Language mapping, a walk-through

I began inventing my grammar when I was a kid, which might part show. I think we yet deserve some sunshine when we are grown up, too. The grammar has remained my real thing. It was my secret, also during university studies. It is quite different from classic guidance, but this is the matter that works for me.


Everyone has one PRESENT, PAST, or FUTURE really. We can symbolize this reality as three fields. We can say figuratively that our knowledge is our light. Knowledge needs memory. Our PAST field can be as with a setting sun. We may forget the detail in a matter we have not studied in a long time, yet there is shine enough to return to it.

__PAST field

We cannot have memories of the FUTURE, but we are capable of planning our study. Our field for the FUTURE can be as with sunrise.

__FUTURE field

It is our PRESENT we have most cognitive powers to shape. We can symbolize the PRESENT as shiny daylight.

__PRESENT field

All tense patterns have the words BE, HAVE, or DO. We envision the words in the Fields (Chapter 1).


The picture lets us focus on the verb form  WILL. It maps on the FUTURE already in the shape it has for the PRESENT. The observation is going to matter much in our further work

(Chapter 2).


For a start, we compare the Simple, Progressive, and Perfect patterns. We use the word “Character”, for general patterns. Character of activity may come easier to think about than the grammatical term “Aspect”, which we get to know too, however.



We can extract our Character or Aspect patterns, if we look to grammatical tense first elements, along with the words BE, HAVE, and WILL (Chapter 3).


We can symbolize the Simple first element with infinity. It can be any verb, and natural language is not mathematically calculable. Our ideas do not come from the Greek Anaximander, but we can compare thought. Feel welcome to read Grammar is always a project.


Human grammar is not separate from human living and thinking. We can associate our grammar and natural human mapping, as with geography and travel. We people do not have the outer space for our regular living space. We live on Earth. We usually view land or seas as extents. We give at least psychological borders to areas in which we are. We perceive routes and ways to places. We happen to be at landmarks and places.

Such are natural human variables for space, in English. We can use them for grammar (Chapter 4).

__ESSENCE 3 VALUE with patterns


Arrows are very familiar symbols to show or indicate the way. We can combine our mapping and arrow symbols, to exercise target time. The ability will be vital in our language journey, especially if we want to fare with Modal verbs. Modal forms do not tell directly what time we are thinking about, so it is good to have an idea for a target time.



Please mind the arrows are not shooting arrows

We never grow too old or mature, to use colors. They can help also advanced language work. We make a color palette, and combine patterns for Expression: the Affirmative, Negative, or Interrogative (Chapter 5.1).


We use visualization for syntax (Chapter 6). We learn to keep the head time. Our arrows are mauve, the color of head verbs (read: Colors can help read and learn). Head verbs can head phrases, clauses, or sentences. Auxiliaries always require another verb.


We get to use time frames. We keep the frame open for the Perfect, and we close it for the Simple. For real time, our frames are green.

Open time frame__3

All along, we mind we use concepts and inventions. We do not claim there is anything like time frames or logical extents in human heads. Common sense, if someone is an architect, it does not mean he or she was born with an idea for a house, or has a building in the brain.


After a comparison of the Simple and Perfect Aspects (Chapter 6), we compare the Simple and the Progressive (Chapter 7). Many grammar books might tell we need to learn “stative verbs”. They would be the words for thinking and feeling. We can stay with our mapping. It is up to our choosing, if we give our thought an extent or part an extent.


After we have compared our mapping variables ON and TO (Simple and Perfect), as well as ON and IN (Simple and Progressive), we try merging TO and IN.

We get another mapping value, AT, the Perfect Progressive (Chapter 8). This means we learn to manage all Aspects with variables as we want them.



We analyze if variable  ON could be a basic value. We remember about “stative verbs”: we might not fancy memorizing lists of words to use with the Simple only. The analysis is favorable. It is always the first element in the tense pattern to adapt for the Time. First elements in all patterns behave the same in the Simple pattern (Chapter 8.1).


We can merge our symbols and continue faring with an earthling basic variable: ON. We merge the Progressive and Perfect features on our Simple arrow cue.



We can agree with classic grammars we may have stative uses of verbs, but we do not have stative verbs. No such special category works in the live, real language. We take our examples from the Corpus of Contemporary American English, COCA.


This is a dream come true. And I’m loving every minute of it.

(NBC_Today Sun as in the Corpus of Contemporary American English, COCA).


Modal verbs challenge our darts (Chapter 9).  PAST Modal forms can work for the PRESENT, too. We can expand our logic as well as color palettes. Our gloss or forget-me-not can symbolize auxiliary time. Tea rose can help visualize Modal relativity.


We learn to perceive our grammar and notional time as related (Chapter 9.2).

We can view our grammar as logically connected

We can observe that Modal form is only relative to real time. More, hypothetical time cannot be the same as real time. We can have gloss (forget-me-not) time frames.

Relative time frames

With the frames, we can economize our use of darts to  ON or IN  values only.  Our Modal phrases will become much simpler to make, and remain correct according to classic grammars (!)


(Should we think it is too simple to be true, let us mind there is no natural language to require looking up volumes on philosophy, to make Modal structures. More, all natural languages are spoken and written in real time.)


Further journey can help learn closing the frame or leaving it open, dependent on our focus. There is no universal guidance. Of the President quotes below, neither is grammatically incorrect.


If Lincoln were alive today, he’d be (would be) turning over in his grave.

Gerald Rudolph Ford, American President.


More than that, and breaking precedent once more, I do not intend to commence any sentence with these words ― “If George Washington had been alive today”, or “If Thomas Jefferson”, or “If Alexander Hamilton”, or “If Abraham Lincoln had been alive today”…

Theodore Roosevelt, American President


Our basic variable and relativity will work with the Conditional or Unreal Past, too. More, we will be able to keep our real PRESENT, PAST, or FUTURE, our head, notional time.


We do not have to keep our visuals and symbolics forever. We try some independence of them already in Chapter 10.4., with exercise 67.


Importantly and very seriously, our work does not belong with computers. First and foremost, no computer could do our human thing: to begin, learn, and think on our infinity. Kids know there are many words and patterns in language, and still manage. Computers do not have cognitive variables, either.


To the Upper Intermediate level, the story consists of four parts.

Feel welcome to the dedicated Travel in Grammar website,

British grammar nazis

Disclaimer: the adjacent — and colored meaningfully yellow — graphic piffle is not intended to mean the Union Jack proper. It is the British Grammar Nazis logo on Facebook.



The logo dubious pulchritude may be seen in its full down here, also with a click.

British grammar nazis headerNow, let me lay out on the fundamentals of orthography. I do not spell the nazis with a big letter. Big letters, though they do not always import reverence, are reserved for proper nouns everywhere except a beginning.


The proper noun Nazis were German nationalists. Their having bombed London during WWII might belong with the semantic field too, and further reasonably connote displeasure on the part of the British people. I mean, I do not have other people’s feelings, but thus I do reckon.


Much has been written about the second world war, including Hitler’s evident lack of linguistic finesse. Therefore, I will do some wondering only, on the British who want to be grammar nazis.


The Daily Mash offers observations.


The way they selflessly dedicate themselves to correct punctuation, for example by pointing out to the staff of a chip shop why the term “chip’s” is a sloppy obfuscation, confirms they are bold and righteous individuals.


Grammar nazis share the article and comment.

This pleases me. A lot!

We are doing a service to the world in helping people be rid of their ignorance!

We knew it all the time!


It is only after a few lines or whiles that thought emerges.

I suspect someone is taking the p*ss.


Grammar nazis do not get irony. Let me think about statistics and implications. Should there be visiting nazis, I promise a brief primer on irony after this indispensable piece of advice about living on the same planet.



The site has about 50 thousand “likes”. Taking the British population alone, that would make about 50 thousand oddly deficient, among about 63 million people.


Some might say it is not so bad. It is not even one percent. Still, it could be better to think literacy, going to England: the guys are permitted to have the UK flag for their capriccio. Such odd types might favor big towns, as London.



Try for a plain passport photo, that is, without brooches, scarves, ties, anything you do not always carry. The piffle shows the guys’ attention to picture specifics.😉


Wave your hand, getting a taxi. It is a simple, therefore legible gesture. Get a map with statues and other tourist attractions in large icons. It is better to take a walk from the National Museum than end up the Piccadilly, owing to small print.😉


In hotels, always tick the boxes. Ask for those straight, should you be provided with a form without boxes to tick.😉


Mailing letters, get the recorded. They have ID strips. Seeking directions, approach people with newspapers. They could be literate. However, never ever leave your books or papers open and unattended. They might be taken for other utilities.😉


Now, the primer on irony. The basics are in the affirmative and the negative. You do not take them for a yes or no merely. Let me quote the Mash:


In no way are any of these people vain, arsey pedants.


This does not have to mean a refutation, Wikipedia explains.


Life cannot be about affirming or denying only. Let me return to the Mash.


The way they selflessly dedicate themselves to correct punctuation, for example by pointing out to the staff of a chip shop why the term “chip’s” is a sloppy obfuscation, confirms they are bold and righteous individuals.


Antonyms and synonyms are the answer. Mind to stay in context.


Laying all that out in detail to a grammar nazi looks discouragingly big a task, hence the handful of thoughts and the primary color, yellow (adjective, reference 3).


