6

English (uk) is my first language, however a few colleagues have picked up that my grammar could do with improvement.

How should I go about this? I think I need to go right back to the basics as I can't remember anything I was taught at school (it was a long time ago!). Should I begin with books that are provided to children at primary school and work my way up from there?

Chris Snow
  • 171
  • 2
    You may have taken an important first step, by venturing to participate on a site such as this. In addition, are you an avid reader? What sorts of things do you read? There is no better route to a good grasp of English than by reading books which are well-written - both fiction and non-fiction. – WS2 Dec 09 '15 at 09:13
  • Welcome to the site. Please note that questions here are expected to conform to certain basic requirements for content and style and more information can be found here: http://english.stackexchange.com/tour - At present your question is a request for advice on learning methods and that is not something the site offers, therefore your question is in danger of getting closed as 'off-topic'. – Marv Mills Dec 09 '15 at 09:53
  • 2
    Is this speaking or writing? Is it your regional dialect or your spelling/punctuation or vocabulary or what? All these will have different specific answers. Are your colleagues well-educated but foreign (they may well have better mastery of the standard UK formal language. Do they complain that you talk like you're in a pub or that you say 'between you and I'? We need details! – Mitch Dec 09 '15 at 15:39
  • 1
    I would recommend reading the following question and answers: What’s purportedly wrong with Strunk & White’s “The Elements of Style”? Most importantly, it's a style guide, not a grammar textbook or reference. The authors do not claim to teach grammar; the book should not be used to learn grammar. They make absolutely no claims about English syntax, but at best about what sounds like good style to them ShreevatsaR – Mari-Lou A Dec 09 '15 at 19:35
  • Then on the other side of the coin you have those who testify: Last, and certainly least, there is Strunk and White's The Elements of Style, perhaps the most overrated book on usage ever written, riddled with errors, hypocrisy, vacuous advice, and fatuous platitudes. nohat – Mari-Lou A Dec 09 '15 at 19:40
  • @mari-Lou double plus up on both. Also S&W is excellent style advice for starting writers (high school, college, those writing at length for the first time). But it's not a reference of rules to follow for language learners. – Mitch Dec 09 '15 at 21:58
  • @Mitch And neither is it a style guide for those who write. White never stuck to the rules he advocated, for style or grammar.. – Araucaria - Him Dec 09 '15 at 23:29
  • I second @WS2's advice above. Read. I doubt very much that studying books about grammar or style is useful (except as examples, if they should happen to be well written). – Greg Lee Dec 09 '15 at 23:52
  • 2
    @Mari-LouA Is the OP asking for style advice? Maybe someone could ask a question about how to get bad hypocritical style advice from authors who never adhered to that advice in the first place here on EL&U in another question. But the OP is asking about grammar! – Araucaria - Him Dec 10 '15 at 00:35
  • @Mari-LouA Hold on a moment. You're quoting Most importantly, it's a style guide, not a grammar textbook or reference. The authors do not claim to teach grammar; the book should not be used to learn grammar. They make absolutely no claims about English syntax, but at best about what sounds like good style to them - as if that made what they say ok. But the book is hypocritical. The writers themselves can't follow their own advice. None of the great writers of English have followed their advice. What if I want to make up my own style advice? Howsabout I do that? And then ignore it ... – Araucaria - Him Dec 10 '15 at 01:21
  • @Araucaria I also quoted nohat's opinion! People can make up their own mind about something when they're aware of the book's strengths and weaknesses. – Mari-Lou A Dec 10 '15 at 08:01
  • 1
    In addition to Araucaria's excellent and to-the-point answer below, you should check out this answer elsewhere, as well as this good and exhaustive book for English grammar. – RegDwigнt Dec 10 '15 at 14:46
  • 1
    If you haven't already learned a second language, you might try that - especially one related to your first. Learning German had a profound impact on my (native) understanding of English grammar. Even now I often mentally translate my English thoughts to German to decide between who and whom and other things like that. – Trevor Brown Dec 10 '15 at 19:02

2 Answers2

5

Your colleagues don't actually know what grammar is! All adult native speakers of a language have perfect grammar, unless they have some form of medical condition.

Grammar is the rules shared by speakers of a variety of a language which enable them to communicate using speech without really thinking about it at all. These rules are known tacitly, not consciously - unless we go out of our way to study them. This is in the same way that you don't really know what muscles it is necessary to contract, in which order, for the purposes of ambulation.

So for example, in the Original Poster's question they say "English is my first language" instead of a) "English are my first language" or b) "English is the my first language" or c) "English my first language is". The Original Poster's sentence shows the tacit knowledge that a) English is, generally speaking, an uncountable noun, that verbs agree with their subjects and that uncountable nouns take singular verb agreement, that b) we can only use one central determiner for each nominal in a noun phrase, not two, that c) English is a subject-->verb-->complement language, and that the order of the constituents of a clause matters in English. All of this is quite complicated and sophisticated knowledge that the Original Poster has stored away in their brain, and never needs to think about. This is what grammar is.

