you see more example sentences (the ones you produced according to the rule). If so, you could do without the rule. You could simply read example sentences produced by other people (rather than produce them yourself with the aid of the rule).

I don't know if it is possible to avoid thinking about the rule when beginning to produce sentences. Maybe no number of example sentences will let you write your first sentence with full confidence. Maybe lots of correct input is not enough. Maybe you still need "written fluency". Maybe before you're fluent, you need the grammar rule?

This could be tested. You could show me 100 example sentence with a new German structure or phrase. Then we could see if I can use the structure fluently in writing.

I think I've never known any grammar rules for MOST of the English I use. I once browsed a grammar book (Michael Swan's "Practical English Usage") and was surprised to see so many rules for things that were obvious to me intuitively.

I really have a strong feeling that learning ANY English grammar structure is only the matter of reading enough example sentences.
Krzysztof Cichy   Sunday, December 23, 2001, 23:17 GMT
To Tom:

>I really have a strong feeling that learning ANY English grammar structure is only the matter of reading enough example sentences.

I have a similar feeling. I think the best confirmation is one's own native language - a baby never learns any grammar rules - it just hears and thus absorbs example sentences. When I once read a grammar book for learners of Polish I was astonished that there are so many grammar rules. I can't even name one rule!

In English I try to develop similar intuition. I feel it is NOT the standard attitude - e.g. in school I was taught many grammar rules that are sometimes helpful but in most cases make it impossible to communicate because if I wanted to say something I would have to:
1. recall the proper rule
2. use it
and it takes enough time to make a conversation impossible.

When I get enough example sentences I will learn English just like I learned Polish as a child - by hearing and reading.