Seonaidh wrote:Gràmar! Seo e:-
amo - amas - amat - amamus - amatis - amant
amicus - amice - amicum - amici - amici - amico -
- amici - amici - amicos - amicorum - amicis - amicis
rego - regis - regit - regimus - regitis - regunt
respublica respublica rempublicam reipublicae reipublicae republica -
- respublicae - respublicae - respublicas - rerumpublicarum - reispublicis - reispublicis
That is not grammar -- that's what Chuck was referring to when he said:
Tearlach61 wrote:Ach 's e fìor mearachd a th' ann nuair thèid gràmmair a chleachdadh mar clàr neo cairt-iùil
It's a grammar
table -- clàr -- and tables are a poor substitute for proper teaching.
A grammar table is a "picture" -- a "diagram" even -- of grammar, and are at their most useful (as GunChleoc says) as an aide-memoire or to help fill in little gaps in your learning.
(EG: I know agam, agad, aig, againn and agaibh from learning them and using them, not from memorising tables, but I still get confused between aige and aca and while I've stopped consulting a physical table, I still find myself having to consciously choose.)
So what is grammar? It's a series of rules, and memorising the rules is no more use to a language learner than learning the theory of skiing without ever strapping yourself onto two planks of wood and tumbling down a hillside.
When I learned to ski I didn't learn to recite the procedure for snow-ploughs and parallel turns, but neither did I blindly imitate the movements of my instructors. They both demonstrated and explained, and when one of my teachers shouted "weight!!!" at me from the other side of the slope, I knew what I was doing wrong and leaned forward.
Grammar is things like hearing a question like
A bheil thu deiseil?
and knowing the answer is either
tha or
chan eil, and also knowing that the answer to
Am bidh thu deiseil is
not the same.
Grammar is being able to hear "tha mi deiseil" and being able to say "thuirt e gun robh e deiseil".
These simple ones can be taught "immersively", but it can be a laborious process, particularly where the concept is as alien as "no yes or no" or when the form changes as much as "tha"->"gu bheil"; but what about the "only-one-genitive" and "double-definitive-article" rules? (Actually, I consider them to be essentially the same rule, but that's just me).
As far as I'm concerned, the DDA can be adequately explained in English, but I cannot imagine trying to work it out for myself -- it's too easy to make a false assumption and head off down a dead end.
In the last week I have managed to achieve a pretty advanced conversational mastery of Italian by spending a week in a chalet with a bunch of native speakers.
Now for my school lessons I remembered the masculine Italian definite article as "il". In Spanish, it's "el", but there's an additional form "lo" which is best translated as "the one" -- "lo verde" = "the green one"; "quiero lo que ella tiene" = "I-want the-one that she has". I noticed some of the guys saying "lo" in Italian too, and in these cases they were using it with an adjective, so I assumed for several days that it was the same as the Spanish "lo". I got corrected on this a few times, but I couldn't work out for the life of me what I was doing wrong -- until I opened a grammar book and looked up the definite article. The difference between "il" and "lo" is simply a matter of what letter(s) the next word starts with, just like with the Gaelic article! I was better equipped than most learners to work it out, but even then it took conscious study for me to get it right.
But more importantly, gramar is being able to build an entirely independent sentence if you want to, so that you don't have to reply to "Ciamar a tha thu?" with "Tha mi ...", but instead you can say "Och, thuit mi air an eigh a-raoir agus tha cas goirt orm fhathast".
Tearlach61 wrote:If the learning imperative is the need to communicate an idea, not being able to express yourself because of artificial constraints is massively frustrating -- the Gaelic environment prevents you unnaturally from communicating, and many people resent that. It becomes a source of stress and gets in the way.
Mas ann gu bheil na h-oileanaich ann, chanainn-sa gur ann gu saor-thoileach a tha iad ann 's nach gabh iad dragh as.
Sorry, I can't go along with that.
I've seen many people go into many different types of learning experiences "voluntarily" and become frustrated by them -- there's certainly a massive difference between
wanting something and
thinking you want it. There are certain things we have conscious control over and certain things that we don't. Very few of us can consciously stifle boredom and/or frustration, whether we want to or not.
Put it this way: everyone who signs up for a language course
wants to learn the language but a scary percentage drop out before the course is finished. I hear teachers and other students say that these drop-outs weren't committed or serious about it -- well two-hundred quid on the table says they
were serious. When the brain is not motivated to process the input, the class has failed the student -- the student
has not failed the class.