Видео

I am with you, English and some other Germanic languages dot not have future tense in the same sense as other languages have.

2:35 they do be hunting rabbits tho

Why would Tolkien be thinking of black people? Creatives create their art based in their life and the other stories, in this case, myths that they consume. The books are clearly based on european culture and myth that is used to re create a soldier's fantastical view of a world after fighting a great war. Why would race be a source of inspiration of creation for him when religion, culture and personal lived experience is where he gets his inspiration. I'd be suprise if Tolkine ever talked to a black man. The obsession of race is a product of our time, and when talking about an author you have to contextualize his writing with his life. Whatever moder interpretation based on how you see the world is irrelevant to him and how he saw the world. Wanna see race and call the orcs black people? Go ahead, but it was clear to me when you saw them rising from the ground and mud that they where symbologyof men going through hell and war represented as a creature, just how those soldiers turned into killing machines during the war. If you ask me, ever comparing the orcs with with black people when there's nothing to link them outside of a color spectrum is insane. We even have the fact they are born of the elves, implying thematically that they where people that where took and turned to this beings forged for war. It might be harsh now, but black people are quite irrelevant or unexistant in european folklore and culture, the generations that lived when european countries where 99% european are still alive, there is no lore of non-europen in europe, unlike the US, europeans didn't, you know, know about black people or care for them, for that matter, they where to ocupied living their lifes to give a relevant or long lasting thought about people from a diffrent culture far away with more melanin.

I see your point, however when I learn French, I’m taught the future tense to be also “je vais faire” so in your frame is this also seen as present looking to the future

This video reminded me of a debate in the comment section of MindYourDecision's "-3²" quiz where even if there already exists a(n almost) universally agreed upon definition, people will still try to find reasons to justify their opposing view.

As an NB, I agree that They/Them is very cool.

For more advanced info on this topic (though it's a more philosophical approach rather than a linguistic one), I'd recommend "sex and the revolution" by the leftist cooks and philosophy tube's video on judith butler

This video was tense

"1: This is prescriptivism." So what if it's prescriptivism, as if it's a bad thing. Yup, I've said it. I believe that not every instance of linguistic prescriptivism should be demonised.

As a person who learned english as a foreign language, I totally get what you mean and I think it's a very interesting thing to notice. If I say "zrobię" in polish you could translate it to "I will do" or "I will have done" but it doesn't imply any movement, probability, any state I'm being in, any schedule, whether I want it or someone made me do it. Any of these grammatical tricks on which it could support itself. Just an abstract action floating somewhere in the future.

then no language has a future tense, because they all follow the same order

As a non-native English speaker, what I find most odd about they/them usage for a single person is the conjugation itself. It would sound much more natural (to me, at least) to say "they is/does" than "they are/do" for singular they.

I thought "It's going to rain tomorrow" was SURER, not less sure than "It will rain tomorrow".

Hehe 10/10 pride month video honestly.

Horrible video. I thought I don't care too much about the topic but that was just so wrong and made me mad. The asterisk and similar things don't work consistently. Not only in edge cases but quite often. This is well known and the main point of discussion when it comes to this topic. (der Arzt, die Ärztin: (Ä/A?)rzt*in; den Schülern, den Schülerinnen: Schüler(n?!)*innen etc). I expected this video to be about that and maybe discussing some possible alternatives and solutions, like using „Lehrende“ insdead for „Lehrer“, which also has Problems etc... Instead you rant about the AfD at length, which was horrible. There are many wrong opinions that still somewhat make sense. But your argumentation was mostly just...naive? I never heard the economic argument against gender neutral language before, sounds weak, but then you go „They want to leave the EU, so economic welfare means nothing to them.“ LMAO Also the public support thing just made me speechless. Can't you see any difference there? If you don't want to put in the effort, you should refrain from such big claims maybe. Either that or, as we say in german: „Schuster, bleib bei deinem Leisten!“

This video makes compelling arguments that fall flat with the conclusion because it assumes that Tolkien has to stay within the rigid structure of old myths, rather than letting him construct something of a hybrid.

Bravo!

We can do as we will, but cannot will what we will.

