Different usage of similar structures

In my previous article I tried to prove to my readers that they can find in their own mother tongue all possible universal logical-grammar categories which can serve them as a transitional bridge to any other foreign language. The only thing we have to do is to penetrate deeper in the nature of our own native language and reach a deeper insight into the GENERAL GIST of all linguistic facts to be able to change over from GENERAL to PARTICULAR details irrespective of any language you are learning now.

Since any human language represents a very complex and complicated informational system whose functions are designed not only to reflect the actual picture of our world and all the activities taking place in this world of ours but also to express different emotions, feelings and suppositions, we should separate this linguistic area from any exact science areas like mathematics or physics on the one hand but we also should admit that there are many features in a human language which make it mathematically logical and physically tangible, on the other hand.

Just recently I demonstrated the universal nature of GRAMMAR CASE which reflects relations of different objects in space and time by using different means like endings, prepositions, order of words etc. When I say that “the cup is on the tray” I just indicate its location in respect of the tray quite generally and approximately without specification of its position with mathematical precision in degrees or sides (left, right, in the middle) nor specifying any physical features (like weight, capacity, friction, material, temperature, pressure etc) because it is not important for my message now, though it may be important for someone in a different situation under certain conditions.

Since any language is very flexible it will allow you to describe any situation more precisely – all depends on a situation. If you are a seller of special anti-friction trays for aircraft then probably you will use other language means to describe advantages of your commodity from physical point of view (weight, pressure, friction) and mathematical point of view (position in the center, horizontal position etc) especially concerning some contingent conditions of flight (turbulence, air pockets, rapid change of descent rate) which really require a very stable and precise position of a cup with hot coffee on a tray. Any language is possible to change over from GENERAL to PARTICULAR.

However, under normal everyday life conditions we do not need any mathematical precision, we need only GENERAL notions which allow us to develop our SPEECH DYNAMICS in any language based on general linguistic categories. SPEECH DYNAMICS is really something practical like AERODYNAMICS because it is founded not only on science but also on some TANGIBLE assets like money or power.

How can we instruct anyone to acquire these tangible assets? I always avoid the word “teach” because a real teacher is accepted by his students not because they pay him money and expect him to deliver them some kind of commodity worth of their money but because they either recognize him of their free will and accord ideologically (which is a rare case) or because they obey him within the given frames of education in an official establishment. As for commercial education I prefer the terms “instruct” and “train”, they are closer to the professional truth.

This professional truth induces me to assert that the best way is to use familiar notions and structures adapting them to particular usage in another language.

Last time I showed the universal nature of GRAMMAR CASE (Relation of objects), now I can show an example for reflecting RESULT in your speech patterns.

The GENERAL category of RESULT can be manifested in different ways – in Chinese they use the final particles like “le”, “qilai,”, “xialai” etc to show the final result or change from one sate to another state, in Japanese they use the combination “shimatta”, in Russian there is a combination of the agglutinated prefix “s” before the verb root followed by the ending of past time “l” and so on, but in many European languages this final result is usually manifested via PERFECT forms.

They are the same in French, Italian, Spanish and even German but the English language has some restriction in these formulas, namely:

1) It does not separate “be” and “have” in combinations with verbs of motion and usual actions verbs;
2) It restricts this result only to Present and does not allow to use it with the word “yesterday”, for example

These divergences can be sometimes considered a rude blunder but sometimes only a mistake in usage, that’s all.

All this proves once more that any language does not follow strictly some mathematical formula rules but that they are also dependent on some local usage restrictions – customary restrictions.

Anyway, this way or other, the general linguistic notions play a very significant role in any learning process if we arrange it on a conscientious and systematic basis.

As for differences in usage and mistakes, I will write about them in my next article.

Instructor/Trainer Alexander Khodovets