On Tuesday 03 April 2012 20:36:07 consultores wrote:
> The other point, is that native speaker, does not mean "excellence"; it
> only mean that this person just speaks one dialect/language from the
> begining of his life!
But in many, if not most, cases, has also been educated in it. And native
speakers are much more likely to be au fait with current usage.
When I took the French Bac., the criterion laid down for the aural English
exam was that marks would be awarded for speaking as would a native speaker,
explicitly in preference to the "correct" usage.
Lisi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201204032121.44960.lisi.reisz@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/201204032121.44960.lisi.reisz@gmail.com
04-03-2012, 08:28 PM
Doug
correct English usage
On 04/03/2012 04:21 PM, Lisi wrote:
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 20:36:07 consultores wrote:
The other point, is that native speaker, does not mean "excellence"; it
only mean that this person just speaks one dialect/language from the
begining of his life!
But in many, if not most, cases, has also been educated in it. And native
speakers are much more likely to be au fait with current usage.
When I took the French Bac., the criterion laid down for the aural English
exam was that marks would be awarded for speaking as would a native speaker,
explicitly in preference to the "correct" usage.
Lisi
+1 !
--
Blessed are the peacekeepers...for they shall be shot at from both sides. --A.M. Greeley
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 20:36:07 consultores wrote:
The other point, is that native speaker, does not mean "excellence"; it
only mean that this person just speaks one dialect/language from the
begining of his life!
But in many, if not most, cases, has also been educated in it. And
native
speakers are much more likely to be au fait with current usage.
Hello Lisi
Yes, but please remember that, Old English + Latin, built the Middle
English, and Modern English came from a mixture with other languages.
It is clearly reflected when English words are substituted by Latin
root words. At this time the meaning is different. I think that might in
any other language, there are colloquial and Academic Language.
I suppose that in this list, we could use an understandable language,
because it is more convenient for the users.
When I took the French Bac., the criterion laid down for the aural
English
exam was that marks would be awarded for speaking as would a native
speaker,
explicitly in preference to the "correct" usage.
Here, i only can ask, what side of the dichotomy could be considered as
an undoubted true?
Lisi
+1 !
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 18:39:03 +0200, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
In this post, "indicated for" is probably the wrong term for the
context. It roughly means "prescribed". It is unclear what you really
mean, but I would guess "capable of".
Mmm... yes.
How about "appropriate"? Or "prepared"? "suited"? "qualified"? I could
have chosen any of those, in my non-English mind they all sound the same
good :-P
I like "Suited". "Qualified" contains an element of academicity, which
may be appropriate. "Prepared" signifies a willingness; maybe OK here.
"Appropriate" would generally be used to indicate correctness. Use any
of them, but apart from suited, it may sound artificial.
"Ulterior" is certainly not a synonym for "posterior",
But it was, that's what I meant. It's not a term I would neither use in
my own language but it is still perfectly correct.
Maybe, but you wouldn't pass for a native speaker, and that's what this
is all about, isn't it? If I'm wrong about that, then all bets are off;
use whatever word takes your fancy!
"Neither" is OK, but in the wrong place in this context. You may have
better expressed it as "Neither is it a term that I would use ...".
and a Latin Lover is something totally different
Damn. I precisely enclosed "old Latin" in double quotes and used
uppercase "L" to avoid misinterpretations>:-)
Yes, I know. I was trying to introduce some levity. Hence the winkie!
--
Tony van der Hoff | mailto:tony@vanderhoff.org
Ariège, France |
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 22:04:24 consultores wrote:
> >> When I took the French Bac., the criterion laid down for the aural
> >> English
> >> exam was that marks would be awarded for speaking as would a native
> >> speaker,
> >> explicitly in preference to the "correct" usage.
>
> Here, i only can ask, what side of the dichotomy could be considered as
> an undoubted true?
I'm sorry, I don't understand you, or I would answer. You are indicating the
problem. Words used in unusual ways are less comprehensible. (And yes, I am
sure that many others will have understood you. But sadly, I have not.)
Lisi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201204032238.55814.lisi.reisz@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/201204032238.55814.lisi.reisz@gmail.com
04-04-2012, 12:52 AM
Joe Pfeiffer
correct English usage
Pierre Frenkiel <pierre.frenkiel@gmail.com> writes:
I am a native speaker, and the "after in time" usage is one I can't
remember ever seeing.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 1bobr8e2sl.fsf@pfeifferfamily.net">http://lists.debian.org/1bobr8e2sl.fsf@pfeifferfamily.net
04-04-2012, 12:53 AM
consultores
correct English usage
On 04/03/2012 02:38 PM, Lisi wrote:
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 22:04:24 consultores wrote:
When I took the French Bac., the criterion laid down for the aural
English
exam was that marks would be awarded for speaking as would a native
speaker,
explicitly in preference to the "correct" usage.
