Originally Posted by Pet Monkey:
“The difficulty (or joy) for English speakers is that it's such a hybrid language. Even the copular verb 'to be' is made up of two once-distinct and separate verbs (the b-root for be, and the am/was verb*). WIth such an intrinsic hotchpodge or growing point of language, we are by necessity linguistically tolerant of change. (AKA bad grammar!)
Our language is the very dog of languages. Bear with me.
Dogs are the species that show the greatest variability of appearance from the same basic genetic make-up, and can breed with one another to produce viable offspring (puppies to thee and me 
). The English language permits a marvellously rugged and flexible usage whilst staying comprehensible, and inter-breedable, to continue the dog analogy.
I love dogs and English messiness too
* You can hear the persistence of an alternative version of that 'to be' mix in the Black Country 'Yow'm' = you am, instead of the now standard 'you are'”
“The difficulty (or joy) for English speakers is that it's such a hybrid language. Even the copular verb 'to be' is made up of two once-distinct and separate verbs (the b-root for be, and the am/was verb*). WIth such an intrinsic hotchpodge or growing point of language, we are by necessity linguistically tolerant of change. (AKA bad grammar!)
Our language is the very dog of languages. Bear with me.
Dogs are the species that show the greatest variability of appearance from the same basic genetic make-up, and can breed with one another to produce viable offspring (puppies to thee and me ). The English language permits a marvellously rugged and flexible usage whilst staying comprehensible, and inter-breedable, to continue the dog analogy. I love dogs and English messiness too
* You can hear the persistence of an alternative version of that 'to be' mix in the Black Country 'Yow'm' = you am, instead of the now standard 'you are'”
I love dogs too!