I always believed that a "tense" is when the verb itself morphologically changes, so the term shouldn't apply to constructions with auxillary verbs. So in English "do" is a present tense, and "did" and "done" are past tenses, but "will have done" or "going to do" are not future tenses since the word "do" is in the past or present tense here and not in a unique future tense.

Wait, how is linguistics a “fake science”??

This only convinces me tense is a lost cause or at least very limited as a concept. The distinction of verb conjugation and auxiliary verb is far more important at least in English when referring to when something happened.

as a transfem love this video!! <3 really great to see creators i watch turn out to be allies :3

Native english soeaker here, I totally agree. I hated my foriegn language classes because the way teachers would sort of bend the rules to explain the language's structure, *and thus explain it incorrectly and in a way which excludes the fundamental mechanisms that I need to learn for my future within that language*, it was fucking awful.

I wonder if in some sense this makes English speakers think of the future as existing in the present, like the future is just present possibilities and expectations we have now.

It absolutely fits the pattern of other English tenses. You might as well argue that English doesn't have the perfect tense or pluperfect tenses because we need the helper verbs have and had to indicate perfect or pluperfect tense! How outrageously preposterous. You sound like you'd argue that English doesn't have an infinitive tense pecause we use the word "to" before the verb do infinitives. Good heavens this is insane.

damn this is a really good elaboration. now i understand your point ! 😃

Isn't there also this relation that proves your statement? can - able to must - have to may - allowed to will - going to

Spanish's/french/italian/Portuguese future tense evolved from a helping verb that expressed obligation that became gramaticalized...🤠 cantar (infinitive)>cantar he (i have to sing)>cantaré that's why Portuguese still has messoclitics going on, by the way

2:33 but in french it's written : tu ne tueras point future tense without modal verb, so shall/will = future tense

Saying English doesn’t have a future tense is ridiculous. It’s like saying that periphrastic languages don’t have adjectives and therefore can’t describe anything

Quite possibly the dumbest video ever. The only thing that seems permanently to be closed is the mind of the Klein. I presume you didn't even notice that you argued for multiple future tenses quite adroitly in this video? No, I guess not.

I am almost mind blown this is even an issue. You must be arguing with non native speakers and dummies because this is supposed to be obvious and was very clearly taught in schools at every grade level from about 2nd grade on

Wow, incredible video with really clearly explained, carefully thought-out examples. I agree with your analysis

"Indian language"

i’m not an expert on this and i probably shouldn’t say anything but i consider english to have three tenses with two being actual, by definition tenses and the other being a sort of actor of a tense to allow people speaking english to describe the future without using any additional words (to the language). like, it’s not “real,” but it serves a very functional purpose by describing what will happen in the future and is thus grouped with the present and past tenses

Thanks!

If so-called present tense is actually non-past tense, why sentences like "I visit you tomorrow" or "I study tomorrow", are ungrammatical as far as I know? I'm not a native English speaker.

Gee, someone needs to chill. He seems two tense 😂

I love the foreshadowing. xD

I agree with your point that "will" and similar verbs are used in ways that don't indicate a future tense, but I think as far as their utility, it's a bit nitpicky to say that they don't at all count as future tense. In cases where "will" indicates an action in the future, it is acting as a future tense verb. When it's not doing that, it's not a future tense verb. Anyway, today I learned what a modal verb is, so thanks for that. ^_^

See you all in the next comment section in a few months when this comes up again!

We don't necessarily need to fully enforce any reform but if ð and þ were taught in schools as legitimate letters and available as letters in the keyboard more people would already start using it.

In think the word grammar itself is from latin,the studies of grammar was initially referring to latin's grammar,so some concepts based on latin don't perfectly suit the reality of other languages.

As a native English speaker who has never once thought about or cared about the future tense, I wholeheartedly agree with this video

i got something more controversial: "will is the future tense in the same way that 'Y' is sometimes a vowel"

thon/thonself sounds like something i would use until i realized i cant pronounce it :( fon/fonself is 10x better

Nah.

In school we were taught the modal nature of the future conjugations in English, though he didn't identify it as a modal system, just as a different approach compared to the continental European grammar. Come to think, I should probably thank this teacher!

liked it

I too prefer the term "retrospective", and how it fits well with the "prospective".