Does "simply" modify "the realization"?

[optimistic pessimist]

Dear all,

In the sentence below, what does "simply" modify? Does it modify "the realization"?

Creative thinking may well mean simply the realization that there's no particular virtue in doing things the way they have always been done.

Thank you!

OP

 

[Matthew Wai]

If it modified 'the realization', it should be 'the simple realization'. So I think the adverb 'simply' modifies the verb 'mean'.

Not a teacher.

 

[BobK]

:up: And your teacher (this feels like homework) probably went to the same school as my English teacher, who insisted that adverbs modify verbs, whereas adjectives qualify nouns.

b

 

[optimistic pessimist]

Dear all,
At first, I thought the same as Matthew, but I noticed that like the cases of "He is only a child" or "Meg is merely a good friend", adverbs can modify article (+adjective)+noun. That's why I thought "simply" could modify "the realization". Is my guess still wrong?

Thank you

OP

 

[MikeNewYork]

Yes, your guess is wrong.

 

[oldbei]

I wonder what the word order would be if the sentence were in Japanese.

To use "he is only a child" as an example, in Chinese, we would have something like "he only is a child" as its translation, which clearly shows what "only" modifies. :lol:

Compare "Mary is his only child" with "Mary is only a child." The first "only" is an adjective, while the second an adverb.

*** Not a teacher ***

 

[Matthew Wai]

"Meg is merely a good friend", adverbs can modify article (+adjective)+noun.

I think 'merely' modifies 'is', because it should be 'a mere good friend' if it modified the noun.

in Chinese

We should try to forget it while learning English, or we will use Chinglish unawares.

Not a teacher.

 

[oldbei]

We should try to forget it while learning English, or we will use Chinglish unawares.

I respectfully disagree. Whether you like it or not, your mother tongue is in your blood. It will affect you in one way or another when you learn a new language. Dealing with such effect is better than simply ignoring it in my opinion.

 

[optimistic pessimist]

Hi oldbey
Thanks for your post. Since the Japanese language has totally different word order from English, the English sentence made up in the Japanese word order, "he only child is", doesn't make any sense. I understand English and Chinese are similar in word order, and that's why you can compare the two languages the way you did in your post.

OP

 

[Matthew Wai]

English and Chinese are similar in word order

I don't think so.

you can compare the two languages the way you did in your post.

I often find the two languages not comparable.

Dealing with such effect is better than simply ignoring it in my opinion.

The more you think about your native language, the more you are affected by it while using English.

Not a teacher.

 

[oldbei]

The more you think about your native language, the more you are affected by it while using English.

Being affected by the things you already knew is not necessarily a bad thing. Why can people acquire more easily a new language that is similar to the one that they already knew? I suspect it's because they've got some help from what they already knew. Although English is very different from Chinese, they do share considerable similarities nevertheless, especially when it comes to grammar. For example, if you have learned you need to use an adverb to modify a verb in Chinese, is it so bad to use this understanding when you study English?

 

[Matthew Wai]

Such opinions may be the cause of the prevalence of Chinglish among us Chinese people.

Not a teacher.

 

[BobK]

Somewhere in this forum I posted a graphic I used when starting with a group of adults learning Portuguese - if I find it I'll post a link. It's relevant, I think, and explains my support of MW's position. When using language you need to forget about what you're doing and just do it. ;-) As soon as you stop and think in your mother tongue!] 'What's that in my mother tongue?' you stop being a language user and become a word processor.

b

 

[oldbei]

Such opinions may be the cause of the prevalence of Chinglish among us Chinese people.

You are still focusing on the negative transfer, while there is something called "positive transfer:"

"When the relevant unit or structure of both languages are the same, linguistic interference can result in correct language production called positive transfer." --Wikipedia

 

[oldbei]

Not a teacher

Somewhere in this forum I posted a graphic I used when starting with a group of adults learning Portuguese - if I find it I'll post a link. It's relevant, I think, and explains my support of MW's position. When using language you need to forget about what you're doing and just do it. ;-) As soon as you stop and think in your mother tongue!] 'What's that in my mother tongue?' you stop being a language user and become a word processor.

b

I beg to differ. I am by no means promoting constantly translating from your mother tongue when you speak in a foreign language. What I am trying to argue is to make use of what you already knew when learning something new. It's like using grammar. You don't think about it when you speak, but it's a great tool when you analyze sentences. It helps you understand why some of them work while others do not.

 

[Matthew Wai]

You are still focusing on the negative transfer, while there is something called "positive transfer:"

I think it is more negative than positive.

Not a teacher.

 

[BobK]

I wouldn't say more. I agree that recognizing similarities between languages can be useful (as a language learner I've certainly found that). But the positives usually carry a risk (as language teacher I've certainly found that). 'Dicho y hecho MEANS "No sooner said than done"' - no it doesn't, though in some contexts it comes close. 'A French /b/ is the same as an English /b/.' No no NO - if you believe that you'll always sound like something out of Astérix chez les Bretons. ;-)

b

 

[Matthew Wai]

But the positives usually carry a risk

The risk is especially big to us Chinese people because Chinese is very different from English.

Not a teacher.

 

[Tarheel]

I have a question for you, Matthew (because I think you know the answer). Is it true that manny people in Hong Kong learn English as a first language or that they learn English and Chinese at the same time (while they are growing up)? And is it true that in Singapore residents are actually required to learn English (in public school)? (If you don't know the answer to this one I am sure somebody here does.)

(BTW, your contributions to this forum are valuable.)

:up:

 

[oldbei]

You could say Chinese mainlanders are required to learn English too. I am from Beijing and I wasn't really given a choice not to learn English since jurnior high.