Ask Me About Grammar!

[Debater Slayer]

I love grammar and language in general, so I figured I'd make this thread. Ask me about English or Arabic grammar!

(Since most RFers are native English speakers, I suspect there may be very few questions about English grammar, but we'll see.)

 

[SalixIncendium]

Why is English verb conjugation so complicated?

 

[JustGeorge]

Teach me an Arabic greeting!

 

[Debater Slayer]

Why is English verb conjugation so complicated?

Great question!

I don't know a great deal about the history of English linguistics, but one thing I know is that English has a lot of words either based on or borrowed from Latin, Greek, French, and other Germanic languages. This is the source of at least some of the language's irregularity in verb conjugation, compared to the highly systematic and prescriptivist grammar of Arabic, for example.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Great question!

I don't know a great deal about the history of English linguistics, but one thing I know is that English has a lot of words either based on or borrowed from Latin, Greek, French, and other Germanic languages. This is the source of at least some of the language's irregularity in verb conjugation, compared to the highly systematic and prescriptivist grammar of Arabic, for example.

It didn't strike me that English verb conjugation was so difficult until I took Latin derived languages in high school. I was taken by how easy the languages were to learn.

I don't envy anyone whose first language isn't English that has to learn it.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Teach me an Arabic greeting!

"Assalaamu 'alaykum" ("peace be upon you") is the most prevalent one, although it's Islamic and not used by most non-Muslims.

"Keefak?"/"Keefek?" (masculine and feminine forms, respectively) means "How are you?" in Shami (Levantine) and Khaleeji (Gulf) dialects. "Ezayak?"/"Ezayek?" means the same in the Egyptian dialect.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It didn't strike me that English verb conjugation was so difficult until I took Latin derived languages in high school. I was taken by how easy the languages were to learn.

The irregular verbs have a considerable learning curve, but on the whole, I would say that English grammar is much easier than its Arabic counterpart, even for many native speakers of the latter.

I don't envy anyone whose first language isn't English that has to learn it.

It's more or less a must for many people, for sure, but the internet and accessibility of various media (e.g., movies and YouTube videos) have made learning it easier than before.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I've taken classes in English, American Sign Language and Japanese.

English and ASL are subject-verb-object (SVO) grammar styles while Japanese is SOV.

What about Arabic?

 

[Secret Chief]

Why is English verb conjugation so complicated?

Dissuades foreigners from learning English.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I've taken classes in English, American Sign Language and Japanese.

English and ASL are subject-verb-object (SVO) grammar styles while Japanese is SOV.

What about Arabic?

Arabic can be SVO, VSO, and VOS, although the most common forms are the first two. The positioning of the subject, verb, and object could be changed to indicate emphasis on any of them, among other rhetorical and poetic uses.

There's a famous example of this in Qur'an 35:28 (highlighting mine):

وَمِنَ النَّاسِ وَالدَّوَابِّ وَالْأَنْعَامِ مُخْتَلِفٌ أَلْوَانُهُ كَذَٰلِكَ ۗ إِنَّمَا يَخْشَى اللَّهَ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ الْعُلَمَاءُ ۗ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَزِيزٌ غَفُورٌ
Sahih International
And among people and moving creatures and grazing livestock are various colors similarly. Only those fear Allah , from among His servants, who have knowledge. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Forgiving.

Surat Fatir [35:28] - The Noble Qur'an - القرآن الكريم

Surat Fatir [verse 28] - And among people and moving creatures and grazing livestock are various colors similarly. Only those fear Allah , from among His servants, who have knowledge. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Forgiving.

legacy.quran.com

The original Arabic has "Allah," the object of fear, before the subject, "[His servants] who have knowledge." In speech, the diacritical movement on the last letter clarifies which is the subject and which is the object. In writing, the diacritics on the last letters of "Allah" and "[His servants] who have knowledge" (which is one word in Arabic), respectively, denote which is which.

These are the diacritics zoomed in:

إِنَّمَا يَخْشَى اللَّهَ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ الْعُلَمَاءُ ۗ​

The fatha, which is the diacritic on "Allah" (to the right), denotes the object. The dhamma, the diacritic on the word "al-ulama'" ("those who have knowledge"), denotes the subject. Swap the two diacritics (not the words, but the diacritics) and the meaning of the sentence becomes, "Allah fears His servants who have knowledge." The subject and the object are inverted just because of swapping the diacritics; the verse is written in VOS order, and swapping the diacritics turns its order into VSO (and also gives a theologically incorrect meaning).

In high school, my Arabic teacher put a question about this verse on a grammar exam and asked students to rewrite it while preserving the meaning. Most of them wrote, "Allah fears His servants who have knowledge" because they didn't have a proper grasp of the grammatical rules behind the placement of the diacritics. That meaning is nonsensical and even blasphemous per Islamic teachings, but it's what one gets if they don't pay attention to where the diacritics are.

This is just a small glimpse into Arabic grammar. You can probably see why it makes a lot of people give up on learning the language.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Arabic can be SVO, VSO, VOS, and SOV in structure, although that last one is quite rare and mainly used in poetic contexts in Classical Arabic. The positioning of the subject, verb, and object could be changed to indicate emphasis on any of them, among other rhetorical and poetic uses.

There's a famous example of this in Qur'an 35:28 (highlighting mine):

Surat Fatir [35:28] - The Noble Qur'an - القرآن الكريم

Surat Fatir [verse 28] - And among people and moving creatures and grazing livestock are various colors similarly. Only those fear Allah , from among His servants, who have knowledge. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Forgiving.

legacy.quran.com

The original Arabic has "Allah," the object of fear, before the subject, "[His servants] who have knowledge." In speech, the diacritical movement on the last letter clarifies which is the subject and which is the object. In writing, the diacritics on the last letters of "Allah" and "[His servants] who have knowledge" (which is one word in Arabic), respectively, denote which is which.

