Jac_Haw wrote:Hello linguoboy,
1. I do not claim that I have totally solved the problem that gave the birth to the theory, but I think I have made an interesting approach, that may be helpful in the process of learning English. I am still not 100% sure where to use the definite article and where to use an indefinite article, but my idea is to turn this problem upside down.
2. This is important—For the English native speakers the Latin alphabet and English the things presented here are clear, but for the people that are not familiarized with the Latin alphabet and English these aspects may seem unclear and strange. My aim was, and still is, to help them.
3. Try to put yourself into the situation of the people mentioned here. Now image that you see the following sentence:
(1) Monica works in the Police.
What you do ?
You want to change (“morph”—in the terms of the theory of sentencoids) the first name “Monica” into the first name “Tina,” so the sentence will describe your (hypothetical) friend that works in the Police.
(2) Tina works in the Police.
Everything is OK, the sentence (2) is grammatically correct.
4. Now you are moving forward—You want to morph the word “Police” into the proper noun: “National Aeronautics and Space Administration”:
(3) Tina works in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.”
Again, everything is OK, the sentence is grammatically correct. However, you have noticed something—The new sentence is much longer now.
Has your sentence really changed so much ?
It may look strange, but NOT. Your new sentence (3) is still “equal” to the previous sentence (2). So this is a paradox—The new sentence (3) contains more words, if compared with the previous sentence (2) however, it has not changed a lot. You have only changed one proper noun into other proper noun. The meaning of the sentence has not changed.
5. More complex example of language morphing:
(4) Tina really likes tennis.
The sentence (4) is grammatically correct. Now, we will morph the word “likes” into the word “hate”:
(5) Tina really hate tennis.
The sentence (5) is incorrect—The verb “hate” suggests that many people hate tennis, not only one person.
This example illustrates that language morphing has its limitations. You cannot change a word into other one, without respecting rules—like Subject-Verb Agreement in this case.
6. Tricky Phrasal Verbs
Phrasal verbs are tricky because a phrasal verb may consists of two or more words—a verb and a preposition, an adverb, or both of them. You cannot just morph a part of a phrasal verb, because the meaning of a sentence will become a nonsense (the pages 36-37 of the paper). That is why, the people who learn English as a second language should be very careful. It is very easy to make a mistake. For English native speakers this question is obvious.
I hope this explains the basics of the theory. If any aspects of the theory are unclear, please inform me.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest