An analogy to systematic grammar: gravity
“What is ‘grammar’?” series: Part 4
Previously, we discussed the idea that “real exceptions” do not exist in grammar because grammar is systematic.
When we encounter “seeming exceptions” to systematic grammar rules--in the sense that two sentences that seem to have identical conditions are not bound in the same way by the same rule--we need to understand that there must be a difference between these sentences, even if the difference might be very complex.
Figuring out what such differences are between seemingly identical sentences not bound by the same rule is what linguists often have to do in their research.
We can use an analogy with gravity to think about the idea that there are no “real exceptions” to grammar:
We all know that everything on earth is governed by the laws of physics.
We all know that there is a force called gravity that pulls objects to the centre of the earth. When we drop an object, it falls to the ground because of gravity.
Gravity is a force that exists all the time. Whenever we drop an object, it would always fall to the ground.
Now, let’s imagine that we see someone dropping an object, but the object is hovering in mid-air.
When we see this, would our conclusion be that gravity has suddenly ceased to exist? Would we think that this hovering object in front of us is an “exception” to the law of gravity?
No, this probably would not be our conclusion because we know that things on earth are always bound by physics. We know that gravity exists in every situation on earth. There simply cannot be exceptions to gravity.
Because we know that gravity always exists, if we want to find out the reason why this particular object does not fall to the ground, we need to do it within the bounds of physics.
We might investigate and find out, for example, that this object is attached to a transparent string that is dangling it in mid-air. This is a logical explanation for why the object seems to be “defying gravity.”
When we see the hovering object, it does not mean that gravity has suddenly ceased to exist--because gravity is always there. It just means that other factors are causing certain changes within the bounds of physics that are leading to this seeming “exception” to gravity.
In order to understand the idea that grammar is systematic, we need to think about it like we think about gravity.
A set of systematic grammar rules governs a language in every situation, just like the laws of physics govern objects in every situation.
As such, when we see a sentence or a situation in a certain language that seems to defy a systematic grammar rule in that language, it is not that systematic grammar has ceased to apply or has “exceptions.”
Rather, systematic grammar always binds a language. When we see something that seems to defy it, there is always a logical explanation for it within the same bounds of systematic grammar.
This is just like, when an object seems to “defy gravity,” there is always a logical explanation for it within the same bounds of physics.
Understanding that grammar systematically governs a language and is not “full of exceptions” allows us to shift our focus in foreign language learning, from seeing pieces of the language as separate and unconnected to seeing them as a cohesive whole within a unified system.
When we see a seeming exception to a systematic grammar rule in our target foreign language, the question to ask is not “why is there an exception again?”, but rather, “what are the factors in this situation that are affecting the systematic rule that I know?” This is a much more helpful question to ask if we want to understand the language better.
文法「系統性」的一個比喻： 地心吸力
「grammar」（文法）是甚麼系列：第 4篇
上一節我們探討過「grammar」中不會存在「真正的例外」，因為文法是系統性的。
當遇上一些「看似例外」的情況，即兩個似乎條件相同的句子卻沒有被相同的系統性文法規則所規範，我們就必需明白這些句子肯定有著條件上的差異，即使差異可能非常複雜。語言學家會對此深入研究，務求找出那些看似相同但不受同一規則規範的句子之間的差異。
我們就用「地心吸力」來做個比喻，進一步說明「grammar」中不存在真正例外這概念。
我們都清楚，地球上一切皆受物理定律支配，也知道地心吸力會將物件拉向地心。當一件物件在地球上掉下時，地心吸力會使它掉落在地面上。由於這股引力一直存在，因此每當有物件掉落時，也是會落到地面上的。
現在，試想像有人在我們面前掉下了一件物件，但該物件竟懸浮在半空中。
看到這情況，我們會認為是因為地心吸力突然消失嗎？或者這樣說，我們會認為這個懸浮半空的物件是地球地心吸力定律下的「例外」嗎？
我們大概都不會這樣認為吧，畢竟我們清楚地球上的一切皆受到物理定律的規範，並知道地心吸力會對地球上的所有物件產生作用，而不會出現例外。
既然知道地心吸力的存在，我們想找出該物件沒有掉落地面的原因，便要在物理學的規範中研究。
例如，我們可能在仔細查看後，發現原來物件是被連接到一根懸在半空的透明線上，因此能合理地解釋了這個看似「反地心吸力」的現象。
當我們看見有物件懸浮，並不代表地心吸力就突然消失，因為引力是一直存在的。這只能表示在物理學的規範中，有其他因素促成了某種變化，從而形成這種看似不受地心吸引影響的「例外」。
要是我們像思考地心吸力一樣去思考「grammar」，便能真正理解文法是系統性這概念。
一套系統性的「grammar」規則會在任何情況下約束語言，正如物理定律會在任何情況下支配著物件。
因此，當我們看到某種語言的句子似乎違反了該語言的系統性文法規則時，也不等如文法的系統性不再適用，或真的出現了「例外」。
相反，文法的系統性一直都會規範著語言。當似乎有與它相違背的情況出現時，也總能在同一套文法規則中找出合乎邏輯的解釋。情況尤如我們遇上看似「反地心吸力」的物件，也能用地球上同一套物理法則作解釋。
明白「grammar」是有系統地規範語言，而且從不存在「真正的例外」，我們便能在學習外語時把注意力轉移到有用的地方 － 即從把語言的各部分看成獨立和互不相關，到把它們視為在統合的系統中，一個環環相扣的整體。
我們在學習外語時，如發現看似是系統性文法規則的「例外」時，要問的不是「為什麼又出現例外」，而是「這裡的甚麼因素影響了我所知的那個系統性規則」。假如我們想要更清晰地理解某語言，後者絕對是比較有益的問題。