Quote:
Originally posted by Captain.Remy
Quote:
Message original : Morphology
Yes, I agree but to be pedantic, English has all those as well as continuous and emphatic forms:
I go
I do go
I am going
I have gone
I had gone
I went
I have been going
I had been going
I was going
I will go
I am going to go
I will be going
I am going to be going
I used to go
I would go
I would have gone
I would have been going
I will have gone
I am going to have gone
I will have been going
I am going to have been going
etc.
By the way, the subjunctive isn't a tense, it's a mood, and the imperative isn't a tense, it's a conjugation - both of which are, on the most part, completely analytical in English and completely synthetic in French.
You're right, English doesn't have noun gender, and in that regard French is more complicated than English but what does it actually add to a language, Lithuanian has four genders but what's the point? You can't express finer detail because of noun gender.
Even though the phonology in English and French are quite minimal compared to German and Spanish, I still find French phonology more regular than English. At least, in French the rules are there and are stuck to, whereas in English it's very erratic and so harder, for me defitinitely, to learn. I've learnt both, so I know what I'm on about here.
|
Imperative and subjunctive are both considered as tenses, confirmed.
We don't talk about Lithuanian, to be honest, it doesn't interest me, at all.
Both phonologies are regular, even though, and I agree, the English one is more 'unpredictable'. But don't forget that you do have links between words in French, and put in a certain way, you don't get the sentence.
In your opinion, this forum is awful because we don't agree with you, sorry about that, sorry if we know French a bit better than you do. 
|
LISTEN: Linguistically the imperative and the subjunctive are conjugations and moods respectively, not tenses! GET THAT!? Check any decent book on the subject.
I'm using Lithuanian as an example, I don't care if it doesn't interest you, it proves the point that both French and English are just as analytical as each other.
Check my posts, I have never said that English was more complex morphologically than French, a complete assumption on your part.