Timeline for "Ihr kleinen Monster?" How come?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 8:52 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| May 4, 2019 at 10:01 | comment | added | tofro | This answer unfortunately evades any explanation on why it is like that. Circular argumentation ("This is correct because it is correct") is absolutely not useful for learners of the language. Also, in your comments, you seem to be totally ignoring that adult, second-language learners pick up a language in a completely different way as children do (which is a well-researched fact). | |
| May 2, 2019 at 15:17 | comment | added | Jonathan Herrera♦ | I was not referring to the term "gestalt-approach" in general but how you used it. | |
| May 2, 2019 at 15:03 | comment | added | Christian Geiselmann | PS: When children learn their first language, they don't memorize rules. They follow a gestalt approach. - I admit that I may be mis-using the term here; in everday words I would say: you can learn by taking in a number of good examples, and then generate your sentences based on that collection of examples and their similarities. You do not need to know rules necessarily. - Of course you may argue that a brain learning that way still distills "rules" out of the set of examples. But that's unconscious. Whereas rules are typically on the conscious level. | |
| May 2, 2019 at 15:00 | comment | added | Christian Geiselmann | @jonathan.scholbach The gestalt approach is not the same as lack of a rule. It is a different way of seeing things. In natural languages "rules" (as found in grammar books) are always only auxiliary tools to approximate (or model) reality. Proof: most languages have for certain phenomena 1) a rule 2) a list of exceptions (secondary rules) 3) a set of exceptions from these exceptions, etc. - It is fine to search for helpful rules in languages, but they are not the final factor. Their power ends at some point. Unlike in artificial languages, of course. | |
| May 2, 2019 at 14:53 | comment | added | Jonathan Herrera♦ | Sorry, but I think this "gestalt approach" is just a fancy word for something which could better be called "lack of a rule". And this is not a feature of the grammar, but a feature of our (your) knowledge of the grammar. By the way, you are actually giving a rule. So I don't get your point... | |
| May 2, 2019 at 14:49 | comment | added | Christian Geiselmann | @jonathan.scholbach 1) Practial examples 2) Advice to not try to learn this through abstract, analytic rules but rather through a holistic gestalt approach. | |
| May 2, 2019 at 14:47 | history | edited | Christian Geiselmann | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 47 characters in body
|
| May 2, 2019 at 14:47 | comment | added | Jonathan Herrera♦ | What information is this adding, which is not already in David Vogt's answer? | |
| May 2, 2019 at 14:43 | history | answered | Christian Geiselmann | CC BY-SA 4.0 |