aaleks's log

[aaleks]

del.

[aaleks]

del.

[aaleks]

del.

[aaleks]

del.

[StringerBell]

today I was personally attacked, as well as my approach to learning English, and the quality of my English too (at least it looked that way), because I value an opinion of a native speaker of the language more than the one of a non-native who learned several grammar books by heart. Actually it's so typical for those people. I've read statements like "natives misspell it's and its/their and they're, we don't make such mistakes -- we know their language better than they do", or "you shouldn't trust an opinion of a native speaker", etc. many times there.

Man, you sure take a beating on that forum! I'm sorry it's so rough over there.

It's true that a lot of native English speakers make a lot of very basic grammatical mistakes. It often seems unforgivable to me, since for a native speaker, the language is really pretty simple as far as grammar goes. Every time I read or hear incorrect English, I have to always remind myself what it should be or else I risk incorporating those mistakes into my speech and writing. That said, I'm sure I do make my share of grammatical mistakes, they just are not those simple "there/they're/their" or "if I was" type of mistakes. So, yes, native English speakers as a general rule tend to be pretty sloppy when it comes to being grammatically correct, but there are enough of us who at least try to be proper that I don't think we can all be written off. I'm sure it is difficult to know whose* feedback to trust, unless you have been reading to/talking with someone for a while and can get a sense of their language skills.

*Here is a good example of how I don't have great grammar, but at least I try: I sometimes forget when to use "whose" vs. "who's". However, whenever I'm not sure which form of a word to use, I look up it. I don't think many people take that extra step and will just guess and move on. It bothers me to do this, so I always double-check.)

"I arrived in London. I had found a job, but I didn't have any friends in England"

What does "had" means in that piece of text? Does it influence the meaning? Is the meaning clear - the order of the events? Grammar-nazy non-natives seem having no problem to give the answer (yes, for them it's "the" -- the only possible answer) while not every chased down native speaker was so sure about that.

I don't know why, but I keep tripping over the words when I try to read this. For some reason, what wants to come out of my mouth is:
"I had found a job, but I hadn't found any friends."

I don't think there's anything technically incorrect about that sentence, it's just not phrased in a way I would instinctively phrase it, so I have to keep slowing myself down to read it as written.

I think that using I'd vs. I had can give a slightly different feel, but it doesn't have to.

I had found a job -> this can either be stating what happened (I had found a job as a salesperson, or I had found a job after only a day of searching), or it can be a way to emphasize that while one thing did happen, another did not. I think this is why I keep wanting to read: "I had found a job, but I hadn't found any friends."

Another very natural way to say this sentence (to me) would be: I'd found a job, but I hadn't made any friends." So writing out "had" isn't necessary to emphasize that one thing happened while another didn't.

However, there are probably a lot of times when people choose "I'd" simply because it's shorter, quicker, and easier. I, myself, probably often choose it for that same reason.

*This is probably not very interesting or helpful since we've established that I'm not a grammar expert by any means, but it was interesting for me to think about the slightly different nuances that I'd vs. I had can have.

[aaleks]

del.

[StringerBell]

I'm tripping over it too but this is a weird wording to begin with. As I understand native speakers are having problem with it because of that jumping back and forth between Past Simple and Past Perfect. So they try lining up it somehow. It's interesing though that you opted for Past Perfect while many would just use Past Simple, like:
"I found a job, but I didn't have any friends"

There are a lot of shades of nuances here, so I was trying to keep intact the meaning of the original sentence. If I were speaking, I would definitely use simple past in this situation. I'd probably say something like: I found a job, but I still haven't made any friends.

About I'd vs I had vs I had it's another issue. "I'd" sounds casual and fleeting to me. As if the Past Perfect is used here because the speaker has to but the Past Simple can be used as well. When it's the non-contracted form "I had" and it is used in an informal writing or conversation it feels to me that the speaker sees that piece of information a bit more important. When it's "I had" -- with an emphasis on "had" -- I see it as an indication that the information is important for the speaker, they want to draw attention to that. That how I feel it. It's really just a feeling that might be wrong. Is it? Or something of what I wrote is true. I know that technically they all are the Past Perfect tense but I'm interested in the emotional part, if I may call it so.

I agree with this. In my opinion, "I'd" has a more casual feeling to it; which is probably why I think it's more common in spoken English than in written English. If someone were speaking and they said "I had" then probably it would be because they were emphasizing or drawing attention to something.

#1: "If I'd studied more, I would have passed the test."
#2: "If I had studied more, I would have passed the test."

These two sentences have the same meaning. But when I say them in my head, they do feel slightly different. #2 feels a little more like I'm wishing I had studied more, while #1 feels a little more like I'm just stating a fact. #2 feels like there's a little bit of regret, while #1 feels a bit detached. I'm not sure if other native English speakers would agree with this, but that's my take.

[aaleks]

del.

[aaleks]

del.

[aaleks]

del.