I would just like to add to what Rebecca says that it is really not hard for
students to understand the implied finish to the sentence and what is going
on there.  It does not take ten minutes to teach this, so I don't see why Ed
thinks such things need to be omitted.

> ----------
> From:         [log in to unmask][SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To:     Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> Sent:         Wednesday, March 24, 1999 4:14 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: "completeness" vs. "incompleteness", etc.
>
> Ed, smile. I surely did appreciate your affirmation that "And remember, in
> spite of the tone of my comments, I'm on your side.
> >Ed"
>
> I do appreciate that. smile.... cuz it is surely both my hope and my
> committed
> goal that we are all on the same side.
>
> BTW, I don't know how the whole issue of "completeness" vs.
> "Incompleteness"
> got introduced here, to begin with.   But since it has gotten introduced,
> notice that in my last email, I did NOT assert that the facts regarding
> the
> 'incompleteness' of "John is ___" should be taught in a Grammar class in
> college.
>
> What I did was ASK whether such facts should be taught.
>
> And by "such facts", what I MEANT, was not anything about completeness, or
> incompleteness, but something more about regular predictable patterns of
> sentences.... (going back to Morenberg's statement of 6 types that I cited
> earlier, or the similar basic types augmented, as Johanna showed, by
> thematic
> roles, so that we have several levels of structure inside a sentence).
>
> Actually, one of my central goals with students in a grammar class is to
> help
> them feel comfortable and competent at what is going on in English
> sentences.
> My experience with people and their FEELINGS about grammar is that they
> are
> pretty durned alienated, bored, and frightened. I'm sure you all have the
> same
> experience I do with people first learning what you do. You say you're an
> English teacher, and the first thing they do is either make excuses for
> their
> grammar, assert that they know no grammar, or start recounting how the
> language is going to the dogs.
>
> In a recent Advanced Grammar class I taught, students talked about how
> they
> feared being judged stupid, incompetent, and inadequate based upon their
> "grammar."
>
> A number of these students (junior level college) were unable to identify
> the
> verb in a sentence.  Some could identify the subject, but plunk a relative
> clause on the simple subject, and they no longer could identify the verb
> and
> they couldn't identify the subject either.
>
> So, one goal of mine in a grammar class is helping the students come to
> feel
> comfortable with what is going on in an increasingly broad sampling of
> English
> text (sentences... at this point). It's like helping them stop the
> spinning in
> their heads, and to feel calm, and secure at being able to understand and
> identify the workings in an English sentence.
>
> Ok, so what does this have to do with Ed's posting this afternoon?
>
> When he says that he might treat issues of "incompleteness or whatever you
> call it" of "John is ___" at the end of 12th grade, if he had time for
> such
> linguistic matters.....
>
> well.... ya know, I don't really see it as an abstruse "linguistic"
> matter.
>
> Students are likely to readily come across such examples -- "John is."
> But
> when they come upon such a sentence  what are they to make of that
> structure?
> Is it a fundamentally different type than "John is happy" or is it the
> same
> type as that? If they can see it as basically the same as "John is
> happy..."
> and can understand why it is basically the same (the 'happy' is picked up
> from
> the preceding sentence) then they've taken some concrete steps in
> recognizing
> general patterns in the language, as they actually occur. And in my
> experience, students feel much gratified in this.
>
> That's why the model of a few basic sentence types, identified based on
> phrase
> structure (NP, V, AdjP, AdvP, PP) accompanied by their function (jobs they
> do,
> as I say to students -- subject, object, complement. etc), with discussion
> of
> thematic roles (agent, patient, beneficiary, ...) is so POWERFUL. I tell
> students in the beginning of Advanced Grammar, that we will begin by
> exploring
> 6 basic patterns of sentences in English.  And then I make them a promise.
> I
> tell them that every (written?) sentence we see, no matter how complex,
> will
> be a variant of one of these 6 types.  So, if they come to know those 6
> types
> through and through, then they will slowly be able to identify/analyze
> anything they come across.
>
> I have found this gives students a handhold that encourages them greatly,
> and
> lets them believe in themselves, and begin to get over their fears.
>
> So, I would not talk about the "incompleteness" of "John is..." in a
> grammar
> class. Upon encountering such a sentence (as in my kiku, the errant puppy,
> example), I'd ask students what they make of it... I'd ask them if there
> really are 6 patterns of sentences, which one is this?
>
> So, check y'all later
>
> :)
> rebecca
>
>
>
>
> >Rebecca's response about "completeness" raises a fundamental point. She
> agrees that she would not teach it in a comp class, but sees it as
> something
> she would teach in a "grammar" class. My question is Ø can she (or we)
> convince most English teachers that such stuff belongs in an "English
> Grammar"
> class. My guess it that most teachers will find that they have plenty to
> do in
> a "grammar class" simply teaching students to be able to identify and
> discuss
> the implications of prepositional phrases, subjects, verbs, clauses, and
> participles. Why do they need to know about these "incomplete" sentences.
> >     No, I'm not playing devil's advocate here. If, after we ideally have
> a
> suggested curriculum, if we find that there is time left (in the students'
> work), then I have no problems with introducing such linguistic questions.
> Indeed, the model I have proposed includes the option for twelfth grade of
> studying more aspects of general linguistics. I don't however, see the
> relevance of teaching all students that "John is" is an "incomplete" or
> whatever else you want to call it, sentence. And remember Ø in spite of
> the
> tone of my comments, I'm on your side.
> >Ed
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Until 5/15
> Rebecca S. Wheeler, Ph.D.       [log in to unmask]
> 1201 University Circle
> Department of English               office phone:       (801) 626-6009
>
> Weber State University                office fax:       (801) 626-7760
> Ogden, UTah 84408-1201
>                USA
>
> After 6/1
> Rebecca S. Wheeler, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor of English
> Christopher Newport University
> Newport News, VA 23606
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
>
>