site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   2680 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for February 22, 2026

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Imo, most people's grasp of grammar and structure in their native language is not great.

Yes!

One advantage of the grammatical approach is that it forces people to finally confront the structure of language in general and thus also their own.

Nooo...

Only a few language nerds find topics like present imperfect or the dative case interesting and understandable. The rest treat it like algebra; arcane nonsense that you have to memorize just long enough to pass the exam and then never use for the rest of your life. And they are right. Nobody learns to speak a language like that. Nobody writes like that. It's useless knowledge.

I don't know what a dative case is, but I would say that most people don't even have a decent grasp of objects in sentences or infinitives (especially English speakers for the latter).

Shit, I’d say I’m unusually interested in linguistics, and I don’t think I understand formal grammar.

Only a few language nerds find topics like present imperfect or the dative case interesting and understandable. The rest treat it like algebra; arcane nonsense that you have to memorize just long enough to pass the exam and then never use for the rest of your life. And they are right. Nobody learns to speak a language like that. Nobody writes like that. It's useless knowledge.

It might be useless knowledge (unless you're a language teacher) to know what "present imperfect" means. It is not useless knowledge to know how to use it correctly.

Yes, but the Venn diagram of native English speakers who understand advanced grammar and native English speakers who generally speak (and less generally write) using such grammar properly is practically two separate circles. Maybe 10% of even extremely profficient English communicators could tell you what "present imperfect" means. I never learned any of it, because the teachers of my advanced placement english courses all assumed we already knew it/thought teaching it was boring and would rather have us read their favorite books instead. Luckily, I was never really tested on grammar in a way I couldn't just sort of intuit my way through. The academic instruction is clearly not the load-bearing component here.

Just like how literally none of us were explicitly taught proper adjective order, even though English definitely has one (it's a big brown dog, not a brown big dog, and I have no idea why), but we tend to get it right anyway based on subconscious vibes of what sounds right.

Well, this is the point. Native speakers intuitively understand the difference between "I eat," "I am eating" and "I have eaten" and when to use them, even if they couldn't name the tenses. But to learn (or teach) English, it's a big help to explicitly name them.

Likewise the "royal order" of adjectives, or OSASCAMP. Most native speakers can't list it, they just know "brown big dog" sounds unnatural. But you need to know it to teach it and while you can pick it up through immersion, it will be faster to study a chart that actually explains it

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats