作者l10nel (小失)
看板Eng-Class
標題Re: [文法] ____ it rains, go into the building.
時間Mon Feb 20 16:40:48 2012
*[m※ 引述《tijj (my two cents)》之銘?
:只要Mary認同statement 1, 就是certainty. 她就應該用when.
:至於為何用when較好? 已有5位教授回答.
這個討論串最後的問題老早已經不是when/if哪個比較好，已經多次說過不是了，也沒人
要再爭辯這個問題，大家都已同意作答時會選when，卻還有人繼續祭出五個教授回答「
when比較好」。模糊焦點？迷糊仗？
:6.
:Yes, "It is raining soon" could be said and make perfect sense depending
:on context.
:Professor John Watkins
:University of Minnesota, Twin Cities
:如所說是爭議的句子, 結果Prof Watkins居然還在make perfect sense.
唯獨第六個教授 Professor John Watkins 針對 It is raining soon 的簡短回答算是有
點搔到癢處，但可惜發問者沒有交代引出這回答的問題全貌。為了把問題拉回到焦點，我
以下跟各位分享我和同一位教授請益，請他澄清先前回答的完整問與答。
最後，也分享和英語教學學者、文法書編寫者 Dr Luke Prodromou 簡短通訊的完整問與
答。
重述一次，兩個相關的焦點問題是：
It is raining soon. 這句話 1) 是否合乎文法； 2) 是否該出現在考試的題目中。
底下出現的 ^^^^^^ 強調部分是我自己加的。
===========================================
1) Professor John Watkins
去文：
Dear Professor Watkins,
I am a participant in an English-learning forum. I'm writing to consult you
about a sentence, "It is raining soon", that another participant quoted you
as supporting. The discussion arose because this sentence occurred in a mock
test for English proficiency in Taiwan. The other participant didn't cite the
whole correspondence with you, but quoted you as saying "Yes, 'It is raining
soon' could be said and make perfect sense depending on context."
The main debate is about two points--whether this sentence is syntactically
and semantically correct, and whether it belongs in a standardized test.
My own research, focusing on the correctness/grammaticality of the sentence
for English learners, found no published English grammar books or usage
guides that support using the present progressive tense in predicting a
future event, and that is also my view. These publications say that the
present progressive can be used for a future event only if it's planned or
scheduled ("We're leaving tomorrow") or scientifically calculable ("The sun
is rising at 6:15 tomorrow"). For "It is raining soon" to be correct, we
would have to have the ability to make it rain on schedule or calculate the
exact time of the next rain in the same way we know when the next scheduled
train arrives or calculate the time of the next sunrise. Two publications, a
linguistics paper and an entry-level grammar book, even call out this exact
sentence as incorrect (not merely acceptable in an informal, conversational
context) or semantically anomalous for the same reason as the other books I
looked at.
Could you please clarify what you mean when you said the sentence "could be
said and make perfect sense depending on context"? Do you mean:
a) although grammatically incorrect (we should say "It is going to rain soon"
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
or "It will rain soon" when we make predictions), it is conceivable that it
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
has been said by some people because the meaning is clear;
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
or
b) in a suitable fictional context, for example, one in which rain is
schedulable or precisely predictable, the sentence would be natural;
or
c) the sentence is obviously correct, grammatical, natural English in any
normal, everyday context because we use the present progressive tense to make
future predictions;
or something else?
The person quoting you believes that your earlier response is proof that this
sentence is perfectly fine to appear in the scholastic ability test for
English. I am hoping to get your clarification on this point.
Judging the sentence to be ungrammatical or incorrect does not mean it hasn't
been uttered by learners of English or even native speakers of English, nor
does it mean the utterance "It is raining soon" can't be understood; in fact
the speaker's intended meaning is easily understood. Yet in my opinion this
doesn't make it a good, valid, grammatical, or correct example sentence for
the purpose of teaching and learning standard English. I believe that, while
this sentence may appear in a fictional conversation (it would reflect a
fictional character's level of understanding of English grammar), it does not
belong in the text of standardized English proficiency tests intended to test
standard English, whether formal or informal. Do you agree?
Thanks in advance for any help you can give me with these questions. Your
reply will help many other learners of English.
Sincerely,
------
回覆：
I think this is where you have to deal with the fact that living, spoken
language doesn't always follow the rules. It would indeed be an unusual use
of the progressive, but one could imagine a situation where a mother said to
her child, "Bill, take your umbrella: it's raining soon" to mean "It is
going to rain." In that case, the native ear would hear it is a kind of
emphasis, a shortened version of "It is going to be raining soon."
Depending on the rules you have been given, I think I'd vote for Option A
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
below. The sentence is not obviously correct grammar, and would probably
never be used formally in writing. Hence I'm uncomfortable with Option C.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
But it isn't exactly incorrect either. It could make sense in the precise
context I have mentioned.
I did not mean option "B" at all, the one where there is a place in which
rain falls according to schedule. (Although such a place might be very
interesting.)
Would I put it on a national test? No, I wouldn't. There is just enough
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ambiguity here to make it a question where people who know the language
^^^^^^^^^
backwards and forwards might disagree.
Do you have a category distinguishing being "informal, or colloquial
language" and "formal language"? Remember, linguistic grammar is NEVER
prescriptive. If native speakers say something and it is understood, it is
not "incorrect". It's another thing to say something would work in
"Standard Written English." Make sense?
This is all very fascinating!
==========================================================
2) Dr Luke Prodromou
去文：
Hello,
Would it be possible to ask Dr Luke Prodromou, the author of Smash, on a
sentence I found in the Smash 2 grammar worksheets, here:
http://www.macmillanenglish.com/uploadedFiles/Catalogue/Teenage/Smash/Level_2/Smash%20Grammar%202.pdf
At the bottom of page 22:
But we can’t use the present continuous when we are talking about things
that we think will happen,
It is going to rain soon. (not: It is raining soon.)
My question is: Is the sentence that is stricken out here, "It is raining
soon.", considered incorrect or merely informal by Dr Prodromou (and by
teachers of English grammar in general)? For the sake of clarity, incorrect
usages should be avoided on all occasions because they don't follow
grammatical rules of standard English. Informal usages, on the other hand,
are not incorrect and can be used in informal situations, such as in a casual
conversation between friends.
Regards,
------
回覆：
Hello ------
I have asked the author Dr Prodromou your question. Please see his response
below. Regards.
"The sentence 'It's raining soon' , in British English, at least, is
incorrect; It is not acceptable even in an informal context, if one wishes to
^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
conform to British Standard English. There may be varieties of English,
including L2 English varieties, where it might be acceptable but I don't know
of any."
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 76.198.133.1
→ nw4m:第一位教授舉Bill的例子，表示it's raining soon是可能被說吧 02/20 21:54
→ nw4m:教授也說If native speakers say something and it is 02/20 21:54
→ nw4m:understood, it is not "incorrect". 至少證明這是口說英語吧 02/20 21:54
→ nw4m:教授也說口說英語與不正式是不好區分啊。 02/20 21:55
→ nw4m:第二位教授也說it might be acceptable but I don't know 02/20 21:55
→ nw4m:of any. 表示教授沒有否認句子的存在性。 02/20 21:55
→ nw4m:我的英文沒有各位大大好，但是這樣寫不好吧'The person 02/20 21:56
→ nw4m:quoting you believes that your earlier response is proof 02/20 21:56
→ nw4m:that this sentence is perfectly fine to appear......'應 02/20 21:57
→ nw4m:該沒有任何大大說我問的原來句子是文法一定正確，為何要寫 02/20 21:57
→ nw4m:"believes" ?" perfectly fine"呢？會不會太小人了？ 02/20 21:58
推 zofloya:"Would I put it on a national test? No, I wouldn't." 02/20 22:54
→ zofloya:"There is just enough AMBIGUITY here" 02/20 22:56
→ zofloya:"to appear in the scholastic ability test"原波這句話重 02/20 23:00
→ zofloya:點在考試，樓上你斷章取義就不小人? 02/20 23:01
→ zofloya:在ps一下，"會不會太小人"就是覺得別人小人，我看不下去! 02/20 23:02
→ gravitino:1F你的確沒有看懂。請把你引述的句子整句看完吧。 02/20 23:51
→ nw4m:你把第一段看完吧。 02/21 00:30
→ nw4m:zofloya你貢獻是零你在看不下去什麼啊？ 02/21 00:31
→ l10nel:mw4m:你的確需要弄懂perfectly fine. 和 perfectly fine後 02/21 05:08
→ l10nel:接to appear in a scholastic ability test，兩者意思 02/21 05:09
→ l10nel:大有不同，自己誤解、斷章取義卻口出惡言罵人，實在不妥。 02/21 05:11
→ l10nel:另外，Prodromou所指的可能存在，是因他自己是專精於標準 02/21 05:42
→ l10nel:英式英語教學，故不能否認在標準L1英式英語之外的各種可 02/21 05:42
→ l10nel:能性。然他最後說，自己並沒聽過有哪種英語裡會接受這句 02/21 05:42
→ l10nel:子的。這是間接暗示：「如果這句話被哪種英語接受，包含 02/21 05:42
→ l10nel:L1美式標準英語和各式各樣的L2英語，我會感到驚訝。」學 02/21 05:43
→ l10nel:者謙虛、不誇飾而有涵養的回應，卻被你拆解得支離破碎。 02/21 05:43
→ l10nel:請你也一樣先瞭解何為L2 English再來斷章取義不急。 02/21 05:43
推 paulchi:說到回應模糊焦點，l1先生好像沒資格說別人吧？ XD 02/21 19:08
推 ShinSioku:回答問題還要被說小人，這世界變了 ╯△╰ 02/21 20:38