Timeline for Can I really follow the theoretical framework proposed in the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
22 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 22, 2023 at 14:59 | history | edited | Laurel♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 617 characters in body
|
| Sep 22, 2023 at 14:53 | history | edited | Laurel♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 617 characters in body
|
| Oct 24, 2021 at 16:52 | comment | added | Araucaria - Him | @Mz2501 You're very welcome! | |
| Oct 22, 2021 at 20:03 | comment | added | Mz2501 | @Araucaria-Nothereanymore. Got it! I have to thank you again for taking your time to give me valuable information. | |
| Oct 21, 2021 at 22:41 | comment | added | Araucaria - Him | @Mz2501 In principle, yes. You might, for example, be looking at a homophone. For example, round is famous for potentially being one of many different word categories. However, it depends why you're doing it! A coupe of strong bits of evidence is often all you need. For example, if it occurs (or could) with a determiner such as a or every and has a singular and plural form, then you can be confident it's a noun! | |
| Oct 20, 2021 at 14:45 | comment | added | Mz2501 | @Araucaria-Nothereanymore. Sorry for tagging you again as it is the only way to contact you through this site. I have a question regarding the weekdays case study. Thanks to it I learn how to actually apply those grammatical properties in the CGEL book to words I encounter. However, I just want to know that when you conclude in the end that weekdays is a noun, you mean it is a noun in that particular instance, i.e. in the sentence It's open weekdays only, right? So if I encounter the word weekdays in another sentence I have to apply those properties again. Do I understand it correctly? | |
| Oct 19, 2021 at 12:16 | comment | added | Mz2501 | @Barmar Thank you! | |
| Oct 18, 2021 at 19:54 | comment | added | Barmar | English (and most human languages) is too complex to parse purely syntactically. This was something discovered very early on by AI reasearchers on natural language processing. | |
| Oct 18, 2021 at 19:53 | comment | added | Barmar | I think you're looking at this the wrong way. You don't use he sentence grammar to understand the sentence. First you determine what the sentence (and by extension all the words in it) means because you know the language. From that you can assign the words to categories. | |
| Oct 17, 2021 at 7:52 | comment | added | Mz2501 | @Araucaria I appreciate your works a lot! | |
| Oct 16, 2021 at 22:27 | comment | added | Andrew Leach♦ | @Araucaria-Nothereanymore. Haven't you written an answer here? | |
| Oct 16, 2021 at 22:01 | comment | added | Araucaria - Him | I've edited your title because your question hasn't been getting many views. I think these changes may increase the chances of your getting a good answer! However, if you don't like them, you can roll them back by clicking on the "edited" button just to the left of where your name appears and then clicking on "roll back"". | |
| Oct 16, 2021 at 21:59 | history | edited | Araucaria - Him | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Oct 16, 2021 at 15:00 | comment | added | Araucaria - Him | Spot on. Exactly so! | |
| Oct 16, 2021 at 10:06 | comment | added | Mz2501 | So does that mean even if I do not know the grammatical function of the word 'dog,' I can look at other properties, which are as important, to determine whether or not it is a noun, right? | |
| Oct 16, 2021 at 9:25 | comment | added | Mz2501 | Thank you so much for your valuable insight! I've learned a lot. | |
| Oct 16, 2021 at 1:35 | comment | added | Araucaria - Him | So the take away points: 1) Many types of word or phrase can fulfil a given syntactic function. 2) A type of phrase or word category may fulfil many types of syntactic function. 3)Knowing the word category is not sufficient to determine the syntactic function of that word or the phrase it heads. 4) Knowing a word or phrase's syntactic function is not sufficient to tell you its phrasal category or word category. | |
| Oct 16, 2021 at 1:29 | comment | added | Araucaria - Him | Oh, and you can't not follow the grammar proposed in CaGEL. Not until there is another grammar of similar scope depth and consistency. It is widely regarded as the most comprehensive, consistent and up-to-date grammar of English there is - even by its opponents! | |
| Oct 16, 2021 at 1:24 | comment | added | Araucaria - Him | You might find this post helpful or interesting: How can I Prove a Word is a Noun?. You could also look at the case study there: weekdays. | |
| Oct 16, 2021 at 1:17 | comment | added | Araucaria - Him | Out of the many, many different properties of nouns listed, you are focussing only on one, which is that nouns may head phrases functioning as Subject. Fulfilling just one potential property of nouns is not sufficient to tell you anything! the fact that dog happens to be functioning as Head of a phrase functioning as Subject just tells you that it might be a noun. You need to look at all the other properties that nouns typically possess. There is no single property of nouns that it sufficient on its own to guarantee membership of the category Noun. (cont) | |
| S Oct 16, 2021 at 0:22 | review | First questions | |||
| Oct 16, 2021 at 0:24 | |||||
| S Oct 16, 2021 at 0:22 | history | asked | Mz2501 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |