<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Top Five Reasons Why Finnish Is Cooler Than English</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/2008/11/06/top-five-reasons-why-finnish-is-cooler-than-english/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/2008/11/06/top-five-reasons-why-finnish-is-cooler-than-english/</link>
	<description>Jeff VanderMeer</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 09:42:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tristan Miller</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/2008/11/06/top-five-reasons-why-finnish-is-cooler-than-english/comment-page-1/#comment-18685</link>
		<dc:creator>Tristan Miller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 23:48:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/?p=2501#comment-18685</guid>
		<description>Brendan, true, the Wikipedia article later muddies the waters by introducing what it calls &quot;complex tenses&quot;.  Someone really should fix that.  What it says in the section on English is correct, though.  Mind you, it doesn&#039;t say or imply that English has no way of expressing events in the future; just that it has no way of doing so through inflection alone.  A tense is, by definition, a form of inflection.  I&#039;ll concede that in colloquial speech the word &quot;tense&quot; may be used less precisely to refer to non-inflected temporal forms.  But if we&#039;re having a dicussion about comparative grammar, why not use the definition commonly used by syntacticians?

This whole discussion makes me happy that I&#039;m learning Icelandic from a degreed linguist rather than someone whose only qualification is simply speaking the language…  I suppose different teaching methods work better for different people, and that in most cases it doesn&#039;t really matter how you refer to various grammatical features as long as you know how to use them correctly, but as a professional linguist myself I find I can learn languages much faster if the teacher introduces grammatical structures by their &quot;proper&quot; (i.e., as used by linguists) name.  That way I know right away what function the structure has, rather than have to figure it out on my own by interpreting the teacher&#039;s vague circumlocutions or parsing a large number of possibly incomplete examples.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brendan, true, the Wikipedia article later muddies the waters by introducing what it calls &#8220;complex tenses&#8221;.  Someone really should fix that.  What it says in the section on English is correct, though.  Mind you, it doesn&#8217;t say or imply that English has no way of expressing events in the future; just that it has no way of doing so through inflection alone.  A tense is, by definition, a form of inflection.  I&#8217;ll concede that in colloquial speech the word &#8220;tense&#8221; may be used less precisely to refer to non-inflected temporal forms.  But if we&#8217;re having a dicussion about comparative grammar, why not use the definition commonly used by syntacticians?</p>
<p>This whole discussion makes me happy that I&#8217;m learning Icelandic from a degreed linguist rather than someone whose only qualification is simply speaking the language…  I suppose different teaching methods work better for different people, and that in most cases it doesn&#8217;t really matter how you refer to various grammatical features as long as you know how to use them correctly, but as a professional linguist myself I find I can learn languages much faster if the teacher introduces grammatical structures by their &#8220;proper&#8221; (i.e., as used by linguists) name.  That way I know right away what function the structure has, rather than have to figure it out on my own by interpreting the teacher&#8217;s vague circumlocutions or parsing a large number of possibly incomplete examples.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: brendan connell</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/2008/11/06/top-five-reasons-why-finnish-is-cooler-than-english/comment-page-1/#comment-18680</link>
		<dc:creator>brendan connell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 19:37:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/?p=2501#comment-18680</guid>
		<description>Tristan, the Wikipedia article you cite actually has a number of tenses listed under &quot;tense&quot;. So it contradicts itself. I actually teach English for a living (not that that really means anything of course...lots of people act for a living and can&#039;t act). 

Anyhow, people can even say &quot;English has no future.&quot; which is sort of correct. But it isnt even really true. Because the &quot;will&quot; or &quot;going to&quot; used to state the future are far different from the present continuous used to state the same thing. Just because we use an auxialliary verbs or modals to state times, does not mean they are not a tense. Past perfect for example is clearly a completely different thing from past simple. It is another tense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tristan, the Wikipedia article you cite actually has a number of tenses listed under &#8220;tense&#8221;. So it contradicts itself. I actually teach English for a living (not that that really means anything of course&#8230;lots of people act for a living and can&#8217;t act). </p>
<p>Anyhow, people can even say &#8220;English has no future.&#8221; which is sort of correct. But it isnt even really true. Because the &#8220;will&#8221; or &#8220;going to&#8221; used to state the future are far different from the present continuous used to state the same thing. Just because we use an auxialliary verbs or modals to state times, does not mean they are not a tense. Past perfect for example is clearly a completely different thing from past simple. It is another tense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tristan Miller</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/2008/11/06/top-five-reasons-why-finnish-is-cooler-than-english/comment-page-1/#comment-18662</link>
		<dc:creator>Tristan Miller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 10:31:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/?p=2501#comment-18662</guid>
		<description>To those insisting that English has more than two tenses, I suggest you &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_tense#Basic_tenses_in_English&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;brush up on your English grammar&lt;/a&gt;. :)  English has many ways of expressing time with verbs, but only two of these are expressed with tenses.  A tense is basically a way of inflecting a verb; that is, by modifying the verb stem itself, such as by tacking on a suffix.  Using auxiliary verbs and adverbs aren&#039;t inflections, and therefore aren&#039;t tenses, because they don&#039;t modify the form of the main verb itself.

So I repeat, if Finnish is good because it doesn&#039;t have a future tense, then English is just as good, because it doesn&#039;t have one either.  But by the same metric, Chinese is even better, because it doesn&#039;t have any tenses at all!  All temporal information in Chinese is expressed in adverbs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To those insisting that English has more than two tenses, I suggest you <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_tense#Basic_tenses_in_English" rel="nofollow">brush up on your English grammar</a>. :)  English has many ways of expressing time with verbs, but only two of these are expressed with tenses.  A tense is basically a way of inflecting a verb; that is, by modifying the verb stem itself, such as by tacking on a suffix.  Using auxiliary verbs and adverbs aren&#8217;t inflections, and therefore aren&#8217;t tenses, because they don&#8217;t modify the form of the main verb itself.</p>
<p>So I repeat, if Finnish is good because it doesn&#8217;t have a future tense, then English is just as good, because it doesn&#8217;t have one either.  But by the same metric, Chinese is even better, because it doesn&#8217;t have any tenses at all!  All temporal information in Chinese is expressed in adverbs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/2008/11/06/top-five-reasons-why-finnish-is-cooler-than-english/comment-page-1/#comment-18660</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 08:39:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/?p=2501#comment-18660</guid>
		<description>Point taken, Tero.

But to add what Brendan said, the one really cool thing featured in some dialects in English is the triple modal.  But I might should oughta go to bed, even if I useta stay awake longer...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Point taken, Tero.</p>
<p>But to add what Brendan said, the one really cool thing featured in some dialects in English is the triple modal.  But I might should oughta go to bed, even if I useta stay awake longer&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: brendan connell</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/2008/11/06/top-five-reasons-why-finnish-is-cooler-than-english/comment-page-1/#comment-18659</link>
		<dc:creator>brendan connell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 08:17:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/?p=2501#comment-18659</guid>
		<description>Actually, English has also present perfect, past perfect and it does have a future in the form of a future perfect (will have had). It also has progressive tenses and a ton of conditionals. It is loaded with tenses. That is why it is the coolest :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, English has also present perfect, past perfect and it does have a future in the form of a future perfect (will have had). It also has progressive tenses and a ton of conditionals. It is loaded with tenses. That is why it is the coolest :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tero</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/2008/11/06/top-five-reasons-why-finnish-is-cooler-than-english/comment-page-1/#comment-18656</link>
		<dc:creator>Tero</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 07:10:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/?p=2501#comment-18656</guid>
		<description>Larry: well, both have been used in Star Trek movies... :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Larry: well, both have been used in Star Trek movies&#8230; :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/2008/11/06/top-five-reasons-why-finnish-is-cooler-than-english/comment-page-1/#comment-18655</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 05:01:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/?p=2501#comment-18655</guid>
		<description>*idly wonders if Finnish will ever compete with Klingon*</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>*idly wonders if Finnish will ever compete with Klingon*</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sbalb</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/2008/11/06/top-five-reasons-why-finnish-is-cooler-than-english/comment-page-1/#comment-18653</link>
		<dc:creator>sbalb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 04:07:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/?p=2501#comment-18653</guid>
		<description>Tero: brilliant, thank you. That&#039;s going on my podcast list!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tero: brilliant, thank you. That&#8217;s going on my podcast list!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tero</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/2008/11/06/top-five-reasons-why-finnish-is-cooler-than-english/comment-page-1/#comment-18643</link>
		<dc:creator>Tero</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 19:28:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/?p=2501#comment-18643</guid>
		<description>Tristan: adverbs and auxiliary verbs count as having a tense. We don&#039;t have even that -- a future tense can&#039;t be formed in any way, only implied by context.

I&#039;m afraid my &quot;Why Finnish is better than Hungarian&quot; list would consist of only one item: I can speak it. :-)

Karen: totally with you there!

sbalb: you might want to take a look at the &lt;a href=&quot;http://yle.fi/ulkomailla/index.php?id=1332&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;selkouutiset, YLE news broadcast in plain Finnish&lt;/a&gt;. It might be useful in training your ear for Finnish -- it&#039;s a daily news broadcast (available as podcast) in Finnish intended for people who don&#039;t speak it as a first language; it uses simple language that is spoken more slowly and clearly than usual.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tristan: adverbs and auxiliary verbs count as having a tense. We don&#8217;t have even that &#8212; a future tense can&#8217;t be formed in any way, only implied by context.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m afraid my &#8220;Why Finnish is better than Hungarian&#8221; list would consist of only one item: I can speak it. :-)</p>
<p>Karen: totally with you there!</p>
<p>sbalb: you might want to take a look at the <a href="http://yle.fi/ulkomailla/index.php?id=1332" rel="nofollow">selkouutiset, YLE news broadcast in plain Finnish</a>. It might be useful in training your ear for Finnish &#8212; it&#8217;s a daily news broadcast (available as podcast) in Finnish intended for people who don&#8217;t speak it as a first language; it uses simple language that is spoken more slowly and clearly than usual.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sbalb</title>
		<link>http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/2008/11/06/top-five-reasons-why-finnish-is-cooler-than-english/comment-page-1/#comment-18638</link>
		<dc:creator>sbalb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:32:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jeffvandermeer.com/?p=2501#comment-18638</guid>
		<description>You missed out vowel harmony, which is as wonderful as it is pointless, thus turning itself into a little art form set like a pearl in an otherwise nicely functional language.

Does anyone know of good resources for taking a working-but-rusty knowledge of basic Finnish and turning it into actual comprehension of the written and spoken language? An equivalent of the BBC&#039;s marvellous &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.bbc.co.uk/apps/nr/vocab/cy-en/news.bbc.co.uk/welsh/default.stm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;News in Welsh with vocabulary hints&lt;/a&gt; would be ideal. A fast trainline all the way from Paris to Tallinn would be even better, as we don&#039;t fly any more and miss Helsinki.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You missed out vowel harmony, which is as wonderful as it is pointless, thus turning itself into a little art form set like a pearl in an otherwise nicely functional language.</p>
<p>Does anyone know of good resources for taking a working-but-rusty knowledge of basic Finnish and turning it into actual comprehension of the written and spoken language? An equivalent of the BBC&#8217;s marvellous <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/apps/nr/vocab/cy-en/news.bbc.co.uk/welsh/default.stm" rel="nofollow">News in Welsh with vocabulary hints</a> would be ideal. A fast trainline all the way from Paris to Tallinn would be even better, as we don&#8217;t fly any more and miss Helsinki.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
