Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 46

Thread: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Israel
    Native language
    Hebrew
    Age
    21
    Posts
    1,935

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    what do you mean by turning to x?
    All the seats are taken in the parliament of fools!

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    (near) Kortrijk, Belgium
    Native language
    Belgium, Dutch
    Posts
    6,384

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    X = someone. that is: turning one's face, one's body, to him --- but that might just be because s/he heard a noise, not because s/he wanted to address that person, to tell him something.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NCR,Luzon,Pilipinas
    Native language
    Tagalog
    Posts
    1,550

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasK View Post
    In Dutch one can say/write both 'een brief sturen aan' and 'een brief sturen naar' (sending a letter to). I now realize that the first one refers to the functional act, the speech (well...) act, if that is a correct description, the other one to the physical act, and that the distinction explains the difference in prepositions.

    It reminds me of speech acts. But it seems to me there is something similar with paying and buying: paying is a factual description of the process, buying is the functional-cultural interpretation of that process. Or that is what I think. There might be something similar with shooting and defending/ attacking, shooting and hunting, etc.

    But is that a accepted distinction? Are those existing categories? Do they have a separate syntax, in some respects at least? Do they 'behave' in different ways? Could the distinction be useful, didactically speaking?
    you mean say vs write? In Tagalog, say is "Sabihan mo" while write is "Sulatan mo". Both have messages but the first one might have many ways. (by phone/face to face etc.)
    deKamatodeNah TeKatenggesan Ketam

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    (near) Kortrijk, Belgium
    Native language
    Belgium, Dutch
    Posts
    6,384

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    That reminds me: there is saying, speaking and telling. The first two can be described objectively, whereas the essence of what happens in telling is hard to describe. Can you make the distinction?

    In some way one might say one tells something in a letter, which shows that it is the function we express, not the means we use.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Pekino, Ĉinujo
    Native language
    Chinese/Italian - bilingual
    Age
    24
    Posts
    1,532

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    Hi ThomasK,
    I've seen that in German and Dutch the verb for "study" is similar to lern-, does it mean both "study" and "learn"?

    In my Chinese dialect, there is no distinction between see and look, between hear and listen, between say and speak and tell.

    In Italian there's no difference between say and tell. To say "tell somebody" you say "say to somebody" (dire a qualcuno). But there is a specific word for "telling a story" (raccontare una storia).
    "Ĉokolado". Do you know how to say "chócoleit" in "Espanis"?

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    (near) Kortrijk, Belgium
    Native language
    Belgium, Dutch
    Posts
    6,384

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    I would not say they are similar. Their meaning is similar, but strictly speaking people can be studying but not learning a thing (because they don't understand for example). Can you make that distinction?

    Say/ tell: people say a lot, but they tell very little. Can(not) you make that distinction? And can you apply the distinction to listening and not hearing, watching and not seeing???

    I am looking forward !

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Native language
    Portuguese (Portugal)
    Posts
    28,006

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasK View Post
    In Dutch one can say/write both 'een brief sturen aan' and 'een brief sturen naar' (sending a letter to).
    Naar in that construct reminds me of the English word near (I'm guessing it's not a cognate of German nach, in spite of the possible syntactical similarity...) Do you think its meaning resembles that of chez or vers in French?
    Deuparth gwaith yw ei ddechrau.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Pekino, Ĉinujo
    Native language
    Chinese/Italian - bilingual
    Age
    24
    Posts
    1,532

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasK View Post
    I would not say they are similar. Their meaning is similar, but strictly speaking people can be studying but not learning a thing (because they don't understand for example). Can you make that distinction?
    Yes, I do distinguish the two meaning.
    I was asking for Dutch, because my cousin from Holland always puts "leren" (or something like that) on MSN status when she is studying.

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasK View Post
    Say/ tell: people say a lot, but they tell very little
    Italian only distinguish between say and speak/talk. I translate it as: la gente parla un sacco, ma dice poco. (people talk a lot, but say very little)
    Unless, you want people telling stories or anedoctes, then you could also say: la gente dice un sacco, ma racconta poco. (raccontare = tell, as in tell a story)

    Mandarin Chinese has the word 告诉 that is similar to the English tell, so I think you can use it to translate this sentence: 人们说很多,但告诉很少。
    My dialect doesn't distinguish between speak, talk, say and tell; so you have to rephrase it in a different way. For example: 伊俫人讲很多话,但是有用的话讲少显。(these people "say" a lot, but "say" very few useful things).

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasK View Post
    And can you apply the distinction to listening and not hearing, watching and not seeing???
    I am looking forward !
    In Mandarin the distinction exists. Seeing is 见. Then you add 见 to listening and watching and form the other two verbs:
    看 watching/looking + 见 = 看见 seeing*
    听 listening + 见 = 听见 hearing

    *So there is a doublet for seeing: 见 or 看见. Compare Chinese pidgin English look-see = to see, which is a direct calque from Chinese.

    You can also add 到 and form 看到 seeing (lit. get to look) and 听到 hearing (lit. get to listen).

    In my dialect "hearing" is rendered as 听着 (lit. get to listen), and "seeing" is rendered as 看着 (lit. get to look).

    In Chinese see and hear are not distinct verbs, but are formed by look / listen + sort of preposition.

    Happy new year!
    Last edited by Youngfun; 1st January 2013 at 3:04 AM.
    "Ĉokolado". Do you know how to say "chócoleit" in "Espanis"?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    (near) Kortrijk, Belgium
    Native language
    Belgium, Dutch
    Posts
    6,384

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    Quote Originally Posted by Outsider View Post
    Naar in that construct reminds me of the English word near (I'm guessing it's not a cognate of German nach, in spite of the possible syntactical similarity...) Do you think its meaning resembles that of chez or vers in French?
    It certainly resembles vers, but not chez,I'd say, because vers refers to direction, whereas chez refers to location, I think... (Thanks and a happy New Year full of discoveries)

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    (near) Kortrijk, Belgium
    Native language
    Belgium, Dutch
    Posts
    6,384

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    Quote Originally Posted by Youngfun View Post
    Mandarin Chinese has the word 告诉 that is similar to the English tell, so I think you can use it to translate this sentence: 人们说很多,但告诉很少。
    My dialect doesn't distinguish between speak, talk, say and tell; so you have to rephrase it in a different way. For example: 伊俫人讲很多话,但是有用的话讲少显。(these people "say" a lot, but "say" very few useful things).
    I see, so there is a lexical addition explaining the other meaning...

    Quote Originally Posted by Youngfun View Post
    In Mandarin the distinction exists. Seeing is 见. Then you add 见 to listening and watching and form the other two verbs:
    看 watching/looking + 见 = 看见 seeing*
    听 listening + 见 = 听见 hearing

    *So there is a doublet for seeing: 见 or 看见. Compare Chinese pidgin English look-see = to see, which is a direct calque from Chinese.

    You can also add 到 and form 看到 seeing (lit. get to look) and 听到 hearing (lit. get to listen).

    In my dialect "hearing" is rendered as 听着 (lit. get to listen), and "seeing" is rendered as 看着 (lit. get to look).

    In Chinese see and hear are not distinct verbs, but are formed by look / listen + sort of preposition.

    Happy new year!
    But then: what is the meaning of 见 ? It cannot really be seeing, I think, because you can combne it with listening. Could it not be understanding rather? Like: listen = hearing + understanding, see = watching + understanding. The other one is perfectly clear: adding a perfective aspect (get to) to the verb.

    But can you also use either of those prepositions/... in other cases? That might be quite interesting !!! Happy - and creative, healthy - New Year to you too !
    Last edited by ThomasK; 1st January 2013 at 10:52 AM.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Pekino, Ĉinujo
    Native language
    Chinese/Italian - bilingual
    Age
    24
    Posts
    1,532

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasK View Post
    I see, so there is a lexical addition explaining the other meaning...


    But then: what is the meaning of 见 ? It cannot really be seeing, I think, because you can combne it with listening. Could it not be understanding rather? Like: listen = hearing + understanding, see = watching + understanding. The other one is perfectly clear: adding a perfective aspect (get to) to the verb.

    But can you also use either of those prepositions/... in other cases? That might be quite interesting !!! Happy - and creative, healthy - New Year to you too !
    见 alone means already "to see". Although it's used more often in the meaning "to meet someone", or in phrases such as "refer to the table/see page 4".
    Compound words in Chinese don't always have a logic. Most often two synonyms are put together to form a third synonim.
    I forgot to say that you can also say 见到 for "to see".
    I would say that there isn't much difference between 看见/看到/见到,or between 听见/听到.
    The only sfumature is that the forms with 到 put more emphasis on "manage to see/manage to hear".
    "Ĉokolado". Do you know how to say "chócoleit" in "Espanis"?

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Native language
    Norwegian
    Posts
    516

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasK View Post
    In Dutch one can say/write both 'een brief sturen aan' and 'een brief sturen naar' (sending a letter to). I now realize that the first one refers to the functional act, the speech (well...) act, if that is a correct description, the other one to the physical act, and that the distinction explains the difference in prepositions.

    But is that a accepted distinction? Are those existing categories? Do they have a separate syntax, in some respects at least? Do they 'behave' in different ways? Could the distinction be useful, didactically speaking?
    The distinction you suggest is probably more confusing than helpful. I am not sure how flexible the Dutch verb 'sturen' is, but the English verb 'send' can be used in various ways:
    send money (transfer)
    send for someone (to request that someone come to you)
    send a letter
    send an email (would that be different from sending a letter?)
    send flowers (order flowers from a shop and have them delivered somewhere)

    What is physical and what is functional here?

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    (near) Kortrijk, Belgium
    Native language
    Belgium, Dutch
    Posts
    6,384

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    At least I do not wish to make things more confusing than helpful.

    In this case 'to send for someone' is the only functional one here, as the rest refer to physical actions the function of which can be guessed whereas it is not unambiguous... I think I am looking for a parallel with speech acts, which must meet 'felicity conditions' for example in order to work.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Pekino, Ĉinujo
    Native language
    Chinese/Italian - bilingual
    Age
    24
    Posts
    1,532

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    Hi Thomas, you didn't answer my question by the way
    I was asking for Dutch, because my cousin from Holland always puts "leren" (or something like that) on MSN status when she is studying.
    How do you say "study" and "learn" in Dutch?
    "Ĉokolado". Do you know how to say "chócoleit" in "Espanis"?

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Native language
    Norwegian
    Posts
    516

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    ThomasK,
    I can kind of understand what you mean when you claim that een brief sturen aan is 'functional' in that it involves a recipient (the whole letter sending frame is opened: sending, receiving, opening, reading) while the other is physical. I could easily send a letter to Amsterdam, a purely physical location with no recipient. But I have to say, I really don't see how the meaning of the verb changes. berndf is right when he says that it's the preposition that changes the whole thing. Didactically speaking, it's probably a lot easier to deal with sturen aan + person and sturen naar + place rather than some abstract concept of functional vs physical.
    Last edited by myšlenka; 2nd January 2013 at 5:04 PM.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    (near) Kortrijk, Belgium
    Native language
    Belgium, Dutch
    Posts
    6,384

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    @Youngfun: please forgive me, I read your answer, but did not have the time to answer. Give me another 12 hours please... ;-(

    @Myslenka: my point is didactic, you know --- in the long run! ;-) I found out that some prepositions imply a figurative interpretation, which seems to be 'functional' at the same time. And so I am now exploring whether this distinction has been made already and/or whether this distinction might account for certain syntactic and other phenomena, which I have not discovered (!). It must be a matter of (semantic) pragmatics, I guess; just like speech acts.

    The background is: this distinction (fig./ lit.) helps learners of Dutch, but I was hoping/ supposing/... the distinction might prove useful in more ways...
    Last edited by ThomasK; 2nd January 2013 at 2:41 PM.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Native language
    Norwegian
    Posts
    516

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    Is it a distinction that is used when teaching Dutch?

    I can construct similar examples in Norwegian, but the choice of prepositon is context-specific so there is no straightforward way to classify prepositions as this or that. I suspect the same is true for Dutch.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    (near) Kortrijk, Belgium
    Native language
    Belgium, Dutch
    Posts
    6,384

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    It is not a straightforward way perhaps, but this difference between schrijven naar/ aan seems fairly 'regular', the one between zich richten naar/ tot also. So I think it might be useful, whereas it is not one that is being used as far as I know --- but it would be more interesting if that distinction proved useful in other ways. So I am just exploring that hypothesis, seeing whether something useful can come out of that... (One of my starting points was that learners of Dutch find prepositions difficult - and so I do some research...)
    Last edited by ThomasK; 2nd January 2013 at 5:34 PM.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Native language
    Norwegian
    Posts
    516

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasK View Post
    It is not a straightforward way perhaps, but this difference between schrijven naar/ aan seems fairly 'regular', the one between zich richten naar/ tot also. So I think it might be useful, whereas it is not one that is being used as far as I know --- but it would be more interesting if that distinction proved useful in other ways. So I am just exploring that hypothesis, seeing whether something useful can come out of that... (One of my starting points was that learners of Dutch find prepositions difficult - and so I do some research...)
    Adpositions are difficult in all languages and people have probably tried to make a system in the chaos already without succeeding. It seems that you are merely inventing new labels for very generalized meanings. Learners of Dutch will still have to memorize the difference between schrijven naar/aan and zich richten naar/tot, and they will probably have to do so on a verb-to-verb basis where this kind of alternation applies because different prepositions are involved.

    You also wondered if this distinction, whatever it's basis is, could account for syntactic phenomena too. I personally don't think you find a special syntax related to this. They probably work like any other Preposition Phrase.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    (near) Kortrijk, Belgium
    Native language
    Belgium, Dutch
    Posts
    6,384

    Re: Descriptive vs. functional verbs?

    Well, at least it helps students to understand the meaning of aan/tot after/behind a verb, and I also tell them that lots of verbs with aan/toe-prefix have a Latin ad-equivalent (toegang/ access, toegeven/ admit, etc.). So that is certainly useful, but my underlying hypothesis might not work, quite possible -- too bad then.

    Syntax : I was not thinking of just PNPs, but also about the aspects of the verbs used, etc. --- but it might all turn out to be 'straw', too bad for me then, again.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •