6 ms·

>I noticed that most of native speakers of any language are not that good actually in their mother tongue. That doesn't make any sense. Maybe they're not good

by throwaway41968 7y ago

>I noticed that most of native speakers of any language are not that good actually in their mother tongue. That doesn't make any sense. Maybe they're not good according to the normative institutions attempting to control the language, but that doesn't have any bearing on the ability of billions of people to communicate with their peers using their mother tongue. Just because an institution says a certain form is "incorrect" doesn't mean people are going to stop using it and make themselves understood with that form.

rq1 7y ago
If these institutions attempt to control it, then they’re not normative. It does make perfect sense when the improper use of tenses or grammar break the temporality, spatiality or relationships of the narrative. Eg. The obvious ones in french: ce/se, ça(cela)/çà/sa... etc. A bit less obvious: “après qu’il ait”, subjunctive after stating a fact or is the subjunctive intended and it wasn’t a fact... etc. And sometimes it becomes poetic “à l’insu de leur plein gré” when both forms are correct but with completely different meanings.
- throwaway41968 7y ago
  Except the subjunctive almost completely lost its initial semantic value of expressing the hypothetical or fictious in French, and in most cases has been replaced by the indicative. (Contrast with languages like Italian or Spanish that did retain the subjunctive in these cases, and look at the (many) situations where the indicative is used in French and the subjunctive is used in Italian/Spanish). These days, the subjunctive is mainly used in clauses where an infinitive could be used (pour qu'il ait/pour avoir, sans qu'il ait/sans avoir, etc.) In that sense, après qu'il ait, on top of feeling more "natural" due to the symmetry with avant qu'il ait, isn't as outrageous an error as académiciens would have you believe, it simply follows this very handy rule of thumb. Generally speaking, proper use of tenses and moods is overrated; it is inconsistent across Romance languages yet speakers of either have no difficulty making themselves understood, or learning others' systems. Many non-Romance languages dispense entirely with this system and yet their speakers don't encounter any difficulties expressing the same shades of meaning as they would in French.
  - rq1 7y ago
    > Except the subjunctive almost completely lost its initial semantic value of expressing the hypothetical or fictious in French That’s definitely not true, and what follows is thus complete bs sorry. Where does this come from to begin with? I even miss Spanish’ subjunctive future in French! It’s not only a mistake wrt the language rules but also a logical one, if intended initially to state facts. > Generally speaking, proper use of tenses and moods is overrated Wiping your butt after pooping is overrated too, you should try the opposite. To order a coffee maybe, but there is definitely something more interesting in (not only) french. That’s what makes a language more or less concise and elegant. You can express countless shades of meanings in pure arid arithmetic too, but yet... And people don’t understand nor agree with each other generally speaking: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics
    - throwaway41968 7y ago
      >That’s definitely not true, and what follows is thus complete bs sorry. Where does this come from to begin with? Alright I have my trusty Grammaire espagnole (Beschrelle) at hand, and here are the differences in use of the subjunctive. The following cases involve the indicative in Spanish and the subjunctive in French: -A concessive clause, whose opposition relies on a reality-grounded fact (aunque està lloviendo/bien qu'il pleuve) -A relative clause after a superlative or similar adjectives expressing the idea of "first", "unique", uses the subjunctive in French. The comparison point being grounded in reality, Spanish always uses the indicative. (la mejor secretaria que hemos tenido/la meilleure secrétaire que nous ayons eue). Conversely, here are cases where Spanish uses the subjunctive and French uses the indicative: -Expressing a condition, hypothesis or hypothetic comparison after si (si vinieras conmigo/si tu venais avec moi) -Expressing a supposition (quiza ella esté al tanto/peut-être qu'elle est au courant) -Temporal clauses in the future (Cuando venga/Quand il viendra) I can go on if you like. Very clearly, Spanish's use of the subjunctive very closely follows the hypothetical/unrealized aspect of the content, whereas French's use is less consistent with that aspect, and mostly depends on the locution being used. >I even miss Spanish’ subjunctive future in French! And yet I'm sure you don't have any problems expressing the hypothetical and/or fictious in Spanish, do you? At least hundreds of millions of Spanish speakers don't. >Wiping your butt after pooping is overrated too, you should try the opposite. Seeing how mood use is inconsistent from one Romance language to the other, I guess Spanish and Italian speakers aren't wiping their butts according to your point of view (and you aren't wiping yours according to them). Or...we could just stop adopting such a normative attitude and admit usage changes across countries and time periods without anything being reprehensible about it? >That’s what makes a language more or less concise and elegant. You can express countless shades of meanings in pure arid arithmetic too, but yet... Are you seriously arguing that languages that lack the tense and mood system of Romance languages are somehow less elegant and concise, or less able to express countless shades of meaning somehow?

rq1 7y ago

If these institutions attempt to control it, then they’re not normative. It does make perfect sense when the improper use of tenses or grammar break the temporality, spatiality or relationships of the narrative. Eg. The obvious ones in french: ce/se, ça(cela)/çà/sa... etc. A bit less obvious: “après qu’il ait”, subjunctive after stating a fact or is the subjunctive intended and it wasn’t a fact... etc. And sometimes it becomes poetic “à l’insu de leur plein gré” when both forms are correct but with completely different meanings.

throwaway41968 7y ago
Except the subjunctive almost completely lost its initial semantic value of expressing the hypothetical or fictious in French, and in most cases has been replaced by the indicative. (Contrast with languages like Italian or Spanish that did retain the subjunctive in these cases, and look at the (many) situations where the indicative is used in French and the subjunctive is used in Italian/Spanish). These days, the subjunctive is mainly used in clauses where an infinitive could be used (pour qu'il ait/pour avoir, sans qu'il ait/sans avoir, etc.) In that sense, après qu'il ait, on top of feeling more "natural" due to the symmetry with avant qu'il ait, isn't as outrageous an error as académiciens would have you believe, it simply follows this very handy rule of thumb. Generally speaking, proper use of tenses and moods is overrated; it is inconsistent across Romance languages yet speakers of either have no difficulty making themselves understood, or learning others' systems. Many non-Romance languages dispense entirely with this system and yet their speakers don't encounter any difficulties expressing the same shades of meaning as they would in French.
- rq1 7y ago
  > Except the subjunctive almost completely lost its initial semantic value of expressing the hypothetical or fictious in French That’s definitely not true, and what follows is thus complete bs sorry. Where does this come from to begin with? I even miss Spanish’ subjunctive future in French! It’s not only a mistake wrt the language rules but also a logical one, if intended initially to state facts. > Generally speaking, proper use of tenses and moods is overrated Wiping your butt after pooping is overrated too, you should try the opposite. To order a coffee maybe, but there is definitely something more interesting in (not only) french. That’s what makes a language more or less concise and elegant. You can express countless shades of meanings in pure arid arithmetic too, but yet... And people don’t understand nor agree with each other generally speaking: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics
  - throwaway41968 7y ago
    >That’s definitely not true, and what follows is thus complete bs sorry. Where does this come from to begin with? Alright I have my trusty Grammaire espagnole (Beschrelle) at hand, and here are the differences in use of the subjunctive. The following cases involve the indicative in Spanish and the subjunctive in French: -A concessive clause, whose opposition relies on a reality-grounded fact (aunque està lloviendo/bien qu'il pleuve) -A relative clause after a superlative or similar adjectives expressing the idea of "first", "unique", uses the subjunctive in French. The comparison point being grounded in reality, Spanish always uses the indicative. (la mejor secretaria que hemos tenido/la meilleure secrétaire que nous ayons eue). Conversely, here are cases where Spanish uses the subjunctive and French uses the indicative: -Expressing a condition, hypothesis or hypothetic comparison after si (si vinieras conmigo/si tu venais avec moi) -Expressing a supposition (quiza ella esté al tanto/peut-être qu'elle est au courant) -Temporal clauses in the future (Cuando venga/Quand il viendra) I can go on if you like. Very clearly, Spanish's use of the subjunctive very closely follows the hypothetical/unrealized aspect of the content, whereas French's use is less consistent with that aspect, and mostly depends on the locution being used. >I even miss Spanish’ subjunctive future in French! And yet I'm sure you don't have any problems expressing the hypothetical and/or fictious in Spanish, do you? At least hundreds of millions of Spanish speakers don't. >Wiping your butt after pooping is overrated too, you should try the opposite. Seeing how mood use is inconsistent from one Romance language to the other, I guess Spanish and Italian speakers aren't wiping their butts according to your point of view (and you aren't wiping yours according to them). Or...we could just stop adopting such a normative attitude and admit usage changes across countries and time periods without anything being reprehensible about it? >That’s what makes a language more or less concise and elegant. You can express countless shades of meanings in pure arid arithmetic too, but yet... Are you seriously arguing that languages that lack the tense and mood system of Romance languages are somehow less elegant and concise, or less able to express countless shades of meaning somehow?