Class having difficulty with Prepositions

Language English Grammar & Usage
21

Edited: Glad I got to the hurried mess this was, before anybody saw it… :blush:

Teaching prepositions feels banging your head against the wall?

I don’t think so.

Linking two nouns with a linking verb + like is not the same as modifying a subject + linking verb with an adjective form functioning as an adverb.

She felt good.

Did she feel good?

Yes.

“How” did she feel?

Good.

Teaching prepositions feels like banging your head against the wall.

Does teaching prepositions feel like banging your head against the wall?

Yes.

“What” does teaching prepositions feel “like”?

Like banging your head against the wall.

“How” does teaching preopsitions feel?

“Like” banging your head against the wall.

“Teaching prepositions feels like banging your head against a wall” could be the answer to a “how” or a “what” question but it should still be considered a N=N structure. That can be demonstrated by reversing the order. “Banging yourself on the head feels like teaching prepositions.”

Either that or Fox had it here…

I think this is odd though because when a person says “He feels/ looks/ sounds like a teacher” they usually mean “He feels/ looks/ sounds like he “is” a teacher.” He “seems like” a teacher. Maybe he “is” a teacher, though not well respected. It is derived from the N=N pattern. It “is” the N=N pattern. Otherwise why would they they call it a linking verb? The “linking” in “linking verb” has to mean something.

In any event I think we can agree that there exists a useful distinction between “feels” and “feels like”.

22

[quote=“bob”]
In any event I think we can agree that there exists a useful distinction between “feels” and “feels like”.[/quote]

I agree, Bob, that’s why I said it would depend on your grammar preference. Different grammarians have different opinions. English is like that. My favorite grammar does it like I did it. I’d link to it, but I can’t. It was written by my favorite professor and he hasn’t published it. They just make copies of it and sell it in the Uni book store. The teacher’s name is Earl Schrock.

23

I don’t think you understand what I am saying. A linking verb + like has to be followed by a noun. Linking verbs are followed by adjectives functioning as adverbs.

24

Okay, I’ll have another look at your post later.

25

[quote]I don’t think you understand what I am saying. A linking verb + like has to be followed by a noun. Linking verbs are followed by adjectives functioning as adverbs.
[/quote]

That’s my point too.

It’s not an adverbial participal phrase, it is a gerund. Like is a preposition that must be followed by a gerund.

The whole phrase: “like banging your head against a wall” is adverbial.

He works like a man possessed.

“Like a man possessed” would be an adverb.

It answers: How does he work?

However “a man possessed” is a noun and an adjective which as a phrase is the object of like. Objects are nouns or pronouns.

26

[quote=“Fox”]

The whole phrase: “like banging your head against a wall” is adverbial.

He works like a man possessed.

“Like a man possessed” would be an adverb.

It answers: How does he work?

However “a man possessed” is a noun and an adjective which as a phrase is the object of like. Objects are nouns or pronouns.[/quote]

All makes perfect sense but I can’t figure out why they call it a linking verb if the relationship if so standard.

She went to/ by/ under/ in etc. the store.

Those are standard verb + prep phrase.

         (but)

“He looks like a professor,” can only take this pattern with “like” or “as if” and remain a linking verb.

Of course you coud say “He looked under the professor” but that would be Vi.+ prep phrase, and “look” would mean something else.

I keep coming back to this…

Linking verbs then are followed by adjectives functioning as adverbs, or by “like” or “as if” functioning as a preposition to introduce a similie. It is related more to S + Vi pattern than to the S=N pattern than I had thought all these years honestly.

Struggling around in my bag…

“Ah, these feel like my keys…”

“But ARE they your keys.”

“Ineed! YES YES. They ARE my keys. They felt like MY keys, but then a lot of things feel like my keys, YOUR keys for example.”

I feel like I’ve had an epiphany, and by this I do not mean that I “am” an epiphany. Geriatric first language aquistion is a wonderful thing.

27

Linking verbs can be replaced by a “be” verb and the sentence still conveys essentially the same meaning.

It feels like banging your head against a wall.

It is like banging your head against a wall.

‘Feel’ is a linking verb. Essentially the same isn’t exactly the same.

28

So linking words behave grammatically like action verbs (with one exception) except that they are always followed by “like” or “as if” and a noun. Or they are followed by an adjective functioning as an adverb (called an adverb because it describes the verb as much as the subject) (this of course doesn’t happen with action verbs, it’s the exception). Their meanings can be something similar to “be” as a main verb but it would be easy to find exceptions to this as well. This “feels like” a road, but it “is” actually a sidewalk.

This matters to me bcause I always teach the five basic structures and I have always said that linking verb + like + noun is derived from the N=N pattern (3), and the linking verb adjective is derived from the be verb adjective pattern (4). I always said that you needed to use structure (1) and (2) patterns to make questions with linking verbs, ie. use do/does/did in the simple present and simple past (in the other tenses with the first aux. of course).

Maybe I am not having an epiphany anymore. Do you think it is OK to say that linking verbs are derived from structures 3 & 4?

29

I don’t know. Like I said, I’m not tht knowledgable about grammar.

30

This whole thread reminds me of Ironlady saying she doesn’t teach grammar explicitly. For must of us I think that would be a pretty good idea because the language isn’t really aquired analytically and the things we are talking about are really complicated and few of us really undertand it all that well. I’m guessing you are one of those people who comes pretty close and I think I am too. I’ve always explained linking verbs as being derived from and related to Subject + be + noun (3) and Subject + be + adjective (4) patterns, like I mentioned above, and that questions were formed like they are in structure 1) Subject + V.i.

I say that in English, nobody understands so I try to say it in Chinese. That half assed “works” so I turn to the page in Shrampfer (the translated version) and have them read the grammar notes. She writes good grammar explanations I think, but lousy exercises. I ask does this seem confusing to you, probably not even noticing that I am using the pattern, they say “yes”, showing that they understood it even though they said they don’t, so I’d translate an actual example sentence “That sounds like frank” -“Na4 ting1 qi3 lai5 xiang4 Frank.” No problem. Does that sound like Carol? No. Does it sound like Ted? No. Who does that sound like? Frank. Do a couple more like that.

Done.

I almost never get into an analysis of grammar with students the way I do here. They don’t undertand it, it’s difficult and boring and they hate me for it. All I try to do is at least really undertand the basics and try to translate that understanding into Chinese occassionaly. Sometimes this works pretty well, explaining infinitive markers is easy and useful for example I think. “Explaining” linking verbs in either language might be beyond me apparently, I think I can provide an environment where it might be aquired though. Anyway it has been ten years since I thought about what part of speech “like” was in a linking verb + like sentence. I’m sure you are right. It’s a preposition. Not entirely sure how that info will help anyone but it will be nice to have in the off chance that ten years from now somebody asks me about it. Interesting too. Thanks.

31

I teach grammar explicitly. It’s helpful sometimes, especially basic sentence structure. If students understand basic sentence structure then it is easier for them to manipulate sentences or understand the reasoning behind things like gerunds and infinitives. I think it empowers students.

32

I bet you are good at it too. But what you really have to wonder about is people who don’t really understand basic grammar trying to teach advanced grammar. It must happen a lot.

With me these days it almost boils down to whether or not I can say it in Chinese. If I can’t say it in Chinese I don’t say it in English. That keeps everything pretty durn basic, believe me.

33

I just bumbled my way along for many years with a mind for always improving my knowledge. I learnt in the classroom, I rarely opened a grammar book.

When I worked in publishing, I learnt a lot by pretending I knew what I was talking about. However, in actuality I feely admit my knowledge is limited to only the most basic of grammar. I wish I knew more, but I’m essentially a lazy soul.

34

I can never remember the ci2zu3 in wen2fa3 de ci2zu3 (grammar phrase) and thinking that maybe I couldn’t remember because I never analyzed the thing I just asked my wife whether the ci2 in ci2zu3 was the same ci2 as in “word.”

She said that “ci2” meant “phrase.”

I said no it didn’t mean “phrase” it meant a two character word.

She said “A character is a word,” so I said “How do you say “what” in Chinese?” She said “shen2me5.”

Is that one word or two?

Two.

But it is not two words in the sense that say “Wo3 hao3 le5” is three words?

Huh?

Shen2me5 is one word.

It is two characters.

A word is not a character. Lots of words in Chinese are more than one character. Some words are one character, some are two, three or four.

If you say this you will drive Chinese crazy.

Etc.

35

And a lot of non Chinese I would expect.

36

That’s true. After that I begged her not to become hysterical but rather to try to look at it “logically”. Shen2me5 translates to one word in English. You could look it up in a dictionary. Shen2me5 is what you might call a “concept.” Isn’t that right dear? I realize that the character system has not evolved sufficiently as to put a space between words but there is hope, right? Logic is a from of torture to the Chinese mind generally and so it goes badly. She sleeps now and looks cute while sleeping, for this I remain thankful.

37

Hey Fox,

Is that “feely admit” or freely admit" . Just wanting to
know whether you charging-out on your posts these days or
sounding humble and sincere or something.

38

Charging out.

You can pay by leaving a small cash deposit under the third seat on left of the first car of the Mucha MRT train. I collect every Thursday.

39

We are back at it again tonight…

Me - Word: Meaningful element of speech, usually shown with a space on either side of it when written or printed. (Oxford)

“Ying1” is a character and it is a word. It means brave. “Wen2” is a character and it is a word. It means language. But “Ying1wen2” is two characters and together they make a new word. A single word meaning “English”. Do you see how that works?

She - This is the same thing we did last night.

Me - Yes, dear. I realize that. But we didn’t really resolve the matter did we?

She - I am Chinese. You can’t argue with me about Chinese.

Me - But we are using the English word “word.” I can argue about the English word “word” as it applies to Chinese, can’t I? I’ve been studying Chinese for a long time…

Once again things go badly.

40

No thanks Fox too inconvenient.
I’ll take it as a warning but. I’m outta here. :moon: :moped: :uk: