Rdearman 2016-24 You Can't Have Your Kate and Edith Too.

Continue or start your personal language log here, including logs for challenge participants
User avatar
rdearman
Site Admin
Posts: 7231
Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 4:18 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Languages: English (N)
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1836
x 23123
Contact:

Re: Rdearman 2016/17/18 [Remember if we get caught, I'm deaf and you don't speak English]

Postby rdearman » Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:12 pm

Well back again for another week where I report little or no progress. I have done a few Language Exchanges since my last post, the most useful one is probably one I do on the weekend with my long term French partner. She has agreed to help me more with written communication. I've been in some off-forum discussions with people about doing NanoWriMo in a target language, but we decided to pull it back a little so it is only 25k words and we'd start today 1st Oct. So, I'm going to dabble a little with that. My original intention was to do Italian, but I sort of got derailed into doing French in order to exchange written stuff with a LE partner who is French.

I was thinking about all the rather stupid things I've challenged myself with over the last few months, most of which I'm failing.
  1. 10 Language Exchanges or Tutor sessions per week.
  2. 25k words in French
  3. 100 actual books in Italian
  4. Super Challenge in Italian
  5. 6WC in Setswana
  6. FLC in Setswana

Some of these I've done OK in: LE, 6WC. But most of the rest are really behind the power-curve and unlikely to be completed by the time limit. I have watched a few TV episodes in Italian, but haven't bothered to log them on the SC since I more interested in the reading part really.

I took Professor Alexander Argüelles survey. I thought there was a lot of assumptions in the survey, which didn't really fit for me. I cannot remember off the top of my head, but I do remember thinking "None of the above" for a couple of answers because they just didn't fit into my profile. I also completely forgot that I'd attempted to learn Esperanto once upon a time. Should have counted that I guess. Don't know if I should have filled out the thing since I don't consider myself a polyglot.

I have a bucket load of books I need to read in English and I'm struggling to get through all the stuff I need to do. Another problem of course is the more stuff I procrastinate on the more stuff builds up to procrastinate on.

I'm more hopeful of getting the French writing done this time as opposed to posting the Roger the Dragon story I did here. This is mainly because I'll spend some time writing a snippet of a story, then send it off to a native speaker, who will spend an hour going over my errors with me and explaining where I have gone wrong. While everyone here was quite helpful in pointing out errors, I think it will be more helpful for me to ask questions about the errors in "real time" with someone. Anyway, that is my theory, we'll see how useful it is later.

I attempted to read 1 page of a French grammar book (originally the plan was read for 20 minutes). Contrary to popular belief I actually own about 5 French grammar books. Anyway, one page and I wanted to yank my eyes out so I never have to look at it again. I really seriously don't understand people who like grammar. So, I thought; Maybe it is just French, perhaps if I did Italian I could do the full 20 minutes I intended. No, no, no and hell no. I think the most annoying thing is to learn the grammar of a language you first have to learn the grammar and vocabulary of grammar. Things like; "The two past transferentives are followed by alternatives, which are mostly contrastives." I mean WTF does that even mean? Or; "If like is in the negative, a gerund refers to an action that we do but don't enjoy doing, while a to-infinitive means that we don't do something because we don't think it right to do" WTF !!!!

How can anyone understand this gibberish, let alone find it enjoyable? "The rule requires agreement between the past participle and the complement of the direct object (abbreviated as COD) in verbs conjugated with avoir (to have) – but only if the COD precedes the participle." AGAIN! WTF !?

One thing I have learned with LE's is that it is pointless to ask a native speaker for the grammar rule, because they don't know. They know it sounds wrong, and they know the right way to say it, but they don't know why. Which is good for me, because if the explanation they give me is: "The two past transferentives are followed by alternatives, which are mostly contrastives." then I'm out. Personally I'm completely OK with someone just saying, we don't say it like that, we say it like this.

OK, grammar rant complete and let me just say that if you are one of those people who love grammar books; Go get a CAT scan, there is something seriously wrong with your brain. ;)
8 x
: 0 / 150 Read 150 books in 2024

My YouTube Channel
The Autodidactic Podcast
My Author's Newsletter

I post on this forum with mobile devices, so excuse short msgs and typos.

User avatar
Brun Ugle
Black Belt - 2nd Dan
Posts: 2273
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2015 12:48 pm
Location: Steinkjer, Norway
Languages: English (N), Norwegian (~C1/C2), Spanish (B1/B2), German (A2/B1?), Japanese (very rusty)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... 15&t=11484
x 5821
Contact:

Re: Rdearman 2016/17/18 [Remember if we get caught, I'm deaf and you don't speak English]

Postby Brun Ugle » Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:31 pm

Maybe you need a less confusing grammar book. Some do explain stuff in everyday language. I LOVE grammar, by the way, but what you wrote sounded pretty complicated to me. Find a straightforward explanation and it probably isn’t so bad.
5 x

Arnaud
Blue Belt
Posts: 984
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2015 11:57 am
Location: Paris, France
Languages: Native: French
Intermediate: English, Russian, Italian
Tourist : Breton, Greek, Chinese, Japanese, German, Spanish, Latin
Language Log: viewtopic.php?t=1524
x 2172

Re: Rdearman 2016/17/18 [Remember if we get caught, I'm deaf and you don't speak English]

Postby Arnaud » Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:51 pm

rdearman wrote:
How can anyone understand this gibberish, let alone find it enjoyable? "The rule requires agreement between the past participle and the complement of the direct object (abbreviated as COD) in verbs conjugated with avoir (to have) – but only if the COD precedes the participle." AGAIN! WTF !?

J'ai chanté la chanson / La chanson que j'ai chantée.
I sang what ? The song. So the song is the COD. In the second sentence, the song is placed before I sang, so you write the past participle at the feminine.

Grammar is fun, it's like coding: you learn the rules, you apply the rules through exercises and it's working :mrgreen:...almost
6 x

User avatar
reineke
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3570
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 7:34 pm
Languages: Fox (C4)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... =15&t=6979
x 6554

Re: Rdearman 2016/17/18 [Remember if we get caught, I'm deaf and you don't speak English]

Postby reineke » Tue Oct 02, 2018 3:20 pm

rdearman wrote:I attempted to read 1 page of a French grammar book (originally the plan was read for 20 minutes). Contrary to popular belief I actually own about 5 French grammar books. Anyway, one page and I wanted to yank my eyes out so I never have to look at it again. I really seriously don't understand people who like grammar. So, I thought; Maybe it is just French, perhaps if I did Italian I could do the full 20 minutes I intended. No, no, no and hell no. I think the most annoying thing is to learn the grammar of a language you first have to learn the grammar and vocabulary of grammar. Things like; "The two past transferentives are followed by alternatives, which are mostly contrastives." I mean WTF does that even mean? Or; "If like is in the negative, a gerund refers to an action that we do but don't enjoy doing, while a to-infinitive means that we don't do something because we don't think it right to do" WTF !!!!

How can anyone understand this gibberish, let alone find it enjoyable? "The rule requires agreement between the past participle and the complement of the direct object (abbreviated as COD) in verbs conjugated with avoir (to have) – but only if the COD precedes the participle." AGAIN! WTF !?

One thing I have learned with LE's is that it is pointless to ask a native speaker for the grammar rule, because they don't know. They know it sounds wrong, and they know the right way to say it, but they don't know why. Which is good for me, because if the explanation they give me is: "The two past transferentives are followed by alternatives, which are mostly contrastives." then I'm out. Personally I'm completely OK with someone just saying, we don't say it like that, we say it like this.

OK, grammar rant complete and let me just say that if you are one of those people who love grammar books; Go get a CAT scan, there is something seriously wrong with your brain. ;)


"Grammar? Why do I have to learn grammar? I hate grammar!

...I’m not surprised you feel this way. First, English grammar is mostly a set of exceptions held together by spit and baling wire. Second, many authors of foreign language textbooks come from a linguistics background (which can seem like the Bizarro world to most of us!), and will use phrases like “introductory conjunctive ending” and sentences like this:

"The two past transferentives are followed by alternatives, which are mostly contrastives."

An Introduction to Korean
by J. David Eisenberg

The second example sentence is from what looks like a self-published book called "The Grammaring Guide" by a certain TEFL teacher called Peter Simon. That's his only book on Amazon.

You have cherry picked crap. I am going to guess that your grammar books are a lot more readable than that.
1 x

User avatar
rdearman
Site Admin
Posts: 7231
Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 4:18 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Languages: English (N)
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1836
x 23123
Contact:

Re: Rdearman 2016/17/18 [Remember if we get caught, I'm deaf and you don't speak English]

Postby rdearman » Tue Oct 02, 2018 3:56 pm

reineke wrote:You have cherry picked crap. I am going to guess that your grammar books are a lot more readable than that.

I picked "French Grammar in Context" off my shelf and turned to a random page. Here is an example:

The pluperfect subjunctive, like the imperfect subjunctive, is becoming increasingly rare, except in the third-person singular in literary contexts such as we have here. All the pluperfect subjunctives in the text are third-person singular.


I have no idea what this means, nor why they felt it important enough to bold some of the gibberish. That was page 152, but perhaps you prefer an example from the next page if you think I'm cherry picking.

The perfect subjunctive is used in the subordinate clause instead of the pluperfect subjunctive.

Again, no idea what the hell they are talking about. But perhaps I picked a page to near the back? Maybe the ones at the front make more sense? Lets go to page 17 and pick something...
The pluperfect of a verb is formed by using the imperfect of etre or avour plus the past participle of the verb.

Now I assume if the first 2nd language you learned was "Grammarian" then this all make sense, but to me no. I could pick other examples from other grammar books which are just as obscure.

To be fair "Collins Easy Learning Italian Grammar" has much better explanations and uses clear everyday English to explain grammatical concepts. However, given that this book is supposed to be used by English GCSE students (ages 13-16) you would expect it to be easy to use.

I suppose the lesson I must take here is to use grammar books for 13-16 year olds. :)
0 x
: 0 / 150 Read 150 books in 2024

My YouTube Channel
The Autodidactic Podcast
My Author's Newsletter

I post on this forum with mobile devices, so excuse short msgs and typos.

User avatar
reineke
Black Belt - 3rd Dan
Posts: 3570
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 7:34 pm
Languages: Fox (C4)
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... =15&t=6979
x 6554

Re: Rdearman 2016/17/18 [Remember if we get caught, I'm deaf and you don't speak English]

Postby reineke » Tue Oct 02, 2018 4:25 pm

This excellent book strikes a very good balance between exhaustivity and accessibility. Clear, lively, and engaging." - Christophe Gagne, Cambridge University, UK

"French Grammar in Context provides an indispensable, much needed integration of comprehensive grammar review with authentic language, a combination that both teachers and students can appreciate." - Lorie Heggie, Illinois State Universty, USA

"Drawing from authentic texts ― both literary and journalistic sources, which have been updated for this fourth edition ― makes the book engaging and gives the learner an opportunity to discover, or maybe rediscover, authors such as Camus, Queneau, Prevert, Stendhal, or Zola, among many others, through the lens of grammar...The texts and explanations are usefully supplemented by spoken and written exercises, with answers provided at the back, which will enable the student to build up knowledge and gain more confidence in handling the structures covered." - Michael Abecassis, University of Oxford, UK

"French Grammar in Context has a wealth of motivating texts and clear explanations of the main points of French grammar. It is well suited for independent practice and review, but also could be included in intermediate and advanced classes as a companion text or jumping off point if instructors supplement the book with more open-ended activities and contextual information about the authentic texts themselves." - Katie Beth Angus, University of Southern Mississippi, The LINGUIST List
0 x

garyb
Black Belt - 1st Dan
Posts: 1572
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 12:35 pm
Location: Scotland
Languages: Native: English
Advanced: Italian, French
Intermediate: Spanish
Beginner: German, Japanese
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1855
x 5992
Contact:

Re: Rdearman 2016/17/18 [Remember if we get caught, I'm deaf and you don't speak English]

Postby garyb » Tue Oct 02, 2018 4:26 pm

rdearman wrote:
reineke wrote:You have cherry picked crap. I am going to guess that your grammar books are a lot more readable than that.

I picked "French Grammar in Context" off my shelf and turned to a random page. Here is an example:


That seems the definition of cherry-picking crap: opening at a random page and taking something that clearly only makes sense if you've read the preceding explanations. I agree that this particular book seems too technical though, especially for someone whose strong point isn't grammar as is clear enough from your English writing. It seems more aimed at an academic or at least advanced audience. I speak French pretty well and I honestly have no idea what transferentives, alternatives and contrastives are.

Personally I've not used many grammar-specific resources because they tend to be too technical and not always even relevant for a learner, and I've found the grammar explanations in more general language-learning courses quite sufficient for most cases; an exception is CLE Grammaire Progressive which is very focused on using grammar rather than explaining it in technical terms, and even it was just to fill in some gaps. For example I've always found that Michel Thomas courses, despite their faults, explain things pretty well by associating them with their equivalents in English. Concepts like perfect, pluperfect, and even subjunctive are quite similar in English and French; if you can understand that "I have done" is perfect, "I had done" is pluperfect, etc. that's most of the battle.
Last edited by garyb on Mon Oct 08, 2018 11:28 am, edited 2 times in total.
7 x

User avatar
zenmonkey
Black Belt - 2nd Dan
Posts: 2528
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2015 7:21 pm
Location: California, Germany and France
Languages: Spanish, English, French trilingual - German (B2/C1) on/off study: Persian, Hebrew, Tibetan, Setswana.
Some knowledge of Italian, Portuguese, Ladino, Yiddish ...
Want to tackle Tzotzil, Nahuatl
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=859
x 7030
Contact:

Re: Rdearman 2016/17/18 [Remember if we get caught, I'm deaf and you don't speak English]

Postby zenmonkey » Wed Oct 03, 2018 1:38 am

I'm with you. I dislike most grammar books that are highly dependent on grammar jargon to explain things. I prefer an example driven approach.

I enjoyed using about.com awhile ago - they've become thoughtco.com - don't know how good they are now.
1 x
I am a leaf on the wind, watch how I soar

User avatar
MamaPata
Brown Belt
Posts: 1019
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 9:25 am
Location: London
Languages: English (N), French (C1*), Russian (B1), Spanish (B1).

Long lost: Arabic and Latin.
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3004
x 1807

Re: Rdearman 2016/17/18 [Remember if we get caught, I'm deaf and you don't speak English]

Postby MamaPata » Thu Oct 04, 2018 5:18 pm

Another French podcast suggestion: À poêle (interviews with chefs).
2 x
Corrections appreciated.

User avatar
rdearman
Site Admin
Posts: 7231
Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 4:18 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Languages: English (N)
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1836
x 23123
Contact:

Re: Rdearman 2016/17/18 [Remember if we get caught, I'm deaf and you don't speak English]

Postby rdearman » Fri Oct 05, 2018 4:02 pm

MamaPata wrote:Another French podcast suggestion: À poêle (interviews with chefs).

Merci.
0 x
: 0 / 150 Read 150 books in 2024

My YouTube Channel
The Autodidactic Podcast
My Author's Newsletter

I post on this forum with mobile devices, so excuse short msgs and typos.


Return to “Language logs”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests