Re: Languages (like French)

En réponse à DOUGLAS KOLLER <LAOKOU@...>:

>
> This is really interesting if this is the way the French are taught to
> understand their own language. When *we* were in school, we were taught
> four
> groups: -ER verbs (verbes de la 1ère conjugaison), -IR verbs (verbes de
> la
> 2ème conjugaison)(like "finir"), -RE verbs (verbes de la 3ème
> conjugaison)(like "vendre"), and everything else (deemed "irregular").
> The
> 1st, 2nd, 3rd ranking was based on the sheer number of verbs in that
> category (though it could probably be easily argued that "irregulars"
> outstrip the third conjugation, but perhaps the powers that be wanted to
> keep parity with the other Romance langs, and -RE verbs are at least
> "regular"). Later, in university, there were hushed rumors about a
> "3rd1/2"
> or "4th" conjugation (verbs in -OIR(E), I think)(I learned 'em as
> irregulars). For my lower level students (say, grades 3-6), the texts
> we're
> using take this traditional approach (sans 4th conjugation), with which,
> of
> course, I am at home and comfortable, and they do tend to bunch
> "irregulars"
> of a type together (a luxury *we*, if I remember correctly, didn't
> always
> have). Upper level students (say, grades 6/7-8) use a collegiate text
> (not
> of my choosing), which says that verbs like "dormir" and "sortir" are
> the
> real "-IR" verbs and that verbs like "finir" and "blanchir" are a
> bizarre
> subclass to be treated separately, setting up its own 31/2 groups. Oh,
> well.
>
Indeed, in French classes I had we had the "first group" (verbs like "aimer"),
second group (verbs like "finir") and the "third group" carrying all the other
verbs, whether they are in -RE, -OIR(E), -IR or completely irregular (like
"faire": to do). I don't remember where an irregular verb like "aller": to go
fell in though...