Now, if we needed to actually be able to consciously understand all of these rules to be able to use them, then there would be no such thing as the study of syntax and there would be no real need for linguistics at all. The blunt fact of the matter is that what we don't know about these rules far exceeds what we do in fact know - or think we know.

So, in short, the Original Poster needn't be worried about the state of their grammar, unless they have suffered a brain injury or have some other illness. They are a sublimely adept syntactician of the highest order already.

However, having said this, there may be some reasons why the Original Poster is getting this feedback. One reason might be that their personal punctuation predilections do not conform with the conventions used by other people in their milieu. So, for example, some pedants may decry using a comma instead of a full stop before the word however. When doing formal writing it is best to conform to the conventions used by other people in your field. It will cause you less aggravation and may also help avoid confusion. Both aggravation and confusion are arguably best avoided.

Araucaria - Him
  • 47,146
  • So in short, language is whatever the majority of idiots wants it to be? I strongly disagree: we need a beacon of guiding light in all the shite that people dare utter when they try to put their ideas into language. We need rules that must be followed; a common denominator we can all agree on. Language is not a democracy, it's a dictatorship! – klaar Dec 10 '15 at 11:35
  • @klaar: can you please re-write your comment in English? You are using a whole lot of words imported from other languages, and non-Germanic constructions. Why are you doing that? Just because the majority of idiots wants it to be that way? Try again. And this time in English. – RegDwigнt Dec 10 '15 at 13:13
  • @RegDwigнt I'm sorry but I cannot. English is a collection of imported words, just like any other language, but English in particular inherits its history of mingling with other nations like France. I also doubt I use constructions that are non-Germanic, since my native language is Germanic. Maybe it's the Romanic languages that are messing up my craft. It's not because my comment was packaged as a trollish rant that the contents meant nothing more than that - it really reflects my sentiment towards literary ignorant people, nothing more. But I don't pretend to be above making mistakes myself. – klaar Dec 10 '15 at 15:18
  • @klaar I think you meant illiterate, not literary. – Araucaria - Him Dec 10 '15 at 16:36
4

So, I am a TEFL teacher and Cognitive Linguist currently working with the Peace Corps in West Africa. As far as re-learning grammar is concerned, there are a couple of really cool books out there to help adults to hone their grammatical skills.

The go-to at universities, even today, is still Strunk and White's The Elements of Style. As far as prescriptive grammar guides go, that's the one held in the highest regard.

I had a guidance technician in college who swore by the Grammar Girl series. Personally, I thought those were (a) more accessible, and (b) funnier. And there's a lot to be said for a text on something as dry as prescriptive grammar being funny.

But then, there's also the cognitive route--the route designed to basically tell your friends to stop bullying you and let you be (though this does not apply to writing. When writing, prescriptive grammar is king, thus stick with the two guides above). For that, I recommend reading Steven Pinker's The Language Instinct. You don't have to read the whole thing either (though it's an excellent overview of language development and acquisition). Chapters 4 and 12 should be enough to get them off your back and show them a thing or two about how grammar actually works.

Give 'em hell, Chris.

/Zach

Zach Rosen
  • 72
  • 1
    For those speaking UK English, like the OP, Strunk & White is literally laughable; see various discussions on this site (Barrie England is particularly scathing). – Tim Lymington Dec 09 '15 at 10:39
  • 1
    Zach, as a TEFL teacher shouldn't you be asking him why he feels he needs to relearn and what his reason for relearning is? Does he have speaking difficulties, writing? What is his purpose? – michael_timofeev Dec 09 '15 at 10:59
  • @TimLymington Link? – Mitch Dec 09 '15 at 15:35
  • @TimLymington Yes, indeed, indeed. – Araucaria - Him Dec 09 '15 at 15:43
  • +1 S&W for language learners and beginning writers, -1 for grammar. +1 for GG. – Mitch Dec 09 '15 at 22:00
  • @Araucaria I sense you haev strong feelings on the subject. But it is difficult to determine here what your feelings are exactly. Chat? – Mitch Dec 10 '15 at 03:31
  • 1
    Immediate disqualification for so much as mentioning Strunk and White. It is not a grammar guide. It is a style guide and says so right in the title. As far as grammar rules go, it cannot tell an arse from a hole in the ground. −1. Thankfully the question as a whole is fluff, so we can just nuke it outright. I do insist you follow that link first. DO NOT RECOMMEND STRUNK AND WHITE TO ANYONE, EVER. – RegDwigнt Dec 10 '15 at 13:08
  • Recommending Stunk & White is irresponsible. It's bad for anyone trying to improve their style. Even E. B. White never adhered to the bad style advice given in Strunk and White. – Araucaria - Him Dec 14 '15 at 08:46