English Language Learners

Damkerng T.

00:04

@Arrowfar Is that from a series or something?

user116848

@DamkerngT. No I made that :)

Damkerng T.

Oh, neat!

user116848

It is again a Tomb Raider photo

user116848

@DamkerngT. I only made it a meme not the photo lol. Photo is from the google images

user116848

You want a meme of Asimo?

Damkerng T.

00:05

She looks cool. :)

user116848

I know, right :D

Damkerng T.

@Arrowfar Umm... Probably not. :)

user116848

@DamkerngT. You thought I made the photo too? haha

Damkerng T.

I guessed the photo might be taken from some TV series. And it might be interesting to watch. :)

Wow, today my keyboard is not super sluggish as usual.

user116848

Yeah you can watch "Arrow" series. But there is a guy in it not her. She is some girl posing for Tomb Raider game promotion.

Damkerng T.

00:08

Ahh

user116848

Yes :)

user116848

@DamkerngT. What happened to your keyboard?

Damkerng T.

Usually, it is not very responsive, but today it seems to be much better than it normally is.

When it was really bad, I had to type blindly the whole line. And after I pressed my Enter, I usually could see what other typed in before I could see mine.

Now, it's only a few characters delay.

(Normally, it's a few words delay.)

(When it's bad, I'd call it a few clauses delay. :-)

Maybe I was trying to push my computer way beyond its limits. :-)

user116848

:D

user116848

Kinda funny. You can change it.

user116848

00:13

Or fix it

Damkerng T.

I like this one, though. I mean, I like to sit in front of this one because of the chair. :)

user116848

hah

user116848

So may be it's the PC's fault not keyboard's

Damkerng T.

Yup. And its owner. :)

user116848

Owner meaning 'you'?

Damkerng T.

00:15

However, my keyboard has some few bad keys, like r and t, which need to be pressed a bit harder than other keys.

@Arrowfar Who else it could be? :)

user116848

:) I thought it was office's etc.

Damkerng T.

So when I type faster, chances are, some of my r and t will be missing.

@Arrowfar I use my home as my office too.

user116848

I had a keyboard like this with bad 'space' key due to me playing video games on it :)

Damkerng T.

Hahaha!

I think I get that. :)

I burned a few mouses myself on that too!

user116848

But now only my internet gives me problems sometimes

user116848

00:17

Keyboard is good for now :)

user116848

@DamkerngT. Yeah my mouses too lol

Damkerng T.

Touchscreens on tables can be a very handy alternative.

user116848

Yes they are. But I tend to use PC or laptop. I find them easy to use and all.

Damkerng T.

(I'm not sure if I should call them mice, I think I prefer calling them mouses. They ain't no real mice anyway.)

@Arrowfar Recently I learned that listening to BBC Radio is much easier on tables (e.g. iPad) than on PCs.

user116848

You mean 'tablets'?

Damkerng T.

00:20

PCs have their own advantages too.

@Arrowfar Ah, see what I just mentioned about my t and r!

user116848

Oh, so it was a typo :D

user116848

You are typing funny now :-)

Damkerng T.

Sometimes my typos are from my brain (well, most of the time), sometimes they're from my fingers (I guess it's about muscle memory), sometimes they're from my keyboard.

Hehe!

user116848

Same here

user116848

I mistype too

Damkerng T.

00:23

What's very funny is that I type your as you very often. I think you can find a handful of them on ELL. :D

user116848

I didn't notice

user116848

But it's okay I guess if it's a typo

Damkerng T.

It's probably the easiest to spot, I think.

user116848

Mm

Damkerng T.

I think I usually pressed the key, and sometimes the keyboard doesn't think I pressed it. And because of the response time, I have no feedback to rely on.

Some people seem to be able to type just fine without seeing the things they type. I'm not.

But I guess my computer is trying to teach me that, every day. :D

user116848

00:28

Yes it is :D

Damkerng T.

In any case, I think most people would find the way I use my own computer funny. For example, I usually have more than a couple of hundred tabs opened at all time. Sometime the number can climb up to a thousand, or more!

(When that happens, my computer will be really slow. And if I opened a big PDF, it would crash. :-)

user116848

That is way too much. I can only open upto max of 10-20 tabs before slowing down the internet

Damkerng T.

Firefox is very handy for this. It can restart with all those several hundred tabs in around 30-60 seconds.

user116848

Yeah I use Firefox too

user116848

@DamkerngT. You can bookmark those tabs without opening them all the time

Damkerng T.

00:32

At the moment, I have 28 windows, and there are 286 tabs in this window alone.

user116848

I use bookmarks in Firefox all the time

Damkerng T.

(Most of them are something I call "need some work" questions on ELL.)

user116848

@DamkerngT. So many tabs! What kind of searching you do?

user116848

Miscellaneous?

Damkerng T.

@Arrowfar I use bookmarks too. If I don't bookmark some of them, I could easily have some ten thousand tabs, I guess!

@Arrowfar Mostly English and work related.

user116848

00:34

I see

user116848

You use Wordreference.com

Damkerng T.

I have one window for NPR, with 15 tabs right now.

@Arrowfar I think I don't use it. My main dictionary is Macmillan.

user116848

No it's not a dictionary. It's some English site

Damkerng T.

Oh, you mean the forum. No, I don't have an account there.

user116848

Yes it's a forum

user116848

00:37

plus dictionaries etc. too

user116848

But I think SE is much better, with interaction options and such

Damkerng T.

Some questions on ELL are cross-posted there too, I think, but I guess it's fine.

user116848

Yeah I know :)

Damkerng T.

@Arrowfar nods -- I like it here too!

user116848

I think interaction with natives and other learners is necessary

Damkerng T.

00:39

Gotta go. See you soon, and have a nice day!

user116848

Bye!

F.E.

03:12

5

Q: "Her whole family IS/ARE biologists"?

I'm not sure whether to put is (number agreeing with the singular her whole family) or are (number agreeing with plural biologists) in this sentence: Her whole family is/are biologists. After some more searching, it seems to make it correct, the whole would need to be removed. Based on t...

Another example why a grammar site is needed.

F.E.

06:02

. . . yawn . . .

> 1. "She had been going to tell me."

> 2. "He may be going to resign."

> 3. "He had been going to marry his tutor."

Those above three examples, are they acceptable to you?

Is this an AmE vs BrE thing?

They all sound unusual to my AmE ear. . . . (Examples taken from CGEL pages 211-2.)

Nico

2 sounds good to me

I'm still thinking of contexts for 1 and 3

F.E.

Some examples, like the following is fine for me:

> 4. "The dog's going to take the roast."

> 5. "The secretary is going to give you a timetable."

Nico

Those sounds fine to me too

I think the ones with "had been" sounds a bit formal

F.E.

#4 and #5 are completely fine for me. It's #1, #2, #3 that don't work for me. I suspect it might be a dialect thing (and possibly mostly a BrE vs AmE).

Did you get the info you wanted from your Bas Aarts book?

Nico

06:17

Would it be fair to say that AmE uses perfect tenses less often?

F.E.

For some kinds of situations, such as VP reduction.

A good grammar book probably will mention them.

Nico

@F.E. I'm still reading it. I'm like 1/4th through. I'm reading it just to get familiar with modern grammar

F.E.

Have you seen the related info for considering the existential "there" to be a dummy pronoun?

Consider:

> There is a cat under the table.

> Is there a cat under the table?

Nico

AFK

F.E.

> There is a cat under the table, isn't there?

They are similar to:

> He is under the table.

> Is he under the table?

> He is under the table, isn't he?

So that shows some similarities between the existential "there" and pronouns.

Nico

06:24

With nouns!

F.E.

And also, a prototypical adverb would not be able to work in the first three versions as done with the existential "there".

But how would a noun work with:

> (*) The cat is under the table, isn't the cat?

So that's an argument for pronoun.

Nouns don't work there, but pronouns do (including the existential "there").

Nico

The way I understood pronouns is that the need a reference

F.E.

Syntactical tests are safer to use (more reliable).

That's like using automation, and there's no need (or less need) to think about the semantics.

And for the pronouns in the previous examples, I don't think there's any referent or antecedent.

Except for the pronoun to previous pronoun.

Nico

An interesting comparison is the equivalent construct in Spanish.

F.E.

Tiger speak no Spanish. Are there tigers in Spain?

Nico

06:32

Spanish clauses don't need an explicit subject, but the verb has to concord in number.

F.E.

In number and person?

Nico

Existentials constructs in Spanish don't a subject, but they concord with an implicit singular, 3rd person

@F.E. yes, and person

Speakers sometime try to concord with the predicate, but the Spanish Academy considers that ungrammatical

F.E.

Actually, I'm starting to recall a similar conversation in a thread on a linguistics site, where there was a language (Spanish?) that had a parallel structure for their pseudo-existential (I think).

Or was that on copular clauses?

Nico

Yes, probably we are talking about the same

F.E.

So your verb has number and person agreement that is 3rd person and singular (for "there")?

Nico

06:37

yes, it does

F.E.

In English, the default person and number for clauses is 3rd person and singular.

So, it sorta makes sense that if there is no explicit subject, then the default would be the ones used: 3rd person and singular.

Interestingly, I'm about to re-read the chapter in CGEL that deals with subjects -- Chapter 4: "The clause: complements".

Nico

This comparison makes me feel that "existential there" is a dummy word. It has absolutly no meaning and it's there just to please the need for an explicit subject.

F.E.

Yes, that is true. Also, by being in the subject slot, it provides an empty "theme" (dummy theme), so that it can then go on and introduce the new info after the verb.

The existential "there" is used quite a lot in fiction prose. (Also in all writings.)

> There's a funny looking man standing in the corner. There's a gun in his hand!

Also:

> I turned around. There was a green tentacled monster standing in the doorway!

Also:

> There was a platter of goodies on the table. There were donuts and cookies and bagels. There were apples and oranges and peaches. There were . . .

The existential "there" construction is very handy. :)

Nico

It's very handy to describe a scene

F.E.

It's amazing how often I see on grammar sites (and writing sites) the bad advice that one should eliminate those "there"s. :(

It's good for introducing new info right at the reader without having to dull the reader's eyes with unnecessary "old info" in the subject slot.

The existential "there" doesn't slow the reader down, and so, the reader goes right on pass it and then hits the new important info after the verb.

It is often jarring for a reader to hit a sentence where the subject is unexpected new info.

Try reading the first two examples where the existential "there" has been removed. They are very awkward and jarring.

> 1.x) A funny looking man is standing in the corner. A gun is in his hand!

Nico

06:51

It's also used in academic writing (thouth I would call it a hedge construct):

F.E.

> 2.) I turned around. A green tentacled monster is standing in the doorway!

Nico

> There is a growing concern...

> There is evidence to indicate...

F.E.

But those have no context with them. (Mine had some context.)

Both versions could be good versions in contexts where: "a growing concern" is new info or about to be a new theme; "evidence to indicate" is new info or about to be a new theme.

Nico

@F.E. They don't work well, because we don't want to introduce new information in the subject position :) (all this grammar reading is teaching me some things)

F.E.

(cont.) Of course, if there was meaningful old info in the context that could have been used in the subject slot to help slide the reader into the sentence, then that is different. :)

Nico

06:57

I always thought my examples were unnecessary, but they actually become handy if you don't want to introduce new information in the subject position.

F.E.

It also helps in that it separates the info into digestible chunks. You don't want a string of new info, one right after the other. You need filler phrases here and there to allow the reader to sorta mentally breath between the chunks. So often, I'll see a writer trying to dump a whole string of adjectives together, not realizing that the reader's mind is not going to really notice each adjective separately.

