For example, English speakers commonly mix up your/you’re or there/their/they’re. I’m curious about similar mistakes in other languages.

  • InEnduringGrowStrong@sh.itjust.works@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I know you’re asking for such errors in other languages, but I find it interesting that some of the common english errors are more frequent with native english speakers than with learners of english as a second language.

    A good example of that is using “of” instead of “have”.
    Should of… of what?? It makes no sense to me how someone could confuse the two.

    Having learned english as a second language, I learned to read and write it before learning to speak it.
    On the other hand, I’d expect native speakers to have learned spoken english before learning written english.
    I think this difference changes which errors someone is likely to make.
    Native speakers confuse of/have more because they heard it long before writing it.
    People who learned it later are less likely to make that mistake, although they’re more likely for some others.

    TL;DR: Native speakers are more likely to make mistakes that are homonyms. Of/have, your/you’re, etc.

    As for the spirit of your question, I’ll go with french.

    Almost every noun in french is gendered.
    Objects, body parts, concepts, ideas, pretty much anything and everything is gendered.
    It’s also super obvious whenever someone doesn’t use the correct gender for anything.
    It’s also hard to explain to anyone.
    There might be a logic behind it, but I don’t know how to summarize any of it.
    I just know it, but couldn’t tell you why.

    Some of those make no fucking sense either.
    It has mostly nothing to do with women or men or gebder roles and identity, it just is.
    “Jam” is a feminine noun, yet “butter” is masculine.
    “Bread” is masculine, but a “loaf” is feminine.
    The noun for each and every season are masculine nouns, but the word “season” itself is a feminine noun.
    Also, a “vagina” is a masculine noun, because reasons? Weird.
    Various different words for “testicles” vary between masculine and feminine.

    It’s all super obvious to anyone who speaks french, but I never managed to explain it to any speaker of a non-gendered language like english without breaking their minds.

    • PaupersSerenade@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Regarding should have and should ‘of’; I’ve always understood it to be should’ve, which when spoken tends to keep a short vowel sound in the middle of the contraction that makes it phonetically sound like ‘of’. Bit of a bone-apple-tea.

      • MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Should I continue to persist after I have cut this olive in twain, and one of the portions thereof in twain again, then I’ll live, I’ll have half an olive, and I’ll’ve halved half an olive.

        • abysmalpoptart@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I disagree, “should’ve” and “should of” sound virtually identical when spoken (at least in some regions, can’t speak for all pronunciations). I can imagine why a non english native speaker would have trouble with this, though I’m not disagreeing with it being a common issue amongst native speakers as well.

      • abysmalpoptart@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is how I’ve always understood it as well. The two spellings are homophones so it’s a pretty easy mistake to make.

    • Paragone@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve been told that to start a fight in Francophones, just demand to know whether grapefruit ( pamplemousse, iirc ), is male or female…

      : P

      The book “The Alphabet Versus The Goddess” by Leonard Shlain, makes the point that women’s-rights simply don’t progress as quickly, in countries which have gendered languages…

      So, Anglo cultures pushed women’s-rights, whereas Latin cultures … won’t, don’t, drag their heels, etc…

      That book is now a couple ?decades? old?

      It’s still true.

      Conditioning an entire population’s System-1 ( Daniel Kahneman’s “Thinking Fast & Slow”, the System-1 is the default-instinct & the trained-now-automatic-expertise system, it also is the system that is both addiction & prejudice ) into gendering everything, automatically, may well prevent equal-validity from ever having place…

      Mind you, I now want to see which Nordic/Scandi languages are gendered, & which Middle-East languages are gendered, to see if that holds in those parts of the world, not just in the Americas…

      … digging …

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_in_Danish_and_Swedish

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_gender

      ( that isn’t a quick read… may come back to it some day… )

      Bingo!

      “The grammatical gender of nouns is one of two: a noun may be masculine or it may be feminine, and there is no neutral option. Moreover, masculinity is the default grammatical gender in Arabic and a word does not have to have anything special in order to reflect this. Femininity, on the other hand, is not default and a noun would have to have something special to reflect this gender in Arabic.”

      from

      https://www.learnarabiconline.com/gender/

      So, there is ZERO hope of equal-validity in Arabic culture, because the language programs Arabic people’s System-1 into 2 exclusive validity-categories, with male being inherently more-valid, by established language-habit.

      What about Hebrew?

      https://www.timesofisrael.com/in-an-increasingly-nonbinary-world-is-gendered-hebrew-willing-to-adapt/

      No wonder women can’t get equal-validity in Jewish culture…

      ( I read a Jewess’s writing ~ Nobody EVERY celebrated the birth of a Jewish girl: only boys are celebrated ~ … which explains the damage in the stereotypical “Jewish mother”, a woman whose validity has been contempted by all in her culture, until the damage is her most defining feature… )

      So, it looks like equal-rights/equal-validity for women is … baseless, in some/many cultures…

      Interesting, but depressing.

      : \

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        So, there is ZERO hope of equal-validity in Arabic culture, because the language programs Arabic people’s System-1 into 2 exclusive validity-categories, with male being inherently more-valid, by established language-habit.

        That sounds like some Strong Sapir-Whorf thinking. And the Strong Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is pretty roundly rejected by most linguists.

      • So, Anglo cultures pushed women’s-rights, whereas Latin cultures … won’t, don’t, drag their heels, etc…

        That’s mostly bullshit imo.

        Grammar itself doesn’t necessarily hold back progress with gender identities and equality.
        Languages evolve.
        French can have gender neutral pronouns, which can make sense for referring to people of various gender identities.
        Meanwhile, a gender neutral “table” is a bit moot. While a table is a feminine noun, such an object has no identity, its “gender” has nothing with social constructs, with gender roles or identities, not with women in general. A noun isn’t feminine or masculine because of its characteristics, but because of its phonetics and in some cases, plain old habit.
        Synonyms can have different grammatical genders.

        I’m quite certain that women are better off living in France or in French Canada than most places in the anglo US, not that it’s a high bar on the subject of women rights.