Italian grammar and etiquette

[Mike Reed]

I'm only just getting into past imperfect.

Forgotten my French verb structure. Is that present perfect, past or past perfect in English? Simple or continuous (or both)?

the Finnish language has no noun gender at all,

I believe Finnish is allied to Hungarian and I have a feeling that these only have past, present and future, like Polish, Mandarin etc. We have subdivisions of each.

 

[canonman]

it's not American led mate. when I was working contracts with the British Council, my opposite numbers would always be polite, using titles. It is a youth driven familiarity - and refreshing it is. I still have to remind certain colleagues not to refer to me as Dr.....

Lords cricket ground ticket office still write to me as Baron....

 

[George J]

In Norway with my late grandmother, she always used the formal you [I am sorry but it is something like Du and Di, but I know not the spelling or which way round they were are] and always got a smile for it. She was old school and people did not think it was stuck-up to be formal, and responded in similar style with her, with smiles around. In those days I was more fluent in Norwegian, and could easily pass for Norwegian [as a half-Brit], and also used the genial smile and formal lingo. Being formal is not stuck-up or snobby, but rather being polite and respectful. It works both ways ...

Even these days, I am quite incapable of using a first name for a lady of my age or older, even if I have known her for decades. It is is always Mrs. X-. They still call me George back. In my childhood, my father's and mother's friends were always addressed by my brother and I as Aunty or Uncle.

Even my mother's house-help was Mrs. B-. If my brother or I were playing her up we might venture, "Oh come on Sheila!" Her response was, "Oh! Come on you little bugxxr!" Mrs, B-, never smacked us and in reality had complete control of the situation. You had to love her to bits. She only died a few years ago - one of the funerals I would never have avoided. She walked on water for me.

Times have changed, and I have not. I'll stick to the old ideas till Hell Freezes Over, which seems unlikely due to climate change.

Just a thought. George

 

[Alex S]

One thing I know about living in Italy: never, ever pour wine back handed.

 

[stevec67]

Forgotten my French verb structure. Is that present perfect, past or past perfect in English? Simple or continuous (or both)?

Present: I work in an office. Statement of current fact, but that may not actually be in progress at present.
Present continuous: " I am walking the dog. " Describes an activity that is currently in progress.
Past perfect: Completed activities. " I assembled a garden table today. " Action completed . I've finished now.
Past imperfect: Activities that were in the process of happening in the past. "In 1980 I was in school." In this case I am travelling back to 1980 and describing something which was ongoing at the time.

 

[wacko]

^ is that taught in school ? I don't remember being taught any English grammar. Maybe I wasn't paying attention.

 

[chartz]

Probably because English grammar is so simple. You don’t really need to study it.
French is just a grammatical nightmare. So many irregular conjugations, so many idiosyncrasies. We just have to learn them, the hard way.

 

[PaulMB]

I don't remember being taught any English grammar at school. I think it is because English is so full of irregulars and exceptions that it has been found easier to teach children by usage. Perhaps also because it is, as Chartz says, basically simple. But is it really? Maybe a linguist will come along...

 

[TheDecameron]

One thing I know about living in Italy: never, ever pour wine back handed.

When the Chinese emissary took the hands of his Saudi and Iranian counterparts for this pic, he grabbed the left hand of the Saudi on his right, who could be seen prising it away from him and offering his right hand.

 

[gintonic]

he clearly didnt have to endure one of the British Council briefings on etiquette in KSA, that i did - it did include advice on handshaking, conversation starters (apparently they like Mr Bean) and things to watch out for (beware of men with long straggly beards)

 

[KrisW]

But there is, usually implied. Two people walk into a restaurant. The head waiter approaches. They ask for a table for two. The HW might say "Se (loro, or i signori can be used or omitted but is implied)) vogliono aspettare un momento al bar, faccio preparare il tavolo." So it is the plural of Lei, third person plural, respectfully distant. Like "If the gentlemen would like to wait a moment at the bar, I'll have a table prepared."

The ability to omit the subject of a sentence in Italian always makes things muddier, but I don’t know would anyone really say that sentence with “loro” as an explicit subject? I have certainly heard the “i signori”, “le signore”, “la signora e il signori” version used, though.

I kept getting this muddled myself, because in German, Sie, the polite form of “you” for both singular and plural, is the same word as “they”, so in speech there’s no way to tell the difference between “if they would like to wait”, “if you-polite would like to wait” or “if you-plural-polite would like to wait”. At least Italian uses a singular pronoun for a singular “you”!

 

[Mike Reed]

Present: I work in an office. Statement of current fact, but that may not actually be in progress at present.
Present continuous: " I am walking the dog. " Describes an activity that is currently in progress.
Past perfect: Completed activities. " I assembled a garden table today. " Action completed . I've finished now.
Past imperfect: Activities that were in the process of happening in the past. "In 1980 I was in school." In this case I am travelling back to 1980 and describing something which was ongoing at the time.

Thanks, Steve, but I was referring to the French verb structure names apropos the English ones. I know these latter by heart, having taught them for years. Basically, the English structure can be divided into 4 past tenses, 2 present perfects (linking past to present), 2 present and 2 future plus 2 future perfect; these 12 comprise 6 simple and 6 continuous usages.

Unfortunately, things get more complicated, esp. with the present tenses, which can and are used for the future. As I cannot at present copy a chart and put it on here, I'll need to write it out when I have time.

Past perfect is not just completed activities; that is simply the past tenses. The p.perf. has activities before the past (tricky for students with simply past, present and future). E.g. The postman had already been (before the past) before I realised (past). Also used for reported speech; e.g. The plaintiff said that he had arrived at the shop before he saw the men running out.

I don't follow your 'past imperfect' example, which describes the past continuous. By that I guess 'imparfait' means 'continuous' Your example, though (In 1980........), is the simple past, not the continuous.

 

[stevec67]

Thanks, Steve, but I was referring to the French verb structure names apropos the English ones. I know these latter by heart, having taught them for years. Basically, the English structure can be divided into 4 past tenses, 2 present perfects (linking past to present), 2 present and 2 future plus 2 future perfect; these 12 comprise 6 simple and 6 continuous usages.

Unfortunately, things get more complicated, esp. with the present tenses, which can and are used for the future. As I cannot at present copy a chart and put it on here, I'll need to write it out when I have time.

Past perfect is not just completed activities; that is simply the past tenses. The p.perf. has activities before the past (tricky for students with simply past, present and future). E.g. The postman had already been (before the past) before I realised (past). Also used for reported speech; e.g. The plaintiff said that he had arrived at the shop before he saw the men running out.

I don't follow your 'past imperfect' example, which describes the past continuous. By that I guess 'imparfait' means 'continuous' Your example, though (In 1980........), is the simple past, not the continuous.

What I described is the French usage. I haven't touched on pluparfait (the postman) and the 1980 example is passé imparfait in french.
Je suis allé a l'école an 1980. Passé parfait. In 1980 I went to school.
En 1980 j 'étais ecolier. Passé imparfait. In 1980 I was a schoolboy.

 

[Mike Reed]

^ is that taught in school ? I don't remember being taught any English grammar.

I don't remember being taught any English grammar at school.

Nor me. My memory of fifties grammar school (grammar? ho ho !) is that the only real dissemination of grammar was in French, at least regarding tense structure. Of course, punctuation, passive/reported speech, essay/sentence formulation and similar aspects were and still are covered, but I never knew what prepositions, phrasal verbs, conditionals, gerunds, modals, relative clauses ad nauseam were until I started teaching.

English is so full of irregulars and exceptions

More so that in French, e.g.? Irregular verbs are rife in both languages. Other irregularities are few; can think of one which is commonly misused. ITS/IT'S. (apostrophes of possession and omission).

 

[chartz]

No, English verbs are really a doddle, just a few forms. If you think about it, be has six forms only. Any French first group verb (the regular ones) has at least 30 different forms!

 

[MikeMA]

I don't remember being taught any English grammar at school. I think it is because English is so full of irregulars and exceptions that it has been found easier to teach children by usage. Perhaps also because it is, as Chartz says, basically simple. But is it really? Maybe a linguist will come along...

Me neither. I remember our German language teacher having to teach us the rudiments of English Grammar so we could understand the German stuff. To this day I think I still have a better understanding of German grammar than I do English, though that's not saying much .

 

[Mike Reed]

What I described is the French usage.

I'd imagine that each tense title in English has an equivalent in French, Steve. Possibly (I don't know) there may be others or indeed omissions. Here are the English, from L to R, as it were:

PAST PERFECT SIMPLE; I had driven (when sth happened)...PAST PERFECT CONTINUOUS; I had been driving (for ? hours when....)
PAST SIMPLE; I drove (definite past time).......................PAST CONTINUOUS; I was driving (when.......)
PRESENT PERFECT SIMPLE; I have driven (? miles up to now).PRESENT PERFECT CONT. I have been driving ....for 2 hours (and am still driving) [past link to present].

PRESENT SIMPLE; I drive (as a routine etc.).....................PRESENT CONT. I am driving (current or potential future activity)
FUTURE SIMPLE; I will drive (showing decision or intent).....FUTURE CONT. I will be driving (planning [e.g. this time tomorrow I'll be driving])
FUTURE PERFECT; I will have driven (? miles by the time)... FUTURE PERFECT CONT. I will have been driving (for 2 hours by the time....)

There is also WOULD (I would go out more when I was younger) and USED TO (similarly in the past, but more routine). Not really tenses but additions to them.

For the present tenses in particular, there are many ways in which they are used (e.g. facts; the Earth revolves around the sun); telling a story; instructions etc (pr. simple) and the future use of the present continuous.

 

[stevec67]

No, English verbs are really a doddle, just a few forms. If you think about it, be has six forms only. Any French first group verb (the regular ones) has at least 30 different forms!

I think 8.
Present, present continuous, past perfect, past imperfect, pluperfect, future, conditional, subjunctive (rare).
We don't study grammar as first language English speakers because we have the time to be able to learn it by usage. Second language needs to study formal grammar because you simply don't put the hours in to be able to learn it by default. "Mummy I throwed the ball". "Yes dear, you threw the ball." That's fine if you have say the first 5 years of your life and not much else to do other than learn to talk, read and write, eat, get dressed and take yourself to the bathroom. Adults don't have a spare 5 years and 10,000 hours so it has to be a bit more structured. As a rule of thumb it takes 1000 hours to become proficient in a foreign language and 10,000 hours to become expert. Obviously if those first 1000 hours are highly structured and involve running through exercises you are going to learn a lot more than if it's just Steve wandering around shops and coffee bars and trying to communicate. Once you have the first 1000 hours down it's going to be more about just putting in the road miles and there will be less and less need for formal instruction. Nobody has to tell a professional footballer the rules any more, after all. They've got that bit down.

 

[stevec67]

I'd imagine that each tense title in English has an equivalent in French, Steve. Possibly (I don't know) there may be others or indeed omissions.

There are cases where a single tense is used for 2 meanings. To follow your lead:

PAST PERFECT SIMPLE; I had driven (when sth happened)...
"J'avais conduit", pluperfect I think.

PAST PERFECT CONTINUOUS; I had been driving (for ? hours when....)
"J'avais conduit 2 heures quand...", pluperfect again I thnk

PAST SIMPLE; I drove (definite past time).......................
"J'ai conduit", passé parfait.

PAST CONTINUOUS; I was driving (when.......)
"je conduisais" past imperfect. I was in the process of driving, in the past.

PRESENT PERFECT SIMPLE; I have driven (? miles up to now).PRESENT PERFECT CONT. I have been driving ....for 2 hours (and am still driving) [past link to present].
J'ai conduit (passé parfait) 2 heures jusq'a maintenant, et de conduis (present) toujours.

PRESENT SIMPLE; I drive (as a routine etc.).....................
Je conduis. (Présent)

PRESENT CONT. I am driving (current or potential future activity)
Je conduis. (Présent) Yes, no difference.

FUTURE SIMPLE; I will drive (showing decision or intent).....
Je conduirai (futur)
FUTURE CONT. I will be driving (planning [e.g. this time tomorrow I'll be driving])
(a 8h demain) je conduirai (futur). No difference.

FUTURE PERFECT; I will have driven (? miles by the time)... FUTURE PERFECT CONT. I will have been driving (for 2 hours by the time....)
A 10h demain j'aurai conduit pour 2h. (Passé du futur?) (By 10 tomorrow I will have driven for 2 hours, because of course I will set off at 8)

There is also WOULD (I would go out more when I was younger)
Use the passé imparfait. Quand j'étais jeune je sortais plus souvent.

and USED TO (similarly in the past, but more routine).
Same. Quand j'etais en France je visitais un bar tous les vendredis. (when I was in France I used to visit a bar every Friday.)[/QUOTE]

 

[stevec67]

Yes, I remember now, a lot of the French constructions in the past are about bolting together the elements around the past participle. Let's take "parler", to talk, because it's the model -er verb and I think regular the whole way through.
I talked - "j'ai parlé". Literally "I have talked" this being the present tense of "avoir" (to have) used as an auxiliary verb plus the past participle. (parlé).
I had talked - "j'avais parlé". So the imperfect past of the auxiliary verb plus the PP. (This is pluparfait, do they call it plus-que-parfait?)
I will have talked - "j' aurai parlé" Future of the auxiliary plus the PP. Future past.
I would have talked - "j'aurais parlé" Conditional of the auxiliary verb plus the PP. Conditional past.

I was (in the process of) talking is still the passé imparfait. "Je parlais."