Nico

Ahh, I almost forgot, I meant to ask you something. How does the followng sound to you:

> Gently and steady does it.

Would such a beast work, or we need instead:

> Gently and steadily do/does it

F.E.

07:17

Well, the coordination of adverb with adverb would probably be expected -- But, remember that this is a "set expression", and so, you might not really want to change its structure like that (by using a coordination).

F.E.

07:37

@Nico As to "do" vs "does", well, you'll have to be careful on that decision too. A speaker of today's English might be treating "it" as the subject (even if that might be counter to the historical roots of that expression).

. . . Tiger be gonna taking a nap . . .

Damkerng T.

09:54

0

Q: Is even a preposition/conjunction?

No one can do it , even him. I've always thought that "even" can function as both preposition and conjunction in that it can be followed by noun phrases or dependent clauses. But dictionaries only say it's an adverb ? And for my example above, what exactly do you call the boldface text in re...

grammar

Traditionally, even is an adverb...

But what does CGEL say about even? Is it really an adverb in CGEL?

By the way, I think these two even's aren't the same.

> We all went, even Steve.
We all went, even.

And we have a few even combos the look really like conjunctions, such as, even if, even though, even so. (Is there any other combo?)

Nico

10:12

@DamkerngT. What's the meaning of the second sentence. I can't parse it.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Yes, a focus adverb

Damkerng T.

Ahh... so they regard even as an adverb too.

Anonymous

@Nico Even is a sentential modifier in the second example

Damkerng T.

@Nico Hmm... How should I describe it? It's hard to begin with, even.

Anonymous

It would be difficult to describe its meaning without giving it a context

Nico

10:13

How does it change the meaning of "We all went"?

Anonymous

"No, we don't hate theme parks. We all went, even!"

Damkerng T.

Ahh... That is a great example!

Nico

It doesn't sound good to me, although I get the meaning.

Anonymous

It's informal.

Nico

"No, we don't hate theme parks. In fact, we all went!"

Anonymous

10:16

You are of course free to apply whatever judgments you feel are best :-)

Damkerng T.

@Nico Would it help if we put even in front of the main verb?

Anonymous

That changes what it focuses

Nico

I think the reason I don't like is because the first clause is negative.

In "we all went, even", where is the strongest stress?

Is the comma necessary?

Damkerng T.

I'd say went and ev- both are prominent.

Nico

Can I say "we all even went"?

Damkerng T.

10:23

A comma there would be nice, because I think I would pause a bit there.

@Nico I tried to suggest it to bend your view a bit, but as snailboat said, it shifts the focus.

To me, "We all even went" is a bit ambiguous. (I can read it three ways.)

Anonymous

I think the comma should be there

Anonymous

The stress is probably on went

Nico

@snailboat That makes it sound better. I think I was putting too much stress in "even" because of the comma

Damkerng T.

I think it's possible for some speakers in some occasions to overshoot the even part, in order to emphasize even.

Some might even emphasize all instead. (It's very tempting to say even after instead there. Really.)

Nico

MWEUD doesn't say much. It advises to put "even" in front of the word it qualifies to avoid possible confision.

Damkerng T.

10:32

Syntactically, I think its position is about as flexible as really.

Nico

The advise is for writing. In speech, stress makes the confusion more difficult.

Damkerng T.

nods

We have 5 questions that begin with "Usage of" today!

Nico

...break is over, back to my duties...

Damkerng T.

Have a nice ~~evening~~ afternoon!

Nico

11h30 here

Damkerng T.

10:37

Oh, it's not noon yet there!?

Ahh... So it's -6 from my timezone. I thought it was -5.

Have a nice day, then!

Nico

Thaiföldi idő (UTC+07:00)
Thailand, Time zone

Damkerng T.

Yes. It's UTC+7 here. (17:41 now)

Anonymous

Using even as a sentential postmodifier is informal and, I think, mainly occurs in speech

Anonymous

That's just my personal impression―I haven't checked any corpora

Anonymous

@Nico Do you have your computer set to Hungarian?

