English, we all know, is a language where prepositions are the most illogical part of speech, and that adds more to the inherent scope for ambiguities generated by syntax.
French and German are precise, unlike English. Besides, there are regularities and abnormalities taught with emphasis. French pro.relative (qui, que, & dont) are very clear, & preposition-based pronouns 'y' & 'en' are also very clear. In English as it is, that amount of clarity was lacking, and in addition, many versions and excessive abbreviated expressions have mutilated the language too much.
Like Grammaire Pratique by Larousse, read this; it will be interesting. I like these grammarians as they tunnel into words and expressions to cull out the minute nuances. English; a few years back, Steven Pinker did. Unfortunately, we were fed on wretched Wren & Martin or tossed into Fowler. Thanks to American and Asian English, both outdated structures and unwanted purism were removed. https://www.college-de-france.
But parsing is the proper way to learn and understand grammar because it explains the form, FUNCTION, and syntax, but again, thanks to American and Asian versions of English, context was also factored in. In fact, form hardly matters; it is 'function' that determines the word label.
Incidentally, I used to use the word "DANCE" to teach different parts of speech or various avatars of a word, during Grammar classes to indicate that a word gets its label as a noun, verb or adjective based on its function in the context and not on the form/spelling, like
I like to dance (sometimes used in colloquial lingo as I like dancing) with girls.
Dancing gives good shape to the hips.
I saw a person with a dancing stride.
I like Indian dances.
Briju maharaj dances energetically
True, the best way to avoid ambiguities and misunderstandings is to make statements explanatory.
Rightly so because the basic/fundamental/primary function of communication is to convey something, and that does not require perfection or profound linguistic clarity. Grammar is like the thalamus; it is supposed to enhance and complement, but both can act as a hindrance as well for a free flow or cascade of emotions. That's why Alapana and RTP (thanam) bring out more nuances of musical phrases, and that's why, in language too (in many languages), literature migrated from classical poetry towards free verse, which conveyed a lot of abstract ideas and philosophies.
From my limited experience, I feel that, be it grammar, punctuation, or long-winding sentences to chop into chunks, it will provide more clarity to the otherwise complex structures of a language. I
In fact, one of the projects I had in mind was to write context-based grammatical labels. On punctuation, I have written a few years back the following: -When thoughts, ideas, and opinions gush forth like a cascade or a cyclone, little do they bother about the twigs and saplings on the way.
The flow and force get prioritized, and the recipient is not even in the scheme of things.
I suggest everyone read one of the world's leading linguists, Steven Pinker’s [of Harvard], 'The Sense of Style'—'The Thinking Person’s Guide to Writing in the 21st Century’—from page 284 on punctuation. This chapter covers very comprehensively the complete width and depth of the uses and usefulness of punctuations.
“The problem for the writer is that punctuation indicates prosody in some places, syntax in others, and neither of them consistently anywhere... Even the sticklers cannot agree on how to stickle…. In 2003 the journalist Lynne Truss, in her wonderful book ‘Eats, Shoots & Leaves,' decries the punctuation errors she spotted in ads and newspapers.
In the 2004 New Yorker Review, the critic Louis Menand decries punctuation errors he spotted in Truss’s book.
In Guardian …the English scholar John Mullan decries the punctuation flaws he spotted in Menand’s review."
The world functions on actions spurred on by thoughts and ideas and not punctuation marks
No comments:
Post a Comment