Fórum EMB de Discussões
[  EMB's Main Menu  |  Forum Index  |  Cadastro  |  Search  ]

Autor:  José Roberto
E-mail:  josezambon@merconet.com.br
Data:  01/MAI/2003 12:13 PM
Assunto:  Re: Future Perfect
Mensagem:  Hello people Mike said: "(...)the time-based explanation was a structure imposed by 19 century grammaraians who sought to elevate the prestige of English by associating it with latin (typical academic correctness and conformity)" Incredable, because it's not the first time I see this explanation, there was here, short ago, a little discussion on the 'ain't' issue and researching I found: "Bishop Robert Lowth undoubtedly thought he was doing a great service to speakers and writers of the English language when in 1762 he published his Short Introduction to English Grammar. However, the reality is that Lowth has done a grave disservice to both users of English, and the rich and wonderful language itself. Rather than basing his grammatical rules in the usage of the best educated speakers and writers of English, he erringly and foolishly based them on the Latin grammatical system, a system wholly inappropriate and incapable of dictating usage to a language as different from Latin as Germanic-based English. The result is that many modern usages in English, particularly an alarming number of rules of normative usage and Standard Written English, are based upon those false origins. Additionally, Lowth's defense of Latin as an "educated" role model for English has given rise to a school of prescriptive grammarians who find it their sworn duty to prescribe this Latinate usage system to those speakers who have managed to escape its inoculation in the educational institutions of English-speaking countries. Prescriptive grammarians are adamant, and their forceful prescriptions and high-brow judgments are irresponsible, and a denial of the rich cultural heritage of our language." On "MISTAKES, FALLACIES, AND IRRESPONSIBILITES OF PRESCRIPTIVE GRAMMAR", on-line: http://www.newdream.net/~scully/toelw/Lowth.ht Talking about Portuguese there are lots of auxiliary verbs too (less than English) ser, estar, ir, vir, andar, haver, ter Looking at the verb dever (Should/must/to have to/to owe) on can say "eu DEVO ir agora", "eu DEVIA ir agora.", "eu DEVERIA ir agora" (I should/must/have to go now). DEVO is present according to the classical prescriptve Grammar, DEVIA is past and DEVERIA conditional (named in Portuguese as 'Past Future- Presente do Pretérito'). But the three phrases mean a present action towards to future the difference is not time but the sureness of the speaker. Normally when one say "DEVO" he/she is quite sure about what they have to do, although "DEVIA" and "DEVERIA" sound as something one have to do but they are not willing to do it now or they may even regret that they have to do it ( I want to stay for a while but I have to go now.=gt; eu DEVERIA/DEVIA ir agora.) As I pointed out, less than English, but Portuguese is not to attained to the rigidness of conjugation (at least some more used verbs, auxiliary or state verbs). MIke... one can see the relation of Would and Will...but what's the deal with Shall and Should? (Isn't should used in a very different way to shall?) Au revoir (Até breve) José Roberto

Envie uma resposta
Índice de mensagens

 English Made in Brazil -- English, Portuguese, & contrastive linguistics
Future Perfect  –  Miguel Vieira  28/ABR/2003, 2:16 PM
Re: Future Perfect  –  Ricardo - EMB -  28/ABR/2003, 3:27 PM
Re: Future Perfect  –  Miguel Vieira  28/ABR/2003, 6:21 PM
Re: Future Perfect  –  pat  29/ABR/2003, 8:30 AM
Re: Future Perfect  –  Miguel Vieira  29/ABR/2003, 6:41 PM
Re: Future Perfect  –  Mike Robertson  29/ABR/2003, 6:56 PM
Re: Future Perfect  –  pat  29/ABR/2003, 9:59 PM
Re: Future Perfect  –  Micke Rob  29/ABR/2003, 11:55 PM
Re: Future Perfect  –  José Roberto  30/ABR/2003, 12:00 AM
Re: Future Perfect  –  Mike Robertson  30/ABR/2003, 12:40 AM
Re: Future Perfect  –  patrick  30/ABR/2003, 8:23 AM
Re: Future Perfect  –  José Roberto  30/ABR/2003, 10:11 AM
Re: Future Perfect  –  Mick Rob  30/ABR/2003, 6:52 PM
Re: Future Perfect  –  pat  30/ABR/2003, 9:57 PM
Re: Will + Perfect Aspect  –  Michael Robertson  01/MAI/2003, 12:20 AM
Re: Will + Perfect Aspect  –  pat  01/MAI/2003, 8:25 AM
 Re: Future Perfect  –  José Roberto  01/MAI/2003, 12:13 PM
Re: Future Perfect  –  pat brownp  01/MAI/2003, 6:34 PM
Re: Future Perfect  –  José Roberto  30/ABR/2003, 10:09 AM
Re: Future Perfect  –  pat  29/ABR/2003, 7:04 PM

Contents of this forum are copy-free.
By S&K