too or either

[engee30]

I got the impression that she was suggesting that there was a rule and that it should always be followed.

Soup, like myself, seems to be a supporter of prescriptivism. You know, when you obtain information in a systematized form, it's much simpler for you to pass it on to others, and for others to understand and follow it in an unchanged form.

However, I may be wrong in my interpretation of her words. Let's wait to see what Soup has to say - it is not for me to say whether or not she agrees with me.

Just look at the example with that double (even triple) negative - if only such use followed mathematical or logical rules, I'd never have a doubt about the meaning of that sentence of Soup's.

PS. Sorry if what I'm writing goes beyond the core topic of this thread.

 

[5jj]

X like myself, seems to be a supporter of prescriptivism. You know, when you obtain information in a systematized form, it's much simpler for you to pass it on to others, and for others to understand and follow it in an unchanged form.

I understand 'prescriptivism' in language teaching to mean telling people how a language should be used, rather than how it is used. If somebody believes, from their observations that a 'rule' reflects what most people say, then I would say that person was a descriptivist.

 

[engee30]

I understand 'prescriptivism' in language teaching to mean telling people how a language should be used, rather than how it is used.

:up: I would have thought that the term rule is something more to do with prescriptivism rather than descriptivism. That's why I wrote what I wrote concerning Soup's post and your reply to it.

 

[5jj]

:up: I would have thought that the term rule is something more to do with prescriptivism rather than descriptivism. That's why I wrote what I wrote concerning Soup's post and your reply to it.

Two points:
1. The word 'rule' is often misunderstood. A 'rule' in modern grammar is simply a statement of what has been observed to happen. Thus there is a 'rule' that the third person singular form of the present simple of all verbs in English, except the modals, ends in -s in the indicative mood. Nobody has said this must happen - it has simply been noted that this is what does happen.
2. I do not think it is appropriate to try to guess what Soup, or any other member, may or may not think or be. We cannot see inside their heads. If they choose to (re-)join this thread, then we can address them directly.

 

[Soup]

Well, my colleague's first response to the OP: "Children should spend only a small part of their free time playing video games. They mustn’t forget to do other things, .?." was 'either'.

So, your colleague felt like saying 'either' because... (I'm not sure I grasp your point.)

 

[5jj]

So, your colleague felt like saying 'either' because... (I'm not sure I grasp your point.)

My point was simply that my colleague did not say the thing that (in my opinion) she should have said. What to me (an experienced teacher) was obviously clear was to my colleague (an experienced teacher) not clear. We teachers are occasionally too inclined to believe that, if we consider something to be true, it must be true.

 

[Soup]

.
2. I do not think it is appropriate to try to guess what Soup, or any other member, may or may not think or be.

Here's what I think.

If the person does, 'not disagree', doesn't that person agree? Or, apparently, the person does disagree. Why use an expression that is purposefully meaningless, self contradictory, and downright confusing?The statement can have only one of three meanings:

• Agreement
• Disagreement
• Agree with some parts and disagree with other parts of the presenter's view

A person cannot 'kind of agree'. The speaker either does or doesn't agree. If the person agrees with some of what you said and disagrees with other elements, that is not "not disagree" [that person] is agreeing with some elements and not with others.
Source 25Seven: Weak Expression Of The Week


______________
I am not a prescriptivist (at least I hope I am not; one never really knows).

Prescriptivists prescribe and sometimes proscribe, emphasising rules and guidelines based on the conservation of customs (and sometimes a mythical ideal of correctness), and on judging what is or isn’t acceptable — which poses, among other questions: acceptable to whom, when, and why?


Source Descriptivism vs. prescriptivism: War is over (if you want it) « Sentence first

​

 

[Soup]

We teachers are occasionally too inclined to believe that, if we consider something to be true, it must be true.

I'm not sure what that means.

 

[5jj]

5jj: We teachers are occasionally too inclined to believe that, if we consider something to be true, it must be true.

I'm not sure what that means.

I'm not sure that I can explain to the satisfaction of all readers,but I'll try.

I was trying to suggest that teachers (OK - I admit that I am over-generalising) have a tendency to believe that what we have learnt to be true is true.

I'll try one example. When I was at school, I was taught that the English future tense was 'WILL + (bare) infinitive'. I believed this; I taught it. It was only after several years of embarrassment in the classroom with students who produced 'incorrect' examples from real life, that I realised that the 'fact' was fiction.

So, "We teachers are occasionally too inclined to believe that, if we consider something to be true, it must be true".

 

[Khosro]

“Children should spend only a small part of their free time playing video games. They mustn’t forget to do other things, too.”

In post 20 I said almost all I had to say about this question. Some further considerations:

Do we agree that "too" and "either" ,in different ways, have an "in addition to" function? I believe so.

But in addition to what? In the above sentence if we say "too" at the end, it means "in addition to "playing video games" ". If we say "either" then it means "in addition to the first "mustn't" ". Ofcourse there is no definite "mustn't" in the first sentence. In other words there is no "parallel construct". But it is possible to discern a hidden "mustn't" in the first sentence and say "either". I am ofcourse in favour of using "too" there.

Second point. When we utter some sentences we do not face them as completed structures. We make them as we keep on talking and our interpretation of we have already said involves in what we say in future words and sentences. The final product of this process when written on a piece of paper could be confusing for some people sometimes.

 

[Soup]

My point was simply that my colleague did not say the thing that (in my opinion) she should have said.

I understand. You mentioned she said, "Either", which, by the way, is possible, but not as a tag for to do other things:

• Children should (not forget to) spend...
• They must not forget either to do other things too.

The pattern I see is this. The speaker (your colleague) not only knows the rule and can apply the rule, her placing either at the end of the sentence could have to do with how she views the VP (must not forget to do other things), as a unit:

• They must not forget to do other things either.

For me, and possibly for you too, either sits directly after the phrase it modifies, the verb:

• They must not forget either to do other things too.

 

[Soup]

I was trying to suggest that teachers (OK - I admit that I am over-generalising) have a tendency to believe that what we have learnt to be true is true.

That I don't get, but, then again, I have never really known teachers like that. Students, yes. Many of them, especially here in Asia.

The rule (parallel construct) is not something I learned or was taught or even read about somewhere. It's based on a pattern. Which brings me back to my original request. Do you have an example sentence in mind that doesn't fit the pattern? I can't seem to find one. I need one. :-D

 

[5jj]

The rule (parallel construct) is not something I learned or was taught or even read about somewhere. It's based on a pattern. Which brings me back to my original request. Do you have an example sentence in mind that doesn't fit the pattern? I can't seem to find one. I need one. :-D

I thought that there were examples enough in this thread, but I was clearly wrong.You and I seem, somehow, to be discussing separate issues; so, I think (for the benefit of those readers still with us), this is my last post. I'll be happy to continue the discussion by PM, if you you would lke to.

 

[Soup]

I thought that there were examples enough in this thread, but I was clearly wrong.

Counter examples? Not a one in the thread. Yes, you were 'clearly wrong'. (Is it your intent to baffle?)

You and I seem, somehow, to be discussing separate issues

We are discussing the same issue. (Your response is baffling.)

so, I think (for the benefit of those readers still with us), this is my last post.

That would be for the best. We've been baffled enough.