On studying verbs

[AldenG]

The question about why suomi becomes suomen but ruotsi becomes ruotsin has prompted me to write this meditation on the learning of verbs (even though those are nouns).

I don't have a direct answer to the suomen/ruotsin question (which ultimately received a good answer anyway) but in a way it is closely related to something I happened to be thinking about verbs last night in relation to another project.

It is common for beginners to think about questions like, "How do I know that tarvita becomes tarvitsen but halata becomes halaan and vanheta becomes vanhenen?" Or more generally, how does one predict a verb's conjugational paradigm, and thus the needed conjugational stems, from the infinitive?

This question typically arises from studying long lists of infinitives and their definitions, a common way in which people delay their acquisition of fluency in Finnish.

And the question is exactly backwards, an example of how a superficially systematic approach to learning makes the task more complicated than the way children actually master the language.

The question should be: What is the infinitive form of tarvitsen? What is the infinitive form of halaan? What is the infinitive form of vanhenen? And suddenly it is a much easier question to answer. In these cases, you use a variety of more easily learned letter-transformations to end up with an infinitive ending in -ta.

Those who don't yet have enough Finnish to immediately recognize that this is a simpler task will simply have to take my word for it.

But if you are creating primary categories in your mind for tarvita, halata, vanheta, etc., and then filling in cubbyholes with various inflected forms or (worse yet) rules for inflection, it is quite a tedious and error-prone task with many levels of indirection that separate your knowledge from your ability to use it as a reflex.

However, if you are learning words and creating primary categories like tarvitsen, halaan, and vanhenen -- preferably from studying them in the context of phrases and sentences that use them -- and then filling in a cubbyhole for "how do I use this after taidan/haluan/aion," it is a much less complicated mental structure, easier and quicker to acquire and more reliable in use.

I believe that regardless of how the language is learned (and some methods certainly take more or less time than others), in the end every fluent person ends up with a brain organization in which the primary "handles" of verbs are inflected forms. (And in fact these neural handles are closely linked to specific phraselets in which they are used.) The infinitive is the afterthought, not the foundation. Thus the study of Finnish for the purpose of learning to understand and speak it should treat the inifinitives as afterthoughts, not as the main handle by which a verb is discussed or rehearsed.

[Jukka Aho]

*Clap*, *clap*, *clap*. (That’s such a simple, good idea and sound advice it needs to be applauded.)

[Rob A.]

The infinitive is the afterthought, not the foundation. Thus the study of Finnish for the purpose of learning to understand and speak it should treat the inifinitives as afterthoughts, not as the main handle by which a verb is discussed or rehearsed.

Yes ...and I agree too... It seems I'm becoming one of Alden's acolytes... ....though I still like the "grammatical" approach...and "comparative linguistics", but I recognize that to learn a language you don't need to remember a whole lot of arcane "rules of grammar" ...or even to be "rocket scientist"...you just have to know which words and phrases to use in particular situations....something that comes with time and practice.... I agree, then, that infinitives ....and nominative forms... are not the "main course"...

Probably this is a bit difficult for native English speakers to grasp initially, because English words, nouns anyway, generally take one form plus typically fairly simple rules for the possessive case and plurals... Verbs get a little more complicated, though again most verbs follow fairly simple rules....Finnish is different...

[AnnikaL]

I agree.

Yesterday I was learning the 4 types of verbs. The teacher first taught them as they were in the book we follow (I'm not saying anything against the teacher, she's great, and this was only the starting point for learning). But, if you go by the book, you learn the rules for when a word ends in a/ä, or da/dä, or consonant+a/ä (hold on a minute... isn't d a consonant?) or finally for vowel+ta/ä.

So, actually, type 1 is actually vowel+a/ä, then types 2 and 3 are specifically t or d... unless there is a vowel before the t, in which case it is the fourth set of rules I must follow. But only if the verb is regular, otherwise all bets are off! Then, if I'm actually able to remember these rules, how quickly can I process them when I come across the infinitive form? Am I going to spend 3 minutes try to thinkg "ok, that's a consonant...."

All you can do is think about how a word sounds and try to generalise from those cases. Sometimes you'll be wrong, then you'll correct on a gradual basis. This is how children learn language and why they make certain mistakes. It's the only sensible option. As you say, generalising from the opposite direction of how the verbs are more often encountered makes a lot of sense, too.

What you CAN'T expect to do is learn rules like this and apply them quickly enough to communicate. I think the key is to learn from all angles and develop a lot of strategies.

I'm going to come up with a list of verbs in English, write down the Finnish infinitive equivalent and do my best to learn to conjugate on sight. I'll also do the reverse and try to guess the infinitve form when I see other forms. Eventually, I hope it will become second nature.

[AnnikaL]

[

Probably this is a bit difficult for native English speakers to grasp initially, because English words, nouns anyway, generally take one form plus typically fairly simple rules for the possessive case and plurals... Verbs get a little more complicated, though again most verbs follow fairly simple rules....Finnish is different...

Ah, yes. Finnish IS different, but if you learn any language in reference to your own, you're adding in an extra layer of complexity that will affect your learning ability. Language is a way of expressing certain universal mental representations and intentions, so native language doesn't really come into it. Obviously an adult learner does inevitably make reference to their native language, and when the language mapping is simple this can speed things up a bit, but otherwise (and in the case of Finnish) it's best to try not to do it too much

[-Kielo-]

I find that living in Finland and learning new verbs from everyday situations such as conversation and reading subtitles on tv you learn verbs in this way. There are many verbs which I can correctly use in their inflected forms but actually have no idea what the infinitive is I often have to search for it afterwards. But when your primary source of language exposure is through lessons, or teaching yourself (as I am now that I'm back in Australia), the approach is the opposite. I think it supports the idea that exposure is the fastest way to achieve fluency (but that also requires active participation, of course).

But having said that, I also personally like to have a solid grammatical base that I can call on when in doubt. And, being interested in linguistics, I like to try and find out why things are the way they are

An interesting insight that I think students and teachers alike could gain value from! Well done!