| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5] > |
句子第一个词用过去分词 Thread poster: redred
|
|---|
ysun 
United States
Local time: 16:39
English to Chinese
+ ...
国内编的某些英语语法书确有缺陷。但有些较好的语法书在编著和修订时，也参考了国外比较著名的英语语法书。所以，也不能全盘否定。毕竟多年来中国还是培养了许多杰出的英语人才和懂英语的科技人才。
至于中式英语，跟师资、教材、语言环境都有关。英语为母语者学中文也会面临类似的问题。连许多中国人的英翻中都会被人认为是英式中文。难道说，中文非为母语者说写中文却反而会都很地道？
| | | |
wherestip
United States
Local time: 16:39
Chinese to English
+ ...
| Grammar Books | Mar 18, 2013 |
I agree with Yueyin. How wrong can an English grammar book really be, considering most of them never breach the boundary of basic English sentence constructs?
One basically has to live a language to master it, not depend on a comprehensive grammar book. IMO, with today's technology and globalization, language environments could be created.
| | | |
wherestip
United States
Local time: 16:39
Chinese to English
+ ...
Are there any "good" Chinese grammar books in existence? Does anyone believe that foreigners learn Chinese by building a basic knowledge base of Chinese grammar?
| | | |
redred
China
Local time: 05:39
English to Chinese
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
咱们写中文都是按习惯,哪还扣着什么谓语宾语那样写东西啊。
| | |
|
|
|
redred
China
Local time: 05:39
English to Chinese
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
ysun wrote: redred wrote:
Seen from a different angle类拟于Viewed from mountain（从山上鸟瞰）的用法。 这种句型是成立的，但 mountain 是可数名词，所以前面应加一个冠词。例如： http://www.chuckallan.com/travel/GrandTeton/utahsign.html Viewed from a mountain to the north of downtown, the Wasatch Mountains are seen on the left with the state capitol in the center.
第一次出现名词Ａ不用，第二次再出现Ａ，就用the A. 如：第一次是"a mountain",第二次出现就“the mountain". 总体来说，较难区分什么时候用the。
[Edited at 2013-03-18 02:05 GMT]
| | | |
wherestip
United States
Local time: 16:39
Chinese to English
+ ...
http://www.proz.com/post/1960094#1960094
wherestip wrote: Obsessed with grammar I agree with Yueyin and Phil. I would recommend finding some grammar book that is written by a native English speaker with the right educational background. This fellow studied modern languages at Oxford University, and has been teaching English as a second language for about 20 years. His take on the usefulness of teaching grammar(both pros and cons) is quite interesting. http://www.mikeswan.co.uk/elt-applied-linguistics/seven-bad-reasons.htm
SEVEN BAD REASONS FOR TEACHING GRAMMAR - AND TWO GOOD REASONS FOR TEACHING SOME -- Michael Swan
...
the results: teaching grammar instead of English
Where grammar is given too much priority the result is predictable and well known. ‘Course books’ become little more than grammar courses. Students don’t learn English: they learn grammar, at the expense of other things that matter as much or more. They know the main rules, can pass tests, and may have the illusion that they know the language well. However, when it comes to using the language in practice they discover that they lack vital elements, typically vocabulary and fluency: they can recite irregular verbs but can’t sustain a conversation. (As J K Jerome put it a century ago, few people care to listen to their own irregular verbs recited by young foreigners.) Such an approach is also psychologically counterproductive, in that it tends to make students nervous of making mistakes, undermining their confidence and destroying their motivation.
the other extreme
There are bad reasons for not teaching grammar, too. When, as sometimes happens, there is a reaction against grammar-heavy syllabuses, people often tend to fly to the other extreme and teach little or no grammar. This happened during the 1970s and after, when the communicative approach (in itself an excellent development) was widely taken as a justification for teaching ‘functions and notions’ or ‘skills’ instead of grammar. One of the results of this unfortunate trend was the appearance of a generation of British teachers and teacher trainers many of whom were seriously ignorant of the structure of the language they were professionally concerned with teaching. Doing too little grammar (whether out of misguided principle or sheer ignorance) is of course as damaging as doing too much.
| | | |
ysun
United States
Local time: 16:39
English to Chinese
+ ...
redred wrote:
第一次出现名词Ａ不用，第二次再出现Ａ，就用the A. 如：第一次是"a mountain",第二次出现就“the mountain". 总体来说，较难区分什么时候用the。
[Edited at 2013-03-18 02:05 GMT]
http://www.chuckallan.com/travel/GrandTeton/utahsign.html
Viewed from a mountain to the north of downtown, the Wasatch Mountains are seen on the left with the state capitol in the center.
在上述例句中，mountain 之前用不定冠词 “a” (indefinite article) 是因为那是泛指的山，而不是某座特定的山。但这个冠词一定得有，不能省略。
| | | |
ysun
United States
Local time: 16:39
English to Chinese
+ ...
wherestip wrote: http://www.mikeswan.co.uk/elt-applied-linguistics/seven-bad-reasons.htm
SEVEN BAD REASONS FOR TEACHING GRAMMAR - AND TWO GOOD REASONS FOR TEACHING SOME -- Michael Swan
...
the results: teaching grammar instead of English
Where grammar is given too much priority the result is predictable and well known. ‘Course books’ become little more than grammar courses. Students don’t learn English: they learn grammar, at the expense of other things that matter as much or more. They know the main rules, can pass tests, and may have the illusion that they know the language well. However, when it comes to using the language in practice they discover that they lack vital elements, typically vocabulary and fluency: they can recite irregular verbs but can’t sustain a conversation.
80年代，有位中国学生到美驻华使馆申请留学签证。申请留学签证者在面谈时是必须说英语的。签证官用英语与他交谈之后说，”虽然你的 TOEFL 和 GRE 考分很高，但你的英语却这么差，你若到了美国怎么上学？” 于是就拒发签证。
那时，很多中国学生考 TOEFL、GRE 和 GMAT 时，语法部分都能考满分，但初到美国时，交流仍然很困难。
| | |
|
|
|
Phil Hand
China
Local time: 05:39
Chinese to English
| Funny, I was just talking about this... | Mar 18, 2013 |
wherestip wrote:
Are there any "good" Chinese grammar books in existence? Does anyone believe that foreigners learn Chinese by building a basic knowledge base of Chinese grammar?
With a friend of mine. There is one that's pretty good, but it's very basic. Can't remember what it's called, now - it's got a purple cover...
Here it is, Yip and Rimmington:
http://www.amazon.com/Chinese-Comprehensive-Grammar-Grammars/dp/0415150329/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1363587259&sr=8-5&keywords=chinese%20grammar
It's good as far as it goes.
But the other day we were talking about the referent of 其. I had a sentence with a structure something like this: 狗追猫，跑得其毛都被风吹光了。Does the 其 refer back to the dog, or the cat, or either?
In the specific case, the author had written it to refer to the cat, and I thought that reading was OK, but Graham thought that the specific verb used meant that it had to refer back to the subject/topic of the sentence, and I think he was right in that case.
Anyway, the point was that no, I've never seen a "Swan" in Chinese. Never seen a book that addresses problems like how and when you use pronouns - the nitty gritty of sentences.
Come to think of it, badly as English is often taught in this country, Chinese is probably taught even worse...
[Edited at 2013-03-18 06:26 GMT]
| | | |
Zhoudan
Local time: 05:39
English to Chinese
+ ...
这个句子很不自然。没人这么说话。逻辑也不通。
Phil Hand wrote:
狗追猫，跑得其毛都被风吹光了。
[Edited at 2013-03-18 10:27 GMT]
| | | |
Shaun Yeo
Local time: 05:39
English to Chinese
+ ...
Zhoudan wrote: 这个句子很不自然。没人这么说话。逻辑也不通。 Phil Hand wrote:
狗追猫，跑得其毛都被风吹光了。 [Edited at 2013-03-18 10:27 GMT]
而且，也不用“跑”。如果指狗的毛，那应该用‘追’。
| | | |
ysun
United States
Local time: 16:39
English to Chinese
+ ...
Zhoudan wrote: 这个句子很不自然。没人这么说话。逻辑也不通。 Phil Hand wrote:
狗追猫，跑得其毛都被风吹光了。 [Edited at 2013-03-18 10:27 GMT]
至少没有华人会这么说话。
听说过大风把狗刮跑了的故事，但还没听说过大风把狗刮秃了的奇事。
[Edited at 2013-03-19 06:38 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
ysun
United States
Local time: 16:39
English to Chinese
+ ...
Shaun Yeo wrote: Zhoudan wrote: 这个句子很不自然。没人这么说话。逻辑也不通。 Phil Hand wrote:
狗追猫，跑得其毛都被风吹光了。 [Edited at 2013-03-18 10:27 GMT] 而且，也不用“跑”。如果指狗的毛，那应该用‘追’。
前后两个动词应该一致。例如，他吹牛，吹得漏洞百出无法自圆其说！
| | | |
ysun
United States
Local time: 16:39
English to Chinese
+ ...
Phil Hand wrote:
Anyway, the point was that no, I've never seen a "Swan" in Chinese. Never seen a book that addresses problems like how and when you use pronouns - the nitty gritty of sentences.
Come to think of it, badly as English is often taught in this country, Chinese is probably taught even worse...
[Edited at 2013-03-18 06:26 GMT]
有问题并不等于一团漆黑。假如中国的中文教学真像你所说的那样糟糕，人们是否应该去英国学中文？
建议你上新华书店去买一本好的汉语语法。
| | | |
wherestip
United States
Local time: 16:39
Chinese to English
+ ...
ysun wrote:
建议你上新华书店去买一本好的汉语语法。
Hmm, that makes sense. If anything, it probably really needs to be written by a Chinese author(s) and studied in Chinese. And I would stay away from names like Ng or Yip.
Of course I'm not serious. But let's face it, there is a significant difference between Hong Kong Mandarin(官话) and Chinese standard Mandarin(普通话). 
| | | |
| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5] > |
Login to reply/comment 