Grammar nazis look unable to admit that picking on people’s works has no chance to bring anything creative, sophisticated. They do not offer own blogs or websites, especially with serious language work, for evaluation.

Apples grow on noses: two languages – two minds?

Speaking a second language can change everything from problem-solving skills to personality. It is almost as if you are two people, says Catherine de Lange.


“Mon espirit paratage — My two minds”, appeared in The New Scientist of May 5th, 2012. Ms. de Lange compares monolingual and bilingual children. Washington Post has her article.


Ms. de Lange describes her testing children on syntax. Syntax is about the way we phrase our talk or writing.


Both monolinguals and bilinguals could see the mistake in phrases such as “apples growed on trees”, but differences arose when they considered nonsensical sentences such as “apples grow on noses”. The monolinguals, flummoxed by the silliness of the phrase, incorrectly reported an error, whereas the bilinguals gave the right answer, says Ms. de Lange. 


Monolingual or multilingual, children get to hear or read fairy tales. It does not matter, if the kid speaks one or more languages. It is important that the child comprehends the words, there was a fairy land, a long time ago, where apples grew on noses.


Children learn early that words can have more than one meaning. Figurative thinking does not disturb syntax. Whether in one or many languages ― but dependent on pragmatics ― we could or could not count any noses in picture 1. The Big Apple Corner in picture 2 only might have apples.


Language pragmatics deals with talk in context and work with ambiguity.


Picture 1. Is there even one nose in the picture, if we do not know what noses count?


Picture 2. Do apples grow square, if we have Big Apple Corners?


Thinking the science, the task was most probably deictically misconstrued. The children did not know what noses the talk was about, and thus if to tell the syntax or the pragmatics.


Ms. de Lange says she speaks English and French. If we were to follow Ms. de Lange and interpret her test results for a difference between monolingual versus multilingual mentality, we would risk un mal de tête, a headache.

We would have to imagine monolingual people as unable to take a figure of speech, and carrying shields instead of umbrellas, for heavy rain.

We would have to dread multilingual medics, fearing they would be the people to take cardiac cases for just a matter of opinion


Obviously and fortunately, no such headache naturally can come.


Further, both English and French have spoken and written forms. What we write as bread in English is un pain in French.

Boy eating bread

To a child, a test to neglect semantics might be un mal a l’oreille.

Word forms as bread or pain would not have to be in the test. Also in little children, brains entire work for language tasks.


Frontal lobes help keep the goal in mind. Temporal lobes tend to word sound, and occipital to word shape. Parietal lobes associate this all ― with the lexicon. Words for physical sensations and food are the basic vocabulary.


Ambiguity may provoke “surfing” the language form, especially if the limbic system would detect some emotional discord. When we ignore word sense, go asemantic, distinction between languages becomes much smaller. Pain or bread become mere forms, disagreeable to be mistaken in one language. The forms yet still might be singular or plural, dependent on syntax.


The “surfing” is not a developmental stage. Monolingual or multilingual, very young or more advanced in age, it is enough to learn to “surf”.


To work on syntax, we can use virtual or invented words ― regardless of age. Interestingly enough, we might get no “difference in mentality” between monolingual or multilingual people. We might not confirm Ms. de Lange results.



Virtual words have an advantage. We can use them to exercise speech sounds without the flummoxing that verbal associations might bring.


[th] is the sound in mother;

[th] is the sound in father

[th] is the sound in brother;

[th] is the sound in … pother 😉


A car rolls, a doll dances, a troll hops, and a ball bounces. Toys are things. They can be phimos. Every phimo can bimo. Before long, a kid may tell easy if we are correct saying, The phimo bimo , or if we should say, The phimo bimoes.🙂


Phimos can bimo.

Multilingualism is becoming an everyday thing in more and more countries and cultures. I like that.


I do not like bias about an ability to comprehend, speak, write, read, and communicate in more than one language. I do not like bias about people who speak one language, either. It is not true that monolingual people cannot take a figure of speech. On the other hand, it is not true that multilingualism makes one prone for nonsense.


The experiment by Ms. de Lange was biased. Multilingual kids were showed as disinterested in finding if something was real or true. Monolingual children were showed as unable to tell syntax.
 Multilingualism does not require a “different wit”.


Bread is always bread.

Multilingual people naturally “can surf”, and monolingual people naturally can learn to “surf”. Importantly, whether multilingual or monolingual, we would not “surf” for serious purposes. Work on syntax is better with virtual words, and then the number of languages might not matter at all. This is what I have for truly syntactic.


Another ethical and linguistic concern comes with Ms. de Lange reporting infant brain scans for experimental purposes. There is no way to obtain informed consent from an infant.


Read why I cannot see sense in such scans.