0

Today, this question came to my mind when I started cerebrating about what it actually is.

My conclusion is that: Te-form is simply another name for the concept of 連用形+て(助詞) that native Japanese speakers would use or they were being taught this way, right?

And in accordance with that, the te-form usage should be roughly equal to or a part of て-usage, Could this line of thinking get through or it's just nonsense?

12
  • 1
    That last paragraph completely loses me -- "the te-form usage should be roughly equal to or a part of て-usage". No idea what that's supposed to mean? Jun 22 at 8:14
  • 2
    You're just asking if the same concept is being taught differently to natives and foreigners, right? That's pretty common. If you look at native grammar materials and second language instruction materials you'll usually find different frames of reference. Natives and non-natives need different things from their grammar education.
    – Leebo
    Jun 22 at 8:36
  • 2
    @HuFellan I'm saying that it's not the only language with that kind of difference. I teach English in Japan, and the way they explain grammar is not the same as how I learned English grammar in school. I think that's normal. They frame things in different ways, since the needs are different. I imagine with thousands of other languages out there I know nothing about, there might be other examples as well.
    – Leebo
    Jun 22 at 13:12
  • 2
    Natives don’t need to be taught 飲む becomes 飲んで. We know it before we learn about such abstract concepts as 連用形. Non-native learners, on the other hand, need to memorize the rules for those irregular forms. It helps to have a name to refer to the whole of 飲んで when it comes to teaching them, instead of explaining it as 連用形 plus て or sometimes で.
    – aguijonazo
    Jun 22 at 15:55
  • 1
    And ordinary native speakers don’t even recognize this て as a particle. It’s just part of the verb.
    – aguijonazo
    Jun 22 at 16:16

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .