ENGLISH GRAMMAR QUESTIONS - DO NOTS IN ENGLISH GRAMMAR
 
 
NAVIGATION PANEL
HOME PAGE
GRAMMAR BOOKS
GRAMMAR NOTES
QUESTION #20
» READERS' QUESTIONS
GREEN LEAF R

QUESTION #20 - A FEW "DO NOTS" IN ENGLISH GRAMMAR

RED LEAVES
Date: June 5, 2016

Q20: Hello Corollary Theorems,

I graduated with a bachelor's degree in linguistics, and I stumbled onto your site when I was looking for some grammar information. You have made claims that your grammar book is unlike any other grammar books out there, and I have to admit that I am impressed by LSEG4 Table of Contents. It has prompted me to make plans to buy your book in the near future when I have the funds, though I am curious about some of the topics in your book. [. . .]

Q20.1 Would the "other forms of interrogations" include "tag questions", "echo questions", etc?

Q20.2 What is a "cognate object", "retained object", "prepositional object" and "complex object"?

Q20.3 What are the "categories of subjects"? What is a "provisional subject"? What is an "elliptic subject"?

Q20.4 What is the "appositive predicate" and "predicate of result"?

From
C. J. - Miami, FL, USA

[There are more interesting questions in C. J.'s email to us, though we decided to address them one at a time.]

RED LEAF L
A20.1
The "CS9.1.7 Other Forms of Interrogations" subchapter in LSEG4 is not about "tag questions" or "echo questions". Tag questions (of both "signs") are explained in CS9.1.5 Confirmative Questions. As for the echo questions, they are missing from LSEG4 altogether since they are ungrammatical (and illogic) forms of expression—which we would like to see discouraged.

George Boole: An Investigation of the Laws of Thought (1)A20.2
Considering the (vast) totality of the questions addressed by C. J., it is clear that the USA school of grammar is far more logic than the UK one. Sure, the USA curriculum is still lagging true, correct, actual grammar by a mile; however, the USA linguists are way ahead of all the other great English nations, today. Note that most of our clients are USA teachers/linguists/readers, and this demonstrates without doubt that the famous USA learning drive is still alive and kicking. Way to go USA!

On the other hand we need to be honest and impartial, therefore we do have to give the credit: about 98% of the entire grammatical knowledge we know comes from the old British school of grammarians. Fact is, most of the great inventions of our modern days were discovered in Britain, at some point into the past. Just one example, the entire IT digital technologies we enjoy today (this is PCs, cell-phones, and the Internet) are rooted into Britain, thanks to Mr. George Boole, the inventor of the Boolean Algebra. Note that Boolean Algebra itself was inspired by . . . grammar!

[The picture above, and the one following, prove grammatical origins of the Boolean Algebra. Please copy both pictures, then use a picture program to enlarge them properly. Both pictures are fragments from the famous book "An Investigation of the Laws of Thought" by George Boole which defines Boolean Algebra—in other words, this book represents "the very birthplace" of our modern and stylish PCs! (Oh, this book is Public Domain.)]

George Boole: An Investigation of the Laws of Thought (2)Unfortunately, UK is no longer a cultural pioneer. The actual British social trend (grammar included) appears to be similar to the outrageous behavior of the football hooligans. Lots of beer and liquor, fathomless pride, noble indolence, and hermetic xenophobia.

In grammar, British scholars are completely oblivious to logic, and rooted into a non-existent fantastic reality. Regrettably, British grammar today is best described as a perfect mumbo-jumbo.

Regardless, most of the grammar books sold today throughout the World are written in UK, by British authors. They invent many absurd pseudo-grammatical concepts, therefore in LSEG4 we had to warn the readers against them. Such senseless ungrammatical concepts are explained briefly in LSEG4, then they are marked as "Do Nots".

Yeah, only those inserted Do Nots in LSEG4 create confusion, particularly among the USA grammarians. Therefore, it is a very good thing C. J. asked us those numerous questions—thank you C. J.

Let's start this. The "Cognate Object" is a poetical concept (developed by the actual UK school of grammarians). In LSEG4 this term is marked within quotes, in order to signal as clear as daylight that it is unrelated and unsupported. Once again, DO NOT USE this ungrammatical interpretation!

The "Retained Object" mechanism (developed by the old UK school of grammarians) is a truly helpful grammatical instrument for any mature linguist; however, we are not going to describe it here. If anyone wants to find out about the way it functions, then we recommend LSEG4.

"Prepositional object" is a fundamental grammatical concept. Regardless of whatever diplomas someone could display on the personal wall of fame, we need to master prepositional object to perfection. In this respect, we have to signal (again) that LSEG4 is the best Tutorial on objects ever created in grammatical history! [That is due to the fact that British grammarians have distorted the category of case consistently, using lots of poetical fantasies.]

The concept of "Complex Object" is just a pretentious (UK) ungrammatical fantasy labeled as a Do Not in LSEG4.
GREEN LEAF
A20.3
Grammatical concepts listed in Q20.3 above as "Categories of Subjects", "Provisional Subject", "Elliptic Subject" are all fundamental and basic/elementary knowledge in grammar. In fact, grammar itself starts exactly with analyzing the subject. For a clear and thorough understanding of grammatical/logic subject it is recommended only LSEG4.

A20.4
  The "Appositive Predicate" and the "Predicate of Result" are both grammatical fantasies (generated by the actual UK school of grammarians), and they are marked as Do Nots in LSEG4. Just stay clear from such preposterous ungrammatical interpretations!


LSEG4RED LEAF L






The complete, easy to learn, Logically Structured English Grammar 4: theory plus exercises!

 
 
 
 
x
Send your comments regarding this page using support@corollarytheorems.com, noi@editcc.com, or cus@2agraph.com
Page last updated on: February 04, 2017
© SC Complement Control SRL. All rights reserved.
 

OUR CANADIAN FLAG

x
 

Valid HTML 4.01!

Site pages valid according to W3C

Valid CSS!

Stylesheets pages valid according to W3C
 
x