So, let’s continue from the last posting! We were talking about that lazy verb…

Repeating the end of the last blog:

The present verb is the same as the infinitive in the present positive with “s” added in the 3^rd person. The auxiliary “do” is the same as the infinitive in the present negative with “s” added in the 3^rd person and the contracted “not” added on. The verb is the bare infinitive (without “to”). The auxiliary “do” takes “did” in the past negative for all persons with contracted “not” added and the bare infinitive added on.

The interrogative is simply the form inverted without the negative.

I DOn’t – Do I?

He DOESn’t – Does he?

He DIDn’t – Did he?

The rhetorical negative form:

Don’t you……..

Doesn’t he……

Didn’t he……..

Recapitulation

Obviously the first obstacle to overcome when learning and becoming fluent in these tenses is to accept the conceptual differences from the learner’s native language.

The simplicity of English grammar is sometimes the biggest obstacle.

As there is almost no declination of the verb, in theory it should be easy to learn. Moreover, as the auxiliary “do” only declines for the third person in the present and only has one past form (do/does/did), the verb only has three forms (to eat: eat/eats/ate) and the negative and interrogative in the present and past use only the bare infinitive (don’t eat/doesn’t eat/didn’t eat) (do I eat?/does he eat?/did you eat?), there is really no necessity to “memorize”.

Memory is obviously needed to remember

1. 1. what a verb means (translation)
2. 2. third person ending (pronunciation – s/z/iz)
3. 3. the irregular past and past participle (with only one form for all subjects)

For the intermediate speaker, a hundred irregular verbs are sufficient and are surprisingly easy to memorize. Drilling is required for the negative and interrogative forms; explanation is not enough.

While teaching, it is important not to forget to correct pronunciation. Maybe a simple table of vowel and diphthong sounds plus drilling of the consonants is advisable. The teacher must be aware of weak forms, contractions, elision and so on, and demand that the students use it right from the first class.

One of the greatest obstacles to overcome is the strange pronunciation of the regular past/past participle endings. Few English-speaking people perceive the peculiar way we speak compared to other languages. Written and spoken English are almost TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT LANGUAGES, and the teacher must be aware of this and communicate it to his/her students.

Besides the diphthongs/weak forms/non-pronounced letters and so on, the rhythm in English basically comes from the information we want to put across. Information is made up of verbs, nouns, adverbs, adjectives and negation. So, on the whole, all this is stressed. The pronouns, articles, conjuncts and so on are largely invisible as are the multiplicity of auxiliaries/modals (often contracted). All this can lead to confusion and exasperation on the part of student: I’ll (ail), Tom’ll (to mul), Peter’d (pi te red). Perhaps the weirdest thing about English emerges when one has to explain the pronunciation of sentences where past regular verbs are used. Obviously the student is delighted when he or she is told that almost all verbs in English have the same formand very minor change for the past and past participle (walk(s)/walked/walked). However in this simplicity lies the BIGGEST problem.

Here is the difficulty.

written form: Peter walks in (present third person)

spoken form: pe ter walk sin

written form: I walk in (present other persons)

spoken form: I wal kin

written form: I walked in (past all persons)

spoken form: I walk tin

As you can see, the present and past forms before a vowel-sound transfer their tense to the following syllable. An Englishman would say “So what?” However here we have a very serious and important linguistic problem.

I wanted it is OK as a written form.

“I won ti dit” is more difficult to explain to many foreign language speakers.

Personally, I don’t think this is a great problem as long as the teacher explains it AND drills it. BUT HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN IT? The perceived wisdom is to talk about “voiced” and “non-voiced” forms. But this is nonsensical to the student not familiar with this jargon. I find it much better to teach it using “vernacular phonetics”; for example, the consonant endings, the real spoken forms dictate the processes.

Obviously the pronunciation of “b” in “rub” doesn’t exist in a written form. There is a “phonetic” form but this doesn’t help the teacher. The only thing the teacher can do is make the student “copy” the “lips”. Therefore the teacher must make sure the student is aware of the difference between:

I rub it /ai u bit/

He rubs it /hi rub zit/

I rubbed it /ai rub dit/

The student hears: /air u bit/, /hi rub zit/ and / ai rub dit/.

But if you explain to a student that more often than not the past tense of the verb is “transferred” to the following syllable, he’ll think you crazy!

He jumped into the river = /hi JUMP tin to the RI ver/

Nobody would dispute that the second form is the spoken form along with the correct stress.

Again we come back to UBIQUITY. The –ed regular ending is used in the past and all perfect forms. If we look at a typical transitive regular verb, we can see how important it is to pronounce the –ed correctly.

to ask

to be asking

*to be asked

*to have asked

to have been asking

*to have been asked

ask

asks

*asked (present subjunctive)

*asked

*had asked (past subjunctive)

*have/has asked

*had asked

asking

*having asked

*being asked

*having been asked

*see examples below

*I used to be asked about it every day /ai yus tu bi yask ta bou ti tev ri day/ (vernacular pronunciation)

*He’s thought to have asked Oswald about it /hiz thor to e vask toz wal da bou tit/

*It must have been wonderful to have been asked to play /it mus tav bin won da ful te wav bi nask te play/

*You talk as if I asked a lot of questions /u too ka si fai yask ta lo tov kwes chuns/

*I asked a question at the meeting last Friday /ai yask ta kwes chu nat the mi ting last frei day/

*If you’d asked a question, he’d’ve panicked /I fu das ka kwes chun, e duv pa nikt/

*Peter has asked us about it again /pi te re zask tu za bou ti ta gen/

*Many people have asked us for our advice /me ni pi pe le vask tuz fe rou rad vais/

*Nobody had asked an important question before / no bo di e dask ta nim por tant kwes chun bi for/

*Having asked a number of questions, she sat down /ha vin gask ta num be rov kwes chuns shi sat down/

*Being asked about it again and again, Tom felt ill / be in gask ta bou ti ta gai nan da gain Tom fel til/

*Having been asked the question before on numerous occasions, he smiled /ha ving bi naskt the kwes chu no nu me ru so ka zions he smaild/

*After having been asked out for dinner on several occasions, she became suspicious /af te ha ving bi nask tout fe di ne ron se ve ra lo kei zions shi bi keim sus pi shus/

*On being asked if he intended to vote for me, he lost his temper /on be in gas ti fe yin ten ded to vout fe me e los tiz tem pe/

*He was astonished at having been asked to contribute to the scheme /e wo za sto nish ta ta ving bi nask te kon tri bu te the skim/

If we have fifteen situations of demanding pronunciation in only one verb, imagine it multiplied by all regular verbs, both transitive and intransitive. As the passive uses the transitive form, we have all the passive forms to take into account also.

The steam engine was invented by Watt / the sti men jin wo zin ven tid by wot/

The law was passed in April / the la woz pas ti nei pril/

The bank was robbed again yesterday /the bank woz rob da gen yis te day/

So, there  must leave until next time!