Here, i only can ask, what side of the dichotomy could be considered as
an undoubted true?
I'm sorry, I don't understand you, or I would answer. You are indicating the
problem. Words used in unusual ways are less comprehensible. (And yes, I am
sure that many others will have understood you. But sadly, I have not.)
Lisi
Lisi
i tried saying that "correct/incorrect", the dichotomy, does not have
any meaning by itself, it needs to be appended by "for", or who/what
is involve.
thanks.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:50, Russell L. Harris
<rlharris@broadcaster.org> > Commonly-used English terms which are
apropos to this matter are
> "precede", "predecessor", "succeed", "successor", "antecedent", and
> "descendant". *Thus, one could say:
>
> * "Lenny preceded Squeeze."
>
> or
>
> * "Squeeze succeeds Lenny."
>
> or
>
> * "Lenny is the predecessor of Squeeze."
>
> or
>
> * "Squeeze is the successor of Lenny."
>
> or
>
> * "Lenny is the antecedent of Squeeze."
>
> or
>
> * "Squeeze is the descendant of Lenny."
>
Wow, that's confusing! How about instead using nonsense alliterating
adjective / animal name combinations, arranged alphabetically?
--
Dotan Cohen
http://gibberish.co.il
http://what-is-what.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: CAKDXFkP16apV7ir2Pxyt54rf9PoPoXW8_in4--z5Gp0qTEpi-A@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/CAKDXFkP16apV7ir2Pxyt54rf9PoPoXW8_in4--z5Gp0qTEpi-A@mail.gmail.com
04-04-2012, 02:09 AM
Dotan Cohen
correct English usage
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 16:21, Lisi <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday 03 April 2012 20:36:07 consultores wrote:
>> The other point, is that native speaker, does not mean "excellence"; it
>> only mean that this person just speaks one dialect/language from the
>> begining of his life!
>
> But in many, if not most, cases, has also been educated in it.
I respectfully disagree. The native speakers of Hebrew and English
that I know are the least educated in the usage of those languages. It
is the immigrants who really study the language. That said, the
Russians do seems to be very well learned of their language. Any
question I have on Russian language the average Russian can explain.
>*And native
> speakers are much more likely to be au fait with current usage.
>
With this part I agree. If you want the fine manual to read like the
current slang or hip hop song, then a native speaker is far preferable
to a learned immigrant.
--
Dotan Cohen
http://gibberish.co.il
http://what-is-what.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: CAKDXFkO=o4xxnaP3dN1Nt2j4xvnwfG5w4Tb5k5wyWxcp+QJE1 A@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/CAKDXFkO=o4xxnaP3dN1Nt2j4xvnwfG5w4Tb5k5wyWxcp+QJE1 A@mail.gmail.com
04-04-2012, 07:39 AM
Lisi
correct English usage
On Wednesday 04 April 2012 01:53:37 consultores wrote:
> On 04/03/2012 02:38 PM, Lisi wrote:
> > On Tuesday 03 April 2012 22:04:24 consultores wrote:
> >>>> When I took the French Bac., the criterion laid down for the aural
> >>>> English
> >>>> exam was that marks would be awarded for speaking as would a native
> >>>> speaker,
> >>>> explicitly in preference to the "correct" usage.
> >>
> >> Here, i only can ask, what side of the dichotomy could be considered as
> >> an undoubted true?
> >
> > I'm sorry, I don't understand you, or I would answer. You are indicating
> > the problem. Words used in unusual ways are less comprehensible. (And
> > yes, I am sure that many others will have understood you. But sadly, I
> > have not.)
> >
> > Lisi
>
> Lisi
> i tried saying that "correct/incorrect", the dichotomy, does not have
> any meaning by itself, it needs to be appended by "for", or who/what
> is involve.
I was quoting exam regulations, for which I was not responsible. You can see
that I have put "correct" in quotation marks precisely because it needs more
definition. But I would imagine that they meant "correct according to the
grammar books". And I did say "who/what is involve": those in Paris who
were responsible for the exam rules for the Baccalauréat.
Lisi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201204040839.44187.lisi.reisz@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/201204040839.44187.lisi.reisz@gmail.com
correct English usage
