請教grammar - 小學雜談

登錄 | 註冊

討論區

教育王國: 教育講場; 使用意見

幼兒教育: 幼校討論; 幼教雜談

小學教育: 小一選校; 小學雜談

中學教育: 升中派位; 中學交流; 初中教育

專上教育: 備戰大學; 選科選校

國際教育: 國際學校; 海外留學

知識增值: 課外活動; 教材閱讀; 公開考試; 深造進修

特殊教育: 特殊教育; 資優教育; 自閉寶寶; 智能評估

徵求專區: 二手市場; 誠徵老師; 組班專區; 徵保母車

聯絡管理員

我的中心

教育王國 › 討論區 › 小學雜談 › 請教grammar

1 ... 5 6 7 8 91011 12 13 下一頁

樓主: Sappy_Kerry	go 請教grammar [複製鏈接]

shadeslayer

珍珠宮

Rank: 11


	32340

181^#

發表於 17-12-11 16:27 |只看該作者

little_yolky 發表於 17-12-11 11:39
Really????

Really. 因為母語的文法大部分不是跟文法規則學的。

The more bizzare a thing is, the less mysterious it proves to be.

返回頂部

shadeslayer

珍珠宮

Rank: 11


	32340

182^#

發表於 17-12-11 16:28 |只看該作者

assado 發表於 17-12-11 14:19
當要出份正式文件, 報告, 建議, 都可以吾理文法?

行文不想着文法規則，不等如無文法。

The more bizzare a thing is, the less mysterious it proves to be.

返回頂部

little_yolky

水晶宮

Rank: 12


	64163

183^#

發表於 17-12-11 16:29 |只看該作者

assado 發表於 17-12-11 14:19
當要出份正式文件, 報告, 建議, 都可以吾理文法?

我無理文法(我講緊中文), 不過我會注意格式同埋措詞。

返回頂部

1998Ruby1998

侯爵府

Rank: 9 Rank: 9 Rank: 9


	22911

184^#

發表於 17-12-11 18:38 |只看該作者

回覆 little_yolky 的帖子

有語言學家講過，文法係腦天生已經擁有，所以唔需要諗文法。

不過以第二語言就唔同說法，唔顧及文法係一件頗難嘅事。

返回頂部

shadeslayer

珍珠宮

Rank: 11


	32340

185^#

發表於 17-12-11 20:03 |只看該作者

1998Ruby1998 發表於 17-12-11 18:38
回覆 little_yolky 的帖子

有語言學家講過，文法係腦天生已經擁有，所以唔需要諗文法。

本帖最後由 shadeslayer 於 17-12-11 20:05 編輯

腦天生時未有 neuron connections, 無可能有文法知識。B B有那一種語文的天生文法知識？德國B有德國天生文法？一出世送去香港，又忽然有廣東話天生文法知識？

無可能也。

學母語也要學文法，無文法連字也没法串連起來。學母語，孩子的文法由聽得多父母親講而學會，變成條件反射，不須用腦。

一般學第二語言，語境關係，則要學文法法則為主調。

我一向提昌，是香港孩子用混合第一第二語言教法。

返回頂部

MrBeast

珍珠宮

Rank: 11


	43230

186^#

發表於 17-12-11 20:09 |只看該作者

1998Ruby1998 發表於 17-12-11 18:38
回覆 little_yolky 的帖子

有語言學家講過，文法係腦天生已經擁有，所以唔需要諗文法。

應該是在BB-幼兒期間，腦子是tuned for lang learning，自動pick up 左些 grammar rules，唔使人教

返回頂部

1998Ruby1998

侯爵府

Rank: 9 Rank: 9 Rank: 9


	22911

187^#

發表於 17-12-11 20:44 |只看該作者

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

Universal Grammar 提倡者 Noam Chomsky 唔係講緊你諗果 d 文法知識 wor，佢講緊果 d 係小朋友天生能夠辨別名詞動詞，就算冇邏輯冇意義都可以組到一句文法成立嘅句子。
不過我冇講過我支持佢說法，而佢套理論的確存在漏洞，你要反駁的話去搵返佢。

返回頂部

shadeslayer

珍珠宮

Rank: 11


	32340

188^#

發表於 17-12-11 20:50 |只看該作者

1998Ruby1998 發表於 17-12-11 20:44
回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

Universal Grammar 提倡者 Noam Chomsky 唔係講緊你諗果 d 文法知識 wor，佢講緊 ...

本帖最後由 shadeslayer 於 17-12-11 21:07 編輯

我係反駁你寫的文字。係你的，我就反駁你，係 Noam 的, 我就反駁 Noam。我對事不對人。

亦可能你引錯，或者我理解錯。

「文法是腦天生有的」，是咩解呢？

返回頂部

1998Ruby1998

侯爵府

Rank: 9 Rank: 9 Rank: 9


	22911

189^#

發表於 17-12-11 20:50 |只看該作者

本帖最後由 1998Ruby1998 於 17-12-12 09:22 編輯

返帖正題，剛剛諗起心理語言堂有幾句幾有趣，大家可以叫下小朋友睇下諗下個句子文法成唔成立。睇唔出唔緊要，因為我有 d 都要讀多兩次先明。: happy:

The mouse the cat the dog the man chased ran away
The old man the boats
The prime numbers few
If police police police police, who police police police? Police police police police police police.

返回頂部

shadeslayer

珍珠宮

Rank: 11


	32340

190^#

發表於 17-12-12 08:56 |只看該作者

1998Ruby1998 發表於 17-12-11 20:50
返帖正題，剛剛諗起心理語言堂有幾句幾有趣，大家可以叫下小朋友睇下諗下個句子文法成唔成立。睇唔出唔緊要 ...

本帖最後由 shadeslayer 於 17-12-12 09:00 編輯

“man” is a verb

“numbers” is a verb

“Police” is both a verb and a noun and there seems to be a couple of police missing in your sentence.

The first one is problematic.There is only one verb

返回頂部

1998Ruby1998

侯爵府

Rank: 9 Rank: 9 Rank: 9


	22911

191^#

發表於 17-12-12 09:26 |只看該作者

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

There's no police missing in the sentence. I noticed I missed out a word in the first one, it should be a lot more obvious now.

返回頂部

shadeslayer

珍珠宮

Rank: 11


	32340

192^#

發表於 17-12-12 12:51 |只看該作者

1998Ruby1998 發表於 17-12-12 09:26
回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

There's no police missing in the sentence. I noticed I missed out a word in ...

First one

You still have only two verbs with 4 subjects.

Last one, if no police is missing, then the last bit is:

Police-police-police (subject) police (verb) police-police (object)

The more bizzare a thing is, the less mysterious it proves to be.

返回頂部

helenfan888

別墅

Rank: 4


	736

193^#

發表於 17-12-12 16:04 |只看該作者

本帖最後由 helenfan888 於 17-12-12 16:04 編輯

學生問：「我們說英文那麼總有詞不達意的時候啊」

外國老師用廣東話說：「我食三文治今朝，您明唔明? -_-"」

老師說：「母語是廣東話的不可能估不到我說什麼」

老師說: 「如果我不是一位專業翻譯員，我要寫一份正式中文報告，我會找一位中國人從旁協助，而不是將自己變成一個中國人 ^_^」

返回頂部

shadeslayer

珍珠宮

Rank: 11


	32340

194^#

發表於 17-12-12 16:20 |只看該作者

helenfan888 發表於 17-12-12 16:04
學生問：「我們說英文那麼總有詞不達意的時候啊」

外國老師用廣東話說：「我食三文治今朝，您明唔明? -_-" ...

問題係一樣語言的用處，遠多於只在「正式報告」時。

The more bizzare a thing is, the less mysterious it proves to be.

返回頂部

1998Ruby1998

侯爵府

Rank: 9 Rank: 9 Rank: 9


	22911

195^#

發表於 17-12-12 16:46 |只看該作者

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

If you add "that" into the sentence, it will be The mouse that the cat that the dog that the man chased ran away. It's similar to the sentence which a lot of children always toy with-I know you know we know they know....

返回頂部

shadeslayer

珍珠宮

Rank: 11


	32340

196^#

發表於 17-12-12 19:15 |只看該作者

1998Ruby1998 發表於 17-12-12 16:46
回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

If you add "that" into the sentence, it will be The mouse that the cat that ...

本帖最後由 shadeslayer 於 17-12-12 19:23 編輯

This is interesting. But the sentence still does not make sense.

"The dog the man chased ran away" is perfectly clear.But if you add "The mouse the cat" in front, nothing else, it is not a proper sentence anymore.

How can you add Two article and Two nouns in front of a proper sentence and the result is still a proper sentence?

For example, The Sun the rock the car was slow.

What does adding mouse and cat even mean?

返回頂部

1998Ruby1998

侯爵府

Rank: 9 Rank: 9 Rank: 9


	22911

197^#

發表於 17-12-12 19:26 |只看該作者

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

It has multiple centre embeddings. We can take "the mouse ran away" and stick in more information to make "the mouse the cat the dog that man chased ran away". In this case, the mouse ran away. It was chased by the cat. That cat was chased by a dog, which was also chased by a man. It's grammatically correct but not so easily comprehensible.

返回頂部

shadeslayer

珍珠宮

Rank: 11


	32340

198^#

發表於 17-12-12 20:56 |只看該作者

1998Ruby1998 發表於 17-12-12 19:26
回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

It has multiple centre embeddings. We can take "the mouse ran away" and sti ...

本帖最後由 shadeslayer 於 17-12-12 21:05 編輯

Then your sentence must be:

The mouse the cat the dog the man chased chased chased ran away.

The mouse the cat the dog the man chased (correspond to the man) chased (correspond to the dog) chased (correspond to the cat) ran away (correspond to the mouse).

You see, then this sentence at least make grammatical sense.

You can't omit two "chased" and share one chased with 3 subjects. If you want to share the verb, you have to have "and". Eg, The cat and the dog chased the mouse.

That is:. The mouse, the cat and the dog the man chased ran away.

This sentence also make perfect grammatical sense.

There are either missed "and"s or missed "chased"s in the original sentence.

I am not trying to challenge you, just want to get to the bottom of this interesting sentence, as I am just a science guy.

返回頂部

1998Ruby1998

侯爵府

Rank: 9 Rank: 9 Rank: 9


	22911

199^#

發表於 17-12-12 21:17 |只看該作者

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

One "chased" is enough, as my professor had explained.
"The mouse [that the cat] [that the dog] [that the man] chased ran away, grammatically it's allowed."

To be honest, you do appear to be challenging people, sometimes I believe you could deliver the messages in a less harsh tone, despite being a science guy.

返回頂部

shadeslayer

珍珠宮

Rank: 11


	32340

200^#

發表於 17-12-12 21:27 |只看該作者

1998Ruby1998 發表於 17-12-12 21:17
回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

One "chased" is enough, as my professor had explained.

本帖最後由 shadeslayer 於 17-12-12 21:37 編輯

Sometimes I detect that possibility and explicitly say I am not challenging someone. I am just curious. May be it is Asian attitude towards "questions". Western teachers welcome questions and do not normally see them as challenges.

You study in the UK, you should also learn that openness.

xxxxxxxxxxxx

The "that" is not necessary.Add it or not, it does not change the meaning.

Let me ask you, what if the cat, the dog and the man do not all chased each other, they do something different.Say,chased, killed, scratched.

How do you then structure the sentence.

I am saying then:

The mouse the cat the dog the man chased killed scratched ran away.

I am 100% sure the above is grammatically correct.

Why do changing chased, killed, scratched to chased, chased, chased, suddenly you can omit two "chased" without adding "and".

I am sure UK professors welcome questions at the right time.They won't see them as "Challenged" by students.

返回頂部