[Grammar] English is not easy to learn

Status
Not open for further replies.

ysc1230

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2011
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Chinese
Home Country
Hong Kong
Current Location
Hong Kong
I have a English question, I wonder if anyone can explain it.

The book says "English is easy to learn" is a correct sentence.

But I doubt why it is correct. And in my opinion, it should be "English is easy to be learnt", but the grammar book says it is a wrong sentence.


Here are my concepts:

1. English is an object.
2. English is not able to LEARN, English is able to be LEARNT, <---isn't it?
3. I am happy to learn English <---Active Voice
4. English is learnt by all the students in my country<---Passive Voice


Therefore, i think the sentence should be "English is easy to be learnt". Passive voice should be used in this sentence.

I would appreciate it if someone could point out my wrong concepts. Thank you.
 

Gentle Nguyen

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2011
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
Vietnamese
Home Country
Vietnam
Current Location
Vietnam
I'm not a teacher.

I think the whole sentence may be:

English is easy for us/me/somebody to learn.

And for (some body) is pruned to make a succinct sentence as a title.

That is my own opinion for your reference.
 

ysc1230

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2011
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Chinese
Home Country
Hong Kong
Current Location
Hong Kong
Thank you for your reply.

If "English is easy to learn" is correct, because some words are pruned to make a succinct sentence.

Then, is my sentence also correct?

English is easy to be learnt.
 

Gentle Nguyen

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2011
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
Vietnamese
Home Country
Vietnam
Current Location
Vietnam
I think it's not wrong, but not sound natural.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
Then, is my sentence also correct?

English is easy to be learnt.
In the sense that native speakers say only "English is easy to learn", your sentence is not correct.
 

leonardoatt

Junior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Persian
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
The verb "Learn" is usually used in active voices not passive ones.
If you want to use a passive voice, you can say that sentence in this way:
"English is easy to be taught"
 

suprunp

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2011
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Ukrainian
Home Country
Ukraine
Current Location
Ukraine
The verb "Learn" is usually used in active voices not passive ones.
If you want to use a passive voice, you can say that sentence in this way:
"English is easy to be taught"

NOT A TEACHER

I, for one, have always thought "to learn" and "to teach" to be two completely different verbs. :)

Incidentally, COCA has not given my any examples of "easy to be taught", whereas it has given me some of "easy to teach".
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
The verb "Learn" is usually used in active voices not passive ones.
If you want to use a passive voice, you can say that sentence in this way:
"English is easy to be taught"
No, that is not natural English.

English is easy to teach - It is easy to teach English - English is easy (for people) to teach.

ps. Also: Young children are easy to teach - It is easy to teach young children.

Mylanguage is correct; the information conveyed may not be.:)
 
Last edited:

leonardoatt

Junior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Persian
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
I am wasting my time.You don't want to face the truth....
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic

Pokemon

Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
Russian
Home Country
Russian Federation
Current Location
Russian Federation
What truth might that be?


The truth is that the meaning is passive and the infinitive is active. :) In this construction an active infinitive expresses a passive meaning. That's what is puzzling the learner. There are a number of other syntactical patterns where this problem occurs:
I have work to do. (Why not 'to be done'?)
There are still many things to be done (or 'to do'?)
The man is difficult to deal with (why not 'to be dealt'?)
The text is too difficult to translate (or 'to be translated'?) ;-)

Some people say 'active infinitive' is used when you mean a specific doer of the action, and 'passive infinitive' when the doer is non-specific. However this formular doesn't always work. So this dilemma is really a problem with English learners.
 

bhaisahab

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
England
Current Location
Ireland
The truth is that the meaning is passive and the infinitive is active. :) In this construction an active infinitive expresses a passive meaning. That's what is puzzling the learner. There are a number of other syntactical patterns where this problem occurs:
I have work to do. (Why not 'to be done'?)
There are still many things to be done (or 'to do'?) Both are correct.
The man is difficult to deal with (why not 'to be dealt'?)
The text is too difficult to translate (or 'to be translated'?) Both are correct. ;-)

Some people say 'active infinitive' is used when you mean a specific doer of the action, and 'passive infinitive' when the doer is non-specific. However this formula doesn't always work. So this dilemma is really a problem with English learners.
That "formula" is wrong.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
The truth is that the meaning is passive and the infinitive is active. :) In this construction an active infinitive expresses a passive meaning. That's what is puzzling the learner. There are a number of other syntactical patterns where this problem occurs:
I have work to do. (Why not 'to be done'?)
There are still many things to be done (or 'to do'?)
The man is difficult to deal with (why not 'to be dealt'?)
The text is too difficult to translate (or 'to be translated'?) ;-)
.
That is an interesting approach, in my opinion, but it is too simplistic to say," the meaning is passive"; ysc1230's suggestion, which avoids any thought of the passive, is just as interesting.

Let's take just the first of your sentences, " I have work to do".

If we start with the idea of "there is work to be done (by me) or "I have work which must be done", then we are thinking in passive terms. If, however, we think of "I have work whichI must/need to/etc do", or "there is work (for me) to do", then we are thinking in active terms.

I think that the problem perhaps lies with learners' L1. In some languages it may be that only a passive construction is possible. That does not mean that the English active construction has a passive sense.
 

Pokemon

Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
Russian
Home Country
Russian Federation
Current Location
Russian Federation
I think that the problem perhaps lies with learners' L1. In some languages it may be that only a passive construction is possible. That does not mean that the English active construction has a passive sense.

But it does!
English is not easy to learn.

Semantically, 'English' is the object of the action expressed by the infinitive 'to learn'. It becomes obvious if you paraphrase the sentence: To learn English isn't easy. The same thing holds good for all the other sentences I listed.

Bhaisahab, thank you for the correction. Of course, formula -- formulae.:-(
 

suprunp

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2011
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Ukrainian
Home Country
Ukraine
Current Location
Ukraine
That does not mean that the English active construction has a passive sense.

Should we again say that it is just 'the way it is' and there is no 'solid formula'?

Thanks.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
But it does!
English is not easy to learn.

Semantically, 'English' is the object of the action expressed by the infinitive 'to learn'. It becomes obvious if you paraphrase the sentence: To learn English isn't easy. The same thing holds good for all the other sentences I listed.
Once one gets into paraphrase, one can prove anything one wishes. All one can say with some degree of certainty of the words "English is not easy to learn" is that 'English' is the subject of the verb 'is'.
 

Pokemon

Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
Russian
Home Country
Russian Federation
Current Location
Russian Federation
Once one gets into paraphrase, one can prove anything one wishes. All one can say with some degree of certainty of the words "English is not easy to learn" is that 'English' is the subject of the verb 'is'.

When one doesn't see the difference between semantics and formal syntax, it doesn't make any sense to paraphrase anything, of course.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
When one doesn't see the difference between semantics and formal syntax, it doesn't make any sense to paraphrase anything, of course.
If one wishes to put forward an argument in strictly semantic or strictly syntactic (or strictly anything) terms, it is helpful if one makes this clear.
 

Pokemon

Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
Russian
Home Country
Russian Federation
Current Location
Russian Federation
If one wishes to put forward an argument in strictly semantic or strictly syntactic (or strictly anything) terms, it is helpful if one makes this clear.

One has already done it, but somebody has missed it. Why doesn't somebody reread the post carefully?
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
One has already done it, but somebody has missed it. Why doesn't somebody reread the post carefully?
Oops. Sorry

However,
Semantically, 'English' is the object of the action expressed by the infinitive 'to learn'. It becomes obvious if you paraphrase the sentence: To learn English isn't easy. The same thing holds good for all the other sentences I listed[...]When one doesn't see the difference between semantics and formal syntax, it doesn't make any sense to paraphrase anything, of course.
in whichever terms one argues, 'English' is the object of the infinitive in "It is not easy to learn English'. Equally, it is clearly the subject of 'is' in "English is not easy to learn".

If, in that second sentence, as well as being the subject of 'is', it is also the object of 'to learn', we can hardly call it 'a passive meaning'. As I said previously, "That does not mean that the English active construction has a passive sense".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top