Damkerng T.

10:42

I'm not absolutely sure, but placing even at the end sounds like either an after thought or a modifier of the whole sentence.

Anonymous

@Nico Have a good bunch of time!

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. It should be pronounced as though it's an afterthought

Damkerng T.

nods

By the way, I just watched some ten minutes of Yellow Elephant and I think I don't get it. The movie seems to be quite abstract. I'm not sure if the Elephant means the Moon or it's about the Yellow Moon or it's entirely something else.

Anonymous

Snagglepuss's distinctive way of speaking uses even a lot:

Anonymous

►

Damkerng T.

10:45

Anyway, I think I might understand it better if I watched the whole movie. :)

Oh, his name is really Snagglepuss! (I've seen him but never knew his name.)

Anonymous

I have trouble understanding this cartoon duck:

Anonymous

►

Damkerng T.

He sounds quite similar to Donald Duck!

LOL

Anonymous

I like that he pronounced the k in knowledge

Damkerng T.

The two clips have one thing in common: Snagglepuss was going to eat something! :-)

They say Methinks!

Anonymous

10:56

Yeah! Sometimes his dialogue is a little bit Shakespearean, even :-)

Anonymous

Hey, Language Log has a related post!

Anonymous

languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=7571

Damkerng T.

Hah! And it's about Snagglepuss, even!

Anonymous

I found it when I searched Google for shakespeare snagglepuss :-)

Damkerng T.

His accent is quite distinctive. :)

Anonymous

10:59

Mark Liberman's response to this comment (the text in red) is interesting: languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=7571#comment-439674

Damkerng T.

Mostly because of his intonation, methinks.

Anonymous

The way he pronounces things is indeed very distinctive

Anonymous

His idiolect is very distinctive, too!

Damkerng T.

@snailboat It seems like he pronounced every kn- word as k-n-. That Language Log page has a soundbite for "Heavens to Murgatroyd! Somebody has terribly large knuckles! To knock with, even!"

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. The /k/ used to be pronounced

Anonymous

11:08

He mixes in a fair bit of archaic language with his modern informal language

Anonymous

I think the onset cluster /kn/ was lost in Early Middle English

Damkerng T.

Ahh... I remember the clip that English prof. was talking about Victorian English.

Anonymous

Professor David Crystal

Anonymous

Though, not Victorian, if we're talking about the same clip

Damkerng T.

Thanks for the name.

I'm not sure about the term (or the period) he used.

Anonymous

11:10

The Victorian era was in the 1800s.

Damkerng T.

Was it Old English or Middle English?

Anonymous

Which is firmly in the Modern English period

Anonymous

In contrast, Shakespeare penned his plays in Early Modern English

Damkerng T.

Ahh...

Oh, I remember now, I should've used the word Elizabethan.

Anonymous

A number of sounds were lost in EME

Anonymous

11:12

Including the onsets /gn/ gnat, /wr/ write and /kn/ knight

Anonymous

Those letters weren't always silent

Anonymous

The gh too in knight used to be pronounced

Damkerng T.

Eh? Hm.m... How was it pronounced?

Anonymous

Umm, [x]?

Anonymous

We don't have an [x] in Modern English

Damkerng T.

11:14

knight used to be pronounced as "k-nix"?

Anonymous

I can't understand your notation

Anonymous

I think it was something like [knaɪxt]

Anonymous

[x] does not mean [ks]

Damkerng T.

Oh, how would an [x] sound like?!

Anonymous

Voiceless velar fricative

== Voiceless velar fricative == The voiceless velar fricative is a type of consonantal sound used in some spoken languages. It was part of the consonant inventory of Old English and can still be found in some dialects of English, most notably in Scottish English loch. The symbol in the International Phonetic Alphabet that represents this sound is 〈x〉. === Features === Features of the voiceless velar fricative: Its manner of articulation is fricative, which means it is produced by constricting air flow through a narrow channel at the place of articulation, causing turbulence. Its place of...

Damkerng T.

11:17

Oh, Scottish English loch!

Anonymous

It might have been [ɣ] at one point

Anonymous

If /kn/ seems like an impossible cluster, it's only because it's not allowed by Modern English phonotactics

Anonymous

So if we pronounce /kn/ we tend to perceive /kən/ instead, as though it's two syllables

Damkerng T.

Gnu and Gnome help. :)

Anonymous

With the illusory epenthetic /ə/ in-between

Anonymous

11:21

@DamkerngT. Of course, /g/ was lost entirely in gnu and gnome, and the modern software names with /g/ pronounced are strange to many speakers

Damkerng T.

I read gnome as nome, but Gnome as g-nome.

Anonymous

Yes, that's right

Anonymous

But I always say Gnome like gnome

Damkerng T.

Ahh

Anonymous

(I assume your dash means "the preceding letter is not silent")

Damkerng T.

11:22

nods

(Perhaps /ə/ was inserted there, just a bit of a hint.)

Anonymous

Yeah, you could also insert an epenthetic schwa

Anonymous

We have a number of disallowed sequences that result in changed pronunciations

Anonymous

Initial /ks/ is disallowed, so xylophone begins instead with /z/

Anonymous

English speakers are often confused about how to pronounce an initial <x>

Anonymous

Some add an initial vowel: /eks/ (or /egz/)

Anonymous

11:27

So Xavier usually has /z/ at the beginning, but you'll also hear /egz/

Anonymous

/ps/ and /pn/ are disallowed, and the /p/ is simply dropped from words like psychology or pneumatic

Damkerng T.

I think he called himself /egzavier/ in the movie.

Anonymous

Yeah, that's a notable example but not the usual pronunciation

Damkerng T.

Ahh

Anonymous

It's probably especially strange to Spanish speakers :-)

Damkerng T.

11:29

Eh? (I wonder how. :)

Anonymous

In which I think the <x> represents /x/

Anonymous

xaβjɛr

Damkerng T.

Oh, you mean Spanish has an /x/ sound!

Anonymous

Yes

Anonymous

Many languages do, but not English (generally speaking)

Anonymous

11:30

We lost ours

Anonymous

Written <x> most commonly corresponds to the consonant sequence /ks/ in English

Anonymous

Initial /ts/ is disallowed, so tsetse becomes set.se, etc.

Anonymous

But in BrE some speakers allow initial /ts/

Anonymous

It's much rarer in AmE, but there are some

Damkerng T.

Ahh... A character in Yellow Elephant is named Tsuba. I wouldn't know her name was Tsuba without the subtitle. It sounds like Suba to my ear.

Anonymous

11:33

Yeah! We simplify all initial /ts/ to /s/ in AmE (and most BrE speakers do too)

Anonymous

We can't tell the difference between onset /ts/ and /s/

Anonymous

The difference is very important in Japanese, though

Damkerng T.

It's very frustrating when we can't tell what native speakers say.

Anonymous

Tsuru and suru are very different verbs :-)

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. I'm kind of a slow learner when it comes to this stuff, but I'm persistent :-)

Anonymous

11:35

In that book I linked you to the other day about native listening,

Anonymous

the author advances the hypothesis that there is no such thing as a critical period, and the reason it becomes more difficult to learn to recognize L2 distinctions later in life is simply that we've made our brains as efficient as possible at recognizing L1 distinctions

Damkerng T.

That makes sense. And I'm trying to come up with a way to break that.

Anonymous

So our brain knows to throw away unnecessary information, which is helpful in our L1, but hinders us in our L2

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. But the author also demonstrates that we have plasticity with respect to phonology throughout our lives--

Damkerng T.

Yay!

Anonymous

11:37

Our native language, whether we notice or not, changes significantly as we grow older

Anonymous

The author compared recordings across lifetimes of individual speakers

Anonymous

And found that, whether or not they realized doing so, they tended to update their pronunciation as the language shifted

Damkerng T.

I do, and I don't like it much. It feels as if the language is deteriorating.

Anonymous

Obviously this isn't absolute, but

Anonymous

Other demonstrations of plasticity include learning to recognize new accents with different vowel sets, etc.

Damkerng T.

11:39

Wait, did they mean the language as a whole that changes, or the language of a particular individual that changes?

Anonymous

The individual's language changes the same way as the language as a whole

Anonymous

In many ways.

Damkerng T.

Ahh

Anonymous

She was only researching pronunciation (accent)

Anonymous

Recognizing new accents in one's L1 is interesting

Anonymous

11:40

The first time I had to work with speakers of Australian English, I had a lot of trouble understanding them

Damkerng T.

Hah! Really?

Anonymous

But working with them, it clicked in my brain, and suddenly I couldn't imagine having a hard time hearing them

Anonymous

My L1 recognition system updated itself :-)

Anonymous

Her research shows that my anecdotal experience is something that happens to other people, too

Anonymous

It's really a very interesting book :-)

Damkerng T.

11:42

Hmm... Interesting!

Oh, I remember that Norwegian guy on reddit now.

I think he (or she) is not very different from me, if we consider Southern Thai as my L1.

(So Thai is my L2.)

I switched to standard Thai around 5.

So my Southern Thai is far from good.

Anonymous

Oh, interesting!

Damkerng T.

But I can understand most of what they said relatively easily.

I could speak in Southern dialect, but not very fluent. (I have to shift all the tones, and I know that I have to think once before saying anything, if I don't want to sound weird in Southern Thai.)

And it's not all about tones. There are several words and phrases that need to change, too.

However, the grammars of the two languages(?) are about the same.

I think I'm still reluctant to call Southern Thai a language. For one thing, there is no written Southern Thai, as far as I know. We'd write in Standard Thai, with some non-standard words or phrases.

Anonymous

Well, most languages have no written form

Damkerng T.

11:58

That's true, but people in those languages wouldn't write in another language, I think. :) They may borrow the letters to represent their sounds, but they wouldn't use almost the entire set of words in the other language.

Argh! It's so confusing, these terminologies!

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. An extreme example is Old Japanese

Anonymous

Although it had basically nothing in common with Classical Chinese, it was at one point written as Classical Chinese

Anonymous

Of course, the words didn't match up one-to-one, so one Japanese word might be written with several different kanji, depending on which Classical Chinese meaning it was expressing

Anonymous

And the word order was different, so Japanese scholars memorized sets of rules to re-order them

Anonymous

And function words and particles were often left out entirely

Anonymous

12:05

A much less extreme example would be Cantonese, which can in many respects be written as though it's the same language as Mandarin

Anonymous

Although it doesn't quite match up entirely

Damkerng T.

I guess the distance between Standard Thai and Southern Thai would be much smaller than the one between Mandarin and Cantonese. But yes, I think Cantonese is a good example.

I'm not sure, but I think you mentioned that Cantonese has its own grammar which is not quite the same as Mandarin's.

Anonymous

12:54

Yeah, there are grammatical differences

Nico

16:33

@snailboat Um, I'd like to know why google thinks so.

Anonymous

17:08

@Nico Hee

Nico

BTW, now I can't stop hearing snagglepuss' "even" all the time (his way of speaking is so catchy, I can't get it out my head!)

Anonymous

Ha

Anonymous

It's an earworm!

F.E.

20:38

Ouch, just notice a bad "typo" in an earlier comment of mine. :(

It should read as:

> And also, a prototypical adverb would not be able to work in the first three versions as done with the existential "there".

The automatic error correction with my typing input by iMac is rather strange. It seems to introduce worse errors than it fixes!

(Especially with technical grammar terminology type of words: e.g. "postposted" where it always inserts an extra space in the middle.)

. . . time to start getting up . . .

Transcript for

English Language Learners