NancyLebovitz comments on Bad Concepts Repository - Less Wrong

20 Post author: moridinamael 27 June 2013 03:16AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (204)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 22 July 2013 02:00:26PM 0 points [-]

I would endorse this as well - grammatical texts are useful for refining your understanding of the structure of a language.

Tentatively-- grammatical texts have a complex relationship with language. They can be somewhat useful but still go astray because they're for a different language, with the classic example being grammar based on Latin being used to occasionally force English out of its normal use.

I suspect the same happens when formal grammar is used to claim that casual and/or spoken English is wrong.

Comment author: [deleted] 22 July 2013 06:58:42PM 1 point [-]

Modern descriptive grammars (like this one) aren't anywhere near that bad.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 04 November 2013 09:05:24PM 0 points [-]

Yes, accurate grammars are better than inaccurate grammars. But I think you are focusing too much on the negative effects and not noticing the positive effects. It is hard to notice people's understanding of grammar except when they make a mistake or correct someone else, both of which are generally negative effects.

Americans are generally not taught English grammar, but often are taught a foreign language, including grammar. Huge numbers of them claim that studying the foreign grammar helped them understand English grammar. Of course, they know the grammar is foreign, so they don't immediately impose it on English. But they start off knowing so little grammar that the overlap with the other language is already quite valuable, as are the abstractions involved.