Surely you, dear reader, have heard that we should not say "first" because there is no "second" or "third", etc.., Then, just as false and ridiculous. The terms "first", "second", "thirdly" and all that can be formed are forms that act as adverbs correct order, although in the case of "first" and "lately" does not always function as adverbs of order but, in most cases, such as adverbs of time.
What happens is that Castilian dialects spoken in Peru and some neighboring countries, these forms do not constitute our standard language and therefore do not have to say they are wrong ways. It's like when a friend recently Colombian warmly greeted the people of Huancayo, saying, "Dear huancanianos and huancanianas" (when our rules impose "Huancayo - Huancayo), and of course, no one could say that these gentile are incorrect because they are used the suffix "-anus-ana" (there are different types of suffixes to form gentile). If they were wrong, then we should not say "Peruvian" but "peruínos" and "peruínas.
just happens that both forms are correct or accepted, but the use of either responds exclusively to the form of higher preference for the community. Another is the many cases presented with "video", whose use is peninsular pronunciation antepenultimate ( saw deo), while in Latin America is serious (vi of o), and never mind that comes from the English " vi deo "with pronunciation antepenultimate simply becomes severe as the great majority of words in our language. Thus people prefer the SAR can not do anything to change it, just recognize it and legalize it.
Returning to our theme, "first" not only acts as an adverb of order, but also can function as an adverb of time. In the sentence: "First tell me what happened and that was the problem. "Tantamount to saying" Right now tell me what happened and that was the probem. "Semantic value" first "have nothing to do with the order or the fact that after this the term "second" or "third". So when you hear expressions like " not say" first ", say" first "because after" comes in second place "has not always considered "first" is an adverb of order and, therefore, no place for "second" or "second." Some
ejemplitos:
A) First took their luggage and secondarily, paid for the service. (Correct)
B) First took their luggage and second , paid for the service (right)
C) First must return the food, then we'll see what we do. (Correct)
D) First I want to congratulate and secondarily giving them this recognition (correct)
In A and D act as adverbs of order, while C is an adverb of time. In B forms in bold are adverbial.
The following I just found in the author http://ggonzale.blogspot.com/ are of Mexican origin and see how he uses the terms mentioned without any objection:
"... Why? First, I have had coffee and suddenly the term as Garfield time after taking espresso. secondly it , preceding heartburn coffee. drank coffee in the morning and the day I spent with heartburn. "
Thanks for reading
Manuel Urbina
prolector@hotmail.com
What happens is that Castilian dialects spoken in Peru and some neighboring countries, these forms do not constitute our standard language and therefore do not have to say they are wrong ways. It's like when a friend recently Colombian warmly greeted the people of Huancayo, saying, "Dear huancanianos and huancanianas" (when our rules impose "Huancayo - Huancayo), and of course, no one could say that these gentile are incorrect because they are used the suffix "-anus-ana" (there are different types of suffixes to form gentile). If they were wrong, then we should not say "Peruvian" but "peruínos" and "peruínas.
just happens that both forms are correct or accepted, but the use of either responds exclusively to the form of higher preference for the community. Another is the many cases presented with "video", whose use is peninsular pronunciation antepenultimate ( saw deo), while in Latin America is serious (vi of o), and never mind that comes from the English " vi deo "with pronunciation antepenultimate simply becomes severe as the great majority of words in our language. Thus people prefer the SAR can not do anything to change it, just recognize it and legalize it.
Returning to our theme, "first" not only acts as an adverb of order, but also can function as an adverb of time. In the sentence: "First tell me what happened and that was the problem. "Tantamount to saying" Right now tell me what happened and that was the probem. "Semantic value" first "have nothing to do with the order or the fact that after this the term "second" or "third". So when you hear expressions like " not say" first ", say" first "because after" comes in second place "has not always considered "first" is an adverb of order and, therefore, no place for "second" or "second." Some
ejemplitos:
A) First took their luggage and secondarily, paid for the service. (Correct)
B) First took their luggage and second , paid for the service (right)
C) First must return the food, then we'll see what we do. (Correct)
D) First I want to congratulate and secondarily giving them this recognition (correct)
In A and D act as adverbs of order, while C is an adverb of time. In B forms in bold are adverbial.
The following I just found in the author http://ggonzale.blogspot.com/ are of Mexican origin and see how he uses the terms mentioned without any objection:
"... Why? First, I have had coffee and suddenly the term as Garfield time after taking espresso. secondly it , preceding heartburn coffee. drank coffee in the morning and the day I spent with heartburn. "
Thanks for reading
Manuel Urbina
prolector@hotmail.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment