Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Also, "How it works?". Are we fighting a losing battle in grammar?

So often I see variations of this rather than "How does it work?"




I thought it was only me! This "inverse question phrasing" is something I see popping up more and more in forums and such, especially phrases starting with "How it <verb>?" or "Why it <verb>?".


I often see this with non-native English speakers, for better or worse, when looking at other comments from folks who write like that. With that in mind, issues like these bother me less.


Surely, most of the usage is from non-native English speakers.

Auxiliary verbs (like "does") are not required to form questions in Russian, Spanish, Chinese, and probably many other languages.


Does it really matter? While it may not adhere strictly to the rules of grammar, it's not so incorrect that it becomes confusing or changes the intended meaning. This is simply how language evolves over time.


I associate that variation specifically with non-native English speakers rather than a language evolution happening among native English speakers.


But you still understand it fine, no?

Why does it matter how you feel about language evolving(especially bringing race into it)?


Non-native English speakers is my favorite race.


I didn't say how I feel about it or anything about race.


Kids born in "native english" change the language too. For example, treat irregular verbs like regular ones. Languages evolve with time, regardless of non-native speakers using it.


Agreed, and I didn't say otherwise.


Yes, it really does matter. The concept that "language evolves" is absolutely valid when you're talking about the introduction of new words and phrases and adapting existing words to new purposes.

It's not the principle to invoke when you're talking about simply making logical mistakes. A question mark is used at the end of a question, not a statement. "How it works" is a statement. "How does it work?" would be the way to word the same CTA as a question.

Details matter because they add up to an overall impression of the quality of your work. Think of it as the "Brown M&Ms" principle, if you're familiar with that story. (Google it if you're not, it's a great anecdote.)


One part of effective communication is making things easy to understand and to remove stumbling blocks.

Removing uppercase or dots might still convey the same meaning but making it harder to read.

It may not matter that much but it does matter.


This is a personal website highlighting a tech project from someone who's probably not a native speaker of the language.

Holding them to a professional writing standard is a bit odd.


As a non-native English speaker, why would I care?


Because are hard languages to understand grammars without.


Native English speaker, and I had no problem reading this sentence.

I had to read it twice to realize the word order was wrong.


that order of words makes perfect sense when literally translated into my native language.


Which is grand if your audience is entirely composed of folks who speak your native language, at which point you should probably just write your native language.


It's understandable enough. People will literally try to make sense of Russian Numbers Stations.

You're being a grammar nazi.


Look, write however you like. Just don't be surprised when people aren't willing or able to crack your personal cipher. I'm not a perscriptivist, and I'm not calling for capital punishment. Heck, I didn't even point out the grammatical mistake in the first place, nor would I have. I'm just agreeing that it's not clear.

Maybe you are built differently from myself, but as is the case with multiple people here, it causes mental whiplash to punctuate a statement like "How it works" with a question mark. I have to go back and parse it again and wonder what the question is and what I got wrong before realizing that it's just a grammatical error. When that happens, it wears on the limited attention I have to look at the thing you want me to look at.

Fix it, don't fix it, it's no skin off my nose. Lord knows every blog post or HN comment I've ever written is bedazzled with errors and typos. I haven't taken the trouble to fix it. I don't, however, pretend that so long as it's as or more intelligible than a Russian Numbers Station that it's "understandable enough".

Also, I invite you to call me a "pedant" or even a "general dumbass" before calling me a Nazi of any sort. Nothing I've (ever) written has warranted me being labelled as such, and I deeply resent it.

https://www.kveller.com/why-we-need-to-stop-using-the-term-g...

https://theotherpress.ca/dont-be-a-grammar-nazi-but-dont-use...


Just don't tell me you didn't understand "How it works?"


I think it’s less about whether it’s possible to understand and more about the increased cognitive load that comes with achieving that understanding.

When you’re used to seeing things a certain way, and you come across something that feels wrong, it derails your line of thought, takes you out of the experience and requires additional willpower and processing to maintain focus.


Just because I was able to ultimately understand what it meant doesn't mean that it required more effort to parse.


