发布时间 : 星期六 文章English Grammar更新完毕开始阅读531bb716bd64783e09122bfd
English Grammar
Meaning: English grammar is the body of rules that describe the structure of expressions in the English language. This includes the structure of words, phrases, clauses, and sentences.
Content:
1. Basic English Grammar Basic English Grammar A. General terms:
1. morphology 词法 2. syntax 句法 3. word 单词 4. phrase 词组
5. sentence 句子 6. clause 从句 7. main clause 主句 8. part of speech 词性 9. structure 结构
B. Tenses 时态
1. past future tense 过去将来时 : would do
2. past future continuous tense 过去将来进行时: would be doing 3. past future perfect tense 过去将来完成时 : would have done 4. present simple tense 一般现在时 : do (does) 5. past simple tense 一般过去时 : did
6. future simple tense 一般将来时 : will do 7. present perfect tense 现在完成时 : have done 8. past perfect tense 过去完成时 : had done
9. future perfect tense 将来完成时 : will have done
10. present continuous tense 现在进行时 : is (am, are) doing 11. past continuous tense 过去进行时 : was (were) doing 12. future continuous tense 将来进行时 : will be doing
13. past future continuous tense 过去将来进行时 : would be doing 14. present perfect continuous tense 现在完成进行时 : have been doing 15. past perfect continuous tense 过去完成进行时 : had been doing
C. Part of speech 词性
1. noun名词: （Nouns are naming words,noun names a person,place,thing,idea）
proper noun 专有名词, common noun 普通名词, countable noun 可数名词, uncountable noun 不可数名词, abstract noun抽象名词, concrete noun 具体名词, material noun物质名词, collective noun集体名词
2.Ajective (describe or modify nouns)
3. verb动词: (Verbs show action,the state of being)
transitive verb及物动词, intransitive verb不及物动词, linking verb系动词, auxiliary verb助动词, modal verb情态动词, regular verb规则动词, irregular verb不规则动词, phrasal verb短语动词
4. preposition 介词(show position and how things go together) 6. conjunction连词 (are joining words ,phrases ,or sentences) 7. adverb副词 (tell about adj. v. adv.)
5. pronoun代词(take the place of nouns)
personal pronoun人称代词, possessive pronoun物主代词, reflexive pronoun反身代词, demonstrative pronoun指示代词, interrogative pronoun疑问代词, relative pronoun关系代词, indefinite pronoun不定代词
(all, each, every, both, either, neither, one, none, little, few, many, much, other, another, some, any, no)
F. Elements of sentences句子成分
1. subject主语 2. predicate谓语 3. object宾语 4. dual object双宾语 5. direct object直接宾语 6. indirect object间接宾语 7. complex object复合宾语 8. complement补语 9. subject complement主补 10. object complement宾补 11. predicative表语 12. attribute定语 13. appositive同位语 14. adverbial状语
G. Subordinate clause从属句
1. nominal clause名词从句 2. attributive clause定语从句 3. object clause宾语从句 5. subject clause主语从句 6. appositive clause同位语从句 adverbial clause状语从句10. adverbial clause of time时间状语从句 11. adverbial clause of place地点状语从句
Examples:
Proper grammar use
1. subject / verb agreement: must have both in a sentence; subject and verb must agree in terms
of quality and tense. Here is an example of what not to do: Three students sits in the hallway. So the verb must indicate the subject(three students), the verb “sits” is wrong, it should be either sit or sat, depending in the meaning you want to convey. The verb “sits” should only be used for a singular subject. For example: “John sits in the hallway” is correct. 2. Corect sentence structure: adj comes before the noun it describes. Red car. 3. Knowing the parts of speech: You look extremely exquisite.
Summary: It seems to be based on a fixed set of concepts, which govern dozens of
constructions and thousands of verbs -- not only in English, but in all other languages -- fundamental concepts such as space, time, causation and human intention, such as, what is the means and what is the ends.
I START TO question the very nature of our thoughts -What our language habits reveal-- the way we use words, how we learn, and how we relate to others…. Let me start off with a technical problem is, which verbs go in which
constructions? The verb is the chassis of the sentence. It's the framework onto which the other parts are bolted.
An intransitive verb, such as \to say, \has to be an object there:\
devoured.\ There are dozens or scores of verbs of this type, each of which shapes its sentence. So, a problem in explaining how children learn language, a problem in
teaching language to adults so that they don't make grammatical errors, and a problem in programming computers to use language is which verbs go in which constructions.
For example, the dative construction in English. You can say, \mouse,\dative. \verbs can go both ways.So a tempting generalization for a child, for an adult, for a computer is that any verb that can appear in the
construction, \
\ so you can produce and understand new sentences.
Unfortunately, there appear to be exceptions. You can say, \Chicago,\headache,\ The solution is that these constructions, despite initial appearance, are not synonymous, that when you crank up the microscope on human cognition, you see that there's a subtle difference in meaning between them. So, \corresponds to the thought\X\
Now, many events can be subject to either construal, kind of like the classic
figure-ground reversal illusions, in which you can either pay attention to the particular object, in which case the space around it recedes from attention, or you can see the faces in the empty space, in which case the object recedes out of consciousness. How are these construals reflected in language? Well, in both cases, the thing that is construed as being affected is expressed as the direct object, the noun after the
verb. So, when you think of the event as causing the muffin to go somewhere -- where you're doing something to the muffin -- you say, \you construe it as \the mouse, and therefore you express it as, \
So which verbs go in which construction -- the problem with which I began
-- depends on whether the verb specifies a kind of motion or a kind of possession change. To give something involves both causing something to go and causing
someone to have. To drive the car only causes something to go, because Chicago's not the kind of thing that can possess something. Only humans can possess things. And to give someone a headache causes them to have the headache, but it's not as if you're taking the headache out of your head and causing it to go to the other person, and
implanting it in them. You may just be loud or obnoxious, or some other way causing them to have the headache. So, that's an example of the kind of thing that I do in my day job. Well, there are a number of interesting conclusions, I think,from this and many similar kinds of analyses of hundreds of English verbs. First, there's a level of fine-grained conceptual structure, which we automatically and unconsciously
compute every time we produce or utter a sentence, that governs our use of language.
It's very hard to find any example of abstract language that is not based on some
concrete metaphor. For example, you can use the verb \and \
Istanbul.\could have been in bed the whole time, but it's as if his health is a point in state
space that you conceptualize as moving. Or, \which we conceive of time as stretched along a line. Likewise, we use \indicate not only physical force, as in, \
interpersonal force, as in, \her,but by issuing a threat. Or, \entities inside Rose's head, engaged in a tug of a war.
Second conclusion is that the ability to conceive of a given event in two different ways, such as \something,\ I think is a fundamental feature of human thought, and it's the basis for much human argumentation, in which people don't differ so much on the facts as on how they ought to be construed. Just to give you a few examples: \pregnancy\
child;\
\And I think the biggest picture of all would take seriously the fact that so much of our verbiage about abstract events is based on a concrete
metaphor and see human intelligence itself as consisting of a repertoire of concepts -- such as objects, space, time, causation and intention -- which are useful in a social, knowledge-intensive species, whose evolution you can well imagine, and a process of metaphorical abstraction that allows us to bleach these concepts of their original conceptual content --space, time and force -- and apply them to new abstract
domains, therefore allowing a species that evolved to deal with rocks and tools and animals, to conceptualize mathematics, physics, law and other abstract domains.
So to sum up: language is a collective human creation, reflecting human
nature, how we conceptualize reality, how we relate to one another. And then by analyzing the various quirks and complexities of language, I think we can get a window onto what makes us tick.