syntax vs. grammar

[richelle]

if i may ask you sir...
what is the difference between them?

if grammar is all about rules...
and syntax is sentence formation...

what is the difference then?

thank you!

[BobK]

Wow! 10 views so far, and nobody wants to be the first to step into this minefield. Here's a first shot (rather from the hip).

The second syllable of syntax is a clue to its relationship to the word 'tactics'. It's the order that you put words in, much as a tactician deploys troops for various effects.

'Grammar' has widely differing meanings - particularly descriptivist (the way things are in fact) and prescriptivist (the way someone thinks things should be.

A descriptive grammar specifies a syntax for any particular language - the way words are actually put together to convey meaning. A prescriptive grammar prescribes a syntax (the way sentences should - according to a fairly random set of 'rules' - be put together).

b (adopting foetal position and logging off immediately)

[Humble]

Hello, Richelle,
Grammar is the framework of a language. It is a study or science that has two parts: morphology (the forms of words) and syntax (the combination of words into sentences).
Morphology studies verbs, nouns, adjectives etc.
Syntax deals with their functions in sentences - subjects, objects, attributes etc.
To know you is to love you.
To know, to love are both verbs (infinitives) - that's morphology.
But they have different functions: to know is the subject, to love is part of the predicate - that's syntax.

Why is it a minefield, Bob? Because some pugnatious people hate the word rules? Descriptivists who take part in forums like this think they make learning languages easier, but it's just the opposite - non-native learners have to remember numerous exceptions in addition. One has to know where exactly the rules can be lax.

Regards

[MikeNewYork]

Originally Posted by BobK

Wow! 10 views so far, and nobody wants to be the first to step into this minefield. Here's a first shot (rather from the hip).

The second syllable of syntax is a clue to its relationship to the word 'tactics'. It's the order that you put words in, much as a tactician deploys troops for various effects.

'Grammar' has widely differing meanings - particularly descriptivist (the way things are in fact) and prescriptivist (the way someone thinks things should be.

A descriptive grammar specifies a syntax for any particular language - the way words are actually put together to convey meaning. A prescriptive grammar prescribes a syntax (the way sentences should - according to a fairly random set of 'rules' - be put together).

b (adopting foetal position and logging off immediately)

I think you did a fine job.

[riverkid]

BobK:

'Grammar' has widely differing meanings - particularly descriptivist (the way things are in fact) and prescriptivist (the way someone thinks things should be.

A descriptive grammar specifies a syntax for any particular language - the way words are actually put together to convey meaning. A prescriptive grammar prescribes a syntax (the way sentences should - according to a fairly random set of 'rules' - be put together).

Originally Posted by Humble

Why is it a minefield, Bob? Because some pugnatious people hate the word rules? Descriptivists who take part in forums like this think they make learning languages easier, but it's just the opposite - non-native learners have to remember numerous exceptions in addition. One has to know where exactly the rules can be lax.

Regards

Good job, Bob!

The problem as I see it is that very few really understand what Descriptivism is. In actuality, it is Descriptivism that describes the minute details of language, the basic rules of language. Prescriptivism has never ever ever attempted this.

All Prescriptivism has done is make up rules according to some individual's personal tastes. That is, on its face, ludicrous in the extreme. You don't study something and inject personal taste and opinion in that study.

Everyone admits that this is what Prescriptivism is and yet so many still give it far far too much credence.

Humble, it is Prescriptivism that has never followed the rules of English, the rules Bobk describes as, let me run and get the exact quote, ... "(the way things are in fact)".

Descriptivists love rules, the factual rules, not some made up nonsense.

[rewboss]

The argument about whether descriptivism or prescriptivism is the better approach to grammar is irrelevant to this thread and most likely unhelpful to richelle.

[riverkid]

Originally Posted by rewboss

The argument about whether descriptivism or prescriptivism is the better approach to grammar is irrelevant to this thread and most likely unhelpful to richelle.

I think it is spot on important. When ESLs come to realize that prescriptions are merely demanded for tests and have no connection to real language, the time will come when we are able to put these nonsensical "rules" to rest.

When that happens, ESLs won't have to go through a false learning process. They'll be informed from the outset how language is really used.

[MikeNewYork]

Originally Posted by riverkid

I think it is spot on important. When ESLs come to realize that prescriptions are merely demanded for tests and have no connection to real language, the time will come when we are able to put these nonsensical "rules" to rest.

When that happens, ESLs won't have to go through a false learning process. They'll be informed from the outset how language is really used.

You are singing the same old song. ESL students are smart enough to realize that prescriptivism sets the rules for standard English. And, most of them come here seeking those rules. You can denigrate prescriptivism all you want, but you can't change it.

[riverkid]

Originally Posted by MikeNewYork

You are singing the same old song. ESL students are smart enough to realize that prescriptivism sets the rules for standard English. And, most of them come here seeking those rules. You can denigrate prescriptivism all you want, but you can't change it.

That is an absolute falsehood, Mike. I'm not at all sure you understand what Prescriptivism is.

++++++++++++
CGEL:

There are also topics in a descriptive grammar that are uniformly ignored by prescriptivists These include the most salient and well-known principles of syntax. Prescriptive works tend to be highly selective, dealing only with points on which people make mistakes (or what are commonly thought to be mistakes).

++++++++++++++++

[rewboss]

My earlier comment was made as a moderator, and I reiterate it here:

This thread is about the difference in meaning between the technical terms "grammar" and "syntax". It is not about the relative merits and demerits of prescriptivism or descriptivism.