Just listen to some Hawaiian English and you'll get used to anything

Dem lang be supreme fr


Non-native speakers care about grammar.


But not about grammar Nazis ;)


We should all care about communicating our ideas in a correct and concise way. This rise of anti-intellectualism must end or we're all dead.


If it is equally understandable to most people and uses fewer words that would make it technically the most concise way to express the idea.

Defeating Anti-Intellectualism doesn't mean being antagonistic to non-native speakers. Intellectual != Asshole

Edit: Communicating in proper english is great till you're choking and you put your hands around your neck and pray the people around you understand your "sign language" so you don't die


I think that's just that English isn't the author's native language.


For example, a direct translation from Spanish to English would result in that:

* "Cómo funciona" -> "How it works", as in "tell me how it works".

* "¿Cómo funciona?" -> "How does it work?".

The auxiliary "do/does" really looks like an extra unnecessary word, but omitting it sounds wrong to a native speaker or anyone already more used to English.

Part of the confusion could be because sentences like "but she does write" and "but she writes" mean basically the same thing (they imply different emphasis, but you know what I mean). So if someone incorrectly does pattern-matching based on those examples, I can see them thinking that "how does it work?" and "how it works?" mean the same thing.

After all, the "-s" suffix kinda looks like an abbreviation of "does", the same way the "-'re" suffix is an abbreviation of "are" ("writes" vs "does write", "they're" vs "they are").


I feel it's a meek way of saying "how it works".

Instead of saying "Click here and I'll tell you how it works", you're saying "did you have a question about how it works? If so, click here and I'll tell you". I'd argue it's still valid English, but it feels uncertain and weak, like you're not quite sure that's the right question to answer.


How it works - declarative statement. This is how it works

How it works? - an unsure comment about it kind of works but unsure how/why is correct reason. i typically add additional ??? to help convey the unsure nature without using shrug emoji

How does it work? - interrogatory of wanting the answer


> an unsure comment about it kind of works but unsure how/why is correct reason

I'd never interpret it that it way. "It works(?)" or "It works?!?" I'd interpret that way, but "How it works?" to me is firmly questioning the statement itself, not how it works.


Leaving out the How totally changes it though. "It works?!?" means it's working but you don't know how/why nor really care. Kind of like everyone importing 3rd party libraries. It works, but don't care to know how. Just move that card to the done column. "How it works?!?" means there's an attempt at the explanation but it might not be the best explanation if even correct.


Could’ve done exactly that and be grammatically correct by simply removing the question mark.


My point is that it was still grammatically correct with the question mark, but the meaning is subtly different.


"How it works, I think?"

The author is not quite sure.


Adding a question mark to a statement can imply they're not sure, but it can also they're no sure about the statement, rather than about the subject of the statement.


Seeing as 380 million English speakers are native and over 1 billion English speakers are not native, I think you are fighting a losing battle in grammar.


Every time i bring up someone confusing "it's" with "its" or "their" with 'they're" i get downvoted to oblivion and now suddenly everyone cares. Is "how it works" a greater offence than confusing words with different meanings?


Yes. Those are homophones at least.


Their and they're are not


Close enough to get mixed up, even if you know they're different words with different meanings. I often swap 2 completely unrelated words when typing if they sound kind of similar in my head. Called "spoonerism" apparently.


Probably ESL


If "Police police police police" is a grammatically correct English sentence, surely "how it works" is also.


Pretty sure it's a valid sentence but not a question.

Also, I can understand 3 police but I don't know how the 4th makes sense.


Adjective noun verb noun?


A matter of taste, both are fine grammatically. The verb "to do" isn't obligatory to form the present tense.


It’s not a matter of taste. You need an auxiliary verb to form a question, in this case the auxiliary verb “does”, e.g. “How does it work?”


It was fine if the question mark wasn't there


"It would be fine if the question mark weren't there."


The subjunctive in English is dead, let it die peacefully.


If I'm going to be prescriptive, I'm going all the way.


That’s exactly the kind of prescriptivism up with which I will not put.


Your comma is spliced.


And I’m going to continue to blithely ignore outdated grammar rules.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: