What’s the most frustrating thing about learning English?

Some say it’s the notoriously inconsistent pronunciation. For example, there are no less than 7 different ways to pronounce the cluster ough.

Others point to the significant number of fake grammar rules that are nevertheless widely followed even by well-educated native speakers, for example Never end a sentence with a preposition! or Don’t split an infinitive!

A Bit of History

To explain this mess, some linguists point to the Norman Conquest, a pivotal moment in the 11th Century when a foreign minority established itself as the ruling class in Britain.

The Normans spoke a variety of French and their descendants continued to rule the country for several centuries, severely limiting not only the use of English in state affairs but also its consolidation as a standardized language.

To make things worse, just before it regained its influence, English underwent a transformation called the Great Vowel Shift. This is the period when, roughly speaking, the /i/ became an /ai/, the /a/ became an /ei/, the /e/ became an /ii/, and so on…

What Makes a Language

History, however, can’t explain everything. Languages are fluid and change constantly. What keeps them stable is institutions called language regulators. Without an established standard, a language is like a lawless country.

The oldest regulator is the Accademia della Crusca which was founded in 1582 with the goal of maintaining the purity of the Italian language. Its birthplace is Florence, the most influential city during the Renaissance. As a result, the Florentine dialect became the foundation of modern Italian.

Half a century later, following the example of the Florentines, Cardinal Richelieu founded what is probably the most famous language regulator in the world, Académie Française. No one, be it a government official or an online influencer, can challenge its authority. It maintains the most comprehensive dictionary of the French language.

The English Psyche

Anyone who has waited in line at an UK supermarket knows that English people love rules and regulations. What they don’t love is writing them down.

Just like the English language has no single regulator, the UK as a country has no codified constitution. This is, again, not an accident. The idea that order can be achieved naturally instead of imposed institutionally runs deep in the British psyche. In a culture that prides itself on its ability to self-regulate, the lack of rigid rules is not an oversight but a feature.

However, the most vivid expression of this liberal attitude to order can be found not in the legal system but in horticulture.

Until the 18th Century, European gardening was dominated by the French formal style (le jardin à la française), perfected by landscape architect André Le Nôtre, who designed the Gardens of Versailles. Their forced, often elaborate geometry reflected the humanist ideals of the Renaissance. Plants were treated as ornaments in a design that celebrated human thought and ingenuity.

Unsurprisingly, the most prominent pushback against this concept came from England, where two landscape designers, William Kent and Charles Bridgeman, introduced an alternative that freed nature from the tyranny of symmetry. The English landscape garden is spiritually closer to its Japanese and Chinese counterparts, where plants are allowed to branch freely and retain their natural shapes.

The style reached its golden age under Kent and Bridgeman’s successor, Lancelot “Capability” Brown who designed more than 170 gardens. English writer Hannah More described his style as “grammatical”, quoting a conversation:

Subscribe now

Most people who study a foreign language know that grammar is important, but few know why. Even fewer know what it really is.

Grammar is one of those “big words” like work and art whose meaning is often confusing because we learn them at an age when we don’t have the necessary experience to truly understand them.

Unlike art, however, grammar is very easy to define.

Imagine you’re an artist who wants to paint a portrait. Your objective is to create a two-dimensional representation of the human model that stands in front of you. You squint. You measure the proportions of the figure, looking for symmetries and matching angles. You study the expression and the body language. Then comes the first stroke: You take a pencil and draw an ellipse marking the head, then add a line to indicate the eye level, and so on…

What you’re actually doing is defining the visual grammar that will help you create a representation of the model you see. And here’s the really important part: You understand, instinctively, that these proportions, symmetries, and angles are not the building blocks of the person in front of you. That person, needless to say, is made of flesh and blood.

The same goes for language. Grammar is not some fundamental ingredient. It’s just a method we invent to explain how language works. And, going back to the drawing example, it can change drastically if your model decides to move. Then all the proportions and angles will have to be redefined, again and again.

Each time you feel discouraged because your grammar isn’t perfect, remember what the Bible says:

Grammar came second.

Subscribe now

The song was actually written by the Queen of Cliche, Diane Warren, but don’t let that discourage you. Cher’s performance turns it into an unforgettable grammar anthem.

The lyrics of the song are pretty straightforward—as I mentioned, Diane Warren is not a fan of complicated metaphors:

We’re actually getting two second conditionals in one verse:

If I could turn back time, I would take back those words (that’ve hurt you).
If I could find a way, you would stay.

Don’t let the modal “could” in the conditional clause fool you. In this case, it’s the past of “can”. In both examples, the grammatical structure is:

if + past simple → would + infinitive

Of course, the drama in the song is that turning back time is absolutely impossible. If it were possible, Cher wouldn’t have used the second conditional! (You see what I did here? Ha-ha!)

With no other options left, our grammar diva decides to move on with her life by throwing a party on a war ship. The skimpy outfit is just a middle finger in the face of the second law of thermodynamics!

Grammar on, Cher!

The future perfect is a tense used for actions that will be completed before another action in the future.

This definition is not wrong. In fact, it’s a great way to summarize the purpose of the future perfect tense for people who already know how to use it.

But the students who see the future perfect for the first time aren’t that lucky. What they need is not a definition but an example from real life:

By the time you get home, I’ll have (already) fallen asleep.

This could be something you say to your roommates who are out partying while you’re relaxing at home. By using the perfect future tense you make it clear you won’t be there to greet them when they arrive—You’ll be in your bed, already asleep. And if they’re really considerate, they’ll make an effort to be as quiet as possible and avoid waking you up.

Only after you have completely understood the example and can truly picture the situation in your mind, you can start with Step 2, which is analyzing the grammatical structure:

will + have + past participle

And there you have it!

What the fuck is this?

A friend of mine once told me the best way to engage an audience is to swear during the introduction. I’m still not sure if she was joking or not but I’m trying it now. Are you engaged already?

My name is Yanko Tsvetkov. I do a lot of things for a living. One of them is teaching English to an incredibly diverse crowd of students in Valencia, Spain.

Hardly Studying is a digital newspaper created to engage my students outside of the classroom and help them find interesting and intuitive ways to practice English. It’s also supposed to be a repository for all these “interesting articles” I often mention in passing because we don’t have enough time to read together. (Classes are, after all, meant for speaking, not straining our eyes!)

How can Hardly Studying help you improve your English?

The same way a friend can help you have a good time—by being there. Instead of more homework, here you’ll find stuff to read or listen to at your own pace. Maybe some of it will inspire you to continue exploring on your own or spark a conversation with others.

Why is this important?

Because studying in a vacuum is counterproductive. Grammar and vocabulary are incredibly important but they are like kitchen utensils. You can’t learn to cook just by collecting them in a drawer.

Language is something alive. You need to get immersed in it without pressure or obligation. And the only way to achieve this is to read and talk about things that are interesting and inspiring for you personally. I hope you’ll find something like this in Hardly Studying.

So, let’s go!

Subscribe now