These are the diacritics zoomed in:

إِنَّمَا يَخْشَى اللَّهَ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ الْعُلَمَاءُ ۗ​

The fatha, which is the diacritic on "Allah" (to the right), denotes the object. The dhamma, the diacritic on the word "al-ulama'" ("those who have knowledge"), denotes the subject. Swap the two diacritics (not the words, but the diacritics) and the meaning of the sentence becomes, "Allah fears His servants who have knowledge." The subject and the object are inverted just because of swapping the diacritics.

In high school, my Arabic teacher put a question about this verse on a grammar exam and asked students to rewrite it while preserving the meaning. Most of them wrote, "Allah fears His servants who have knowledge" because they didn't have a proper grasp of the grammatical rules behind the placement of the diacritics. That meaning is nonsensical and even blasphemous per Islamic teachings, but it's what one gets if they don't pay attention to where the diacritics are.

This is just a small glimpse into Arabic grammar. You can probably see why it makes a lot of people give up on learning the language.

That's interesting! ASL can be a little like that too, because the order of the sentence can be changed by simultaneous direction or movenent of the sign or facial gesture. It also necessitates a time order in the sov or svo too. So time-subject-verb-object. It also has a strong active vs passive voice that can change the order too.

 

[Debater Slayer]

That's interesting! ASL can be a little like that too, because the order of the sentence can be changed by simultaneous direction or movenent of the sign or facial gesture. It also necessitates a time order in the sov or svo too. So time-subject-verb-object. It also has a strong active vs passive voice that can change the order too.

Interesting. I've come to believe that knowing different languages can actually change the way one thinks about the world, and in my opinion, the way sentences are structured is part of this. The fact that all nouns are gendered in Arabic and French, for example, means it takes a little getting used to for some native speakers of one language to adjust to the other when learning it, since some nouns that are masculine in Arabic are feminine in French, and vice versa.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Interesting. I've come to believe that knowing different languages can actually change the way one thinks about the world, and in my opinion, the way sentences are structured is part of this. The fact that all nouns are gendered in Arabic and French, for example, means it takes a little getting used to for some native speakers of one language to adjust to the other when learning it, since some nouns that are masculine in Arabic are feminine in French, and vice versa.

Yep. Meanwhile all pronouns in ASL are gender neutral, since you only indicate by pointing to the person(s) or by name. Writing takes on all American English concentions though.

Japanese language is also fairly gender neutral spoken, in Tokyo standard dialect. But there are feminine and masculine slang. But modern Kanji and traditional Kanji are not gender neutral in the slightest.

 

[Rival]

What do you think of the passival voice?

 

[Debater Slayer]

What do you think of the passival voice?

Useful or necessary in some contexts but often best replaced by the active voice when the subject is known. (Oops.) It can occasionally give a tinge of equivocation or disingenuousness to a statement even when the writer or speaker is genuine.

In Arabic, the answer is much more complicated, as each voice has numerous uses that range from enhancing poetic rhyming and meter to emphasizing different parts of a sentence and evoking different emotions within the reader or listener.

 

[Rival]

Useful or necessary in some contexts but often best replaced by the active voice when the subject is known. (Oops.) It can occasionally give a tinge of equivocation or disingenuousness to a statement even when the writer or speaker is genuine.

In Arabic, the answer is much more complicated, as each voice has numerous uses that range from enhancing poetic rhyming and meter to emphasizing different parts of a sentence and evoking different emotions within the reader or listener.

No, no, I mean the passival

The Grammarphobia Blog: As the passive progressed

How the passival ("the houses were building") became the passive progressive ("the houses were being built").

www.grammarphobia.com

 

[Debater Slayer]

No, no, I mean the passival

The Grammarphobia Blog: As the passive progressed

How the passival ("the houses were building") became the passive progressive ("the houses were being built").

www.grammarphobia.com

Something is cooking!

To me, the primary function of language is clarity of expression, so it doesn't matter much to me whether the passival voice or the evolution thereof (the present progressive/continuous) takes precedence in English as long as it serves its intended function.

In Arabic, "is being [insert past participle here]" is formed from the root verb and is just one word. The object in the active voice becomes the subject or what is called in Arabic the "vice subject" or "substitute of the subject" in the passive construction. It is denoted by the same diacritical mark as the subject.

What about you? What do you think of the passival voice?

 

[Rival]

Something is cooking!

To me, the primary function of language is clarity of expression, so it doesn't matter much to me whether the passival voice or the evolution thereof (the present progressive/continuous) takes precedence in English as long as it serves its intended function.

In Arabic, "is being [insert past participle here]" is formed from the root verb and is just one word. The object in the active voice becomes the subject or what is called in Arabic the "vice subject" or "substitute of the subject" in the passive construction. It is denoted by the same diacritical mark as the subject.

What about you? What do you think of the passival voice?

I like it as I think it flows better than the awkward 'is being' etc.

 

[Vinayaka]

I love grammar and language in general, so I figured I'd make this thread. Ask me about English or Arabic grammar!

(Since most RFers are native English speakers, I suspect there may be very few questions about English grammar, but we'll see.)

Is the comma in your sentence necessary or optional?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Is the comma in your sentence necessary or optional?

The one inside the parentheses? It is necessary in order to separate the introductory clause from the independent clause:

Since most RFers are native English speakers, I suspect there may be very few questions about English grammar, but we'll see.

The last sentence is also an independent clause, and since it starts with a coordinating conjunction, a comma before it is necessary to separate it from the preceding independent clause.