ATEG Archives

June 2008

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Robert Yates <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:46:48 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
Herb,

Thank you for your response.  Theories clearly change.  I have no problem with the fact that the distinction of competence and performance might be hard to make and has changed over time.

As someone who has taught a lot of writing to both native and non-native speakers, I know I am dealing with issues of both competence and performance.

I agree with the following list that cannot be defined within the domain of sentence.  

***
But let's look at phenomena that have syntactic consequences within sentences but that cannot be defined within the domain of the sentence:  focus, topicality, reference, and tense, to start with.  Many of the consequences for these can all be described at the sentence level for a particular language, but the larger phenomena are phenomena of discourse and of pragmatics, rendering their sentential effects epiphenomena.
***

In fact, Jim Kenkel and I have tried to look at how both native and non-native speakers try to achieve focus and topicality without the "standard" grammatical constructions. We have argued that labelling non-standard constructions as a "mixed constructions" or "fragment" or "run-on" are not very helpful because such labels do not provide any insight why developing writings have such forms in their writing.


I think the following suggests there is a competence-performance distinction.

***
This is not to say that native speakers don't have intuitions of grammaticality.  Clearly they do, but these intuitions are grounded, I suspect, in something more broadly cognitive and not in the endlessly shifting convenience of the competence/performance borderline.  
***

I have no idea what final statement might mean.  I have no idea what "more broadly cognitive" might explain the facts about the pronoun-antecedent relationships in the sentences I gave in my last post.   

Bob Yates, University of Central Missouri

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2