I would feel comfortable saying, " Both you and your students will discover
that YOU ALL know . . .; otherwise, I would reword.
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of ATEG automatic digest system
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2008 12:00 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: ATEG Digest - 20 Jun 2008 to 21 Jun 2008 (#2008-140)
There are 5 messages totalling 865 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Pronouns (3)
2. The Death of the Sentence? and the importance of
thecompetence-performance
distinction (2)
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/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 09:04:01 -0400
From: John Crow <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Pronouns
------=_Part_19848_18203690.1214053441163
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Which is correct/sounds better:
1. Both you and your students will discover that YOU know . . .
2. Both you and your students will discover that THEY know . . .
Or should I just re-work the thing?
Thanks,
John
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/
------=_Part_19848_18203690.1214053441163
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Which is correct/sounds better:<br><br>1. Both you and your students
will discover that YOU know . . .<br>2. Both you and your students
will discover that THEY know . . .<br><br>Or should I just re-work the
thing?<br><br>
Thanks,<br>John<br>
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"
<p>
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
------=_Part_19848_18203690.1214053441163--
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 11:43:27 -0400
From: "STAHLKE, HERBERT F" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Pronouns
--_000_0DDF38BA66ECD847B39F1FD4C801D5430F46A0E6D6EMAILBACKEND0_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
John,
I'd say it depends on whether you intend "you" to be included in who "knows=
." Will the teacher discover that he or she knows something or that the st=
udents know something?
Herb
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]
OHIO.EDU] On Behalf Of John Crow
Sent: 2008-06-21 09:04
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Pronouns
Which is correct/sounds better:
1. Both you and your students will discover that YOU know . . .
2. Both you and your students will discover that THEY know . . .
Or should I just re-work the thing?
Thanks,
John
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/
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/
--_000_0DDF38BA66ECD847B39F1FD4C801D5430F46A0E6D6EMAILBACKEND0_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-micr=
osoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns:m=3D"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns=3D"http:=
//www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii"=
>
<meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D"edit" spidmax=3D"1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext=3D"edit">
<o:idmap v:ext=3D"edit" data=3D"1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vlink=3Dpurple>
<div class=3DSection1>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",=
"sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>John,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",=
"sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",=
"sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I’d say it depends on whether you intend “you=
221; to be included in
who “knows.” Will the teacher discover that he or she kno=
ws something or that
the students know something?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",=
"sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",=
"sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Herb<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",=
"sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style=3D'border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in =
0in 0in'>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><b><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma=
","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Assembly for =
the
Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] <b>On Behalf =
Of </b>John
Crow<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 2008-06-21 09:04<br>
<b>To:</b> [log in to unmask]<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Pronouns<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal>Which is correct/sounds better:<br>
<br>
1. Both you and your students will discover that YOU know . . .<br>
2. Both you and your students will discover that THEY know . . .<br>
<br>
Or should I just re-work the thing?<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
John<br>
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 leav=
e
the list" <o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/ <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>
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"
<p>
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
--_000_0DDF38BA66ECD847B39F1FD4C801D5430F46A0E6D6EMAILBACKEND0_--
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 12:14:54 -0400
From: Patricia Lafayllve <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Pronouns
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_008E_01C8D398.6AB69720
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
My question is about the context, because depending on the rest of the
sentence, both 1 and 2 could be fine.
"Both you and your students will discover," to me, implies something that
the teacher and students figure out together. However - in the first
sentence, using YOU means (again, to me) that the two subjects discover
something no one knew before. In the second, using THEY implies that
there's something the teacher knew that the students didn't.
As an example:
1. Both you and your students will discover that YOU know about text
messaging syntax.
2. Both you and your students will discover that THEY know more about
grammar than they realized.
See what I mean, there? Or am I over-thinking this?
-patty
_____
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Crow
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2008 9:04 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Pronouns
Which is correct/sounds better:
1. Both you and your students will discover that YOU know . . .
2. Both you and your students will discover that THEY know . . .
Or should I just re-work the thing?
Thanks,
John
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/
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/
------=_NextPart_000_008E_01C8D398.6AB69720
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" =
xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" =
xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns:st1=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" =
xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" =
name=3D"PersonName"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1461849146;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:1455445830 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703
=
67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vlink=3Dpurple>
<div class=3DSection1>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>My question is about the context, =
because
depending on the rest of the sentence, both 1 and 2 could be =
fine.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>“Both you and your students =
will
discover,” to me, implies something that the teacher and students =
figure
out together. However – in the first sentence, using YOU =
means
(again, to me) that the two subjects discover something no one knew
before. In the second, using THEY implies that there’s =
something
the teacher knew that the students didn’t. =
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>As an =
example:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<ol style=3D'margin-top:0in' start=3D1 type=3D1>
<li class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'color:navy;mso-list:l0 level1 =
lfo1'><font size=3D2
color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Both
you and your students will discover that YOU know about text =
messaging
syntax.<o:p></o:p></span></font></li>
<li class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'color:navy;mso-list:l0 level1 =
lfo1'><font size=3D2
color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Both
you and your students will discover that THEY know more about =
grammar than
they realized.<o:p></o:p></span></font></li>
</ol>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>See what I mean, there? Or am =
I
over-thinking this?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>-patty<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=3DMsoNormal align=3Dcenter style=3D'text-align:center'><font =
size=3D3
face=3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=3D2 width=3D"100%" align=3Dcenter tabindex=3D-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><b><font size=3D2 face=3DTahoma><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font =
size=3D2
face=3DTahoma><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'> =
<st1:PersonName
w:st=3D"on">Assembly for the Teaching of English =
Grammar</st1:PersonName>
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] <b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>On =
Behalf
Of </span></b>John Crow<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Saturday, June 21, =
2008 9:04
AM<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> =
[log in to unmask]<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> =
Pronouns</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Which is correct/sounds better:<br>
<br>
1. Both you and your students will discover that YOU know . . =
.<br>
2. Both you and your students will discover that THEY know . . =
.<br>
<br>
Or should I just re-work the thing?<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
John<br>
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" <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>Visit
ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/ <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>
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"
<p>
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
------=_NextPart_000_008E_01C8D398.6AB69720--
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 11:25:04 -0500
From: Robert Yates <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: The Death of the Sentence? and the importance of
thecompetence-performance distinction
I am sorry I am coming late to this discussion. I agree with everything =
that has been said. My colleague Jim Kenkel and I have been looking at a =
collection of essays written by first year native and non-native speaking =
college students to understand the non-standard punctuation. ALL of the =
essays had sentences that were punctuated according to the standard rules. =
Those that were non-standard appeared to be following principles to show =
the relationship between various ideas.
I am very reticent to question Herb, but there are reasons why the concept =
of the sentence is more that a "methodological choice." It is a category =
that reflects English speakers knowledge of the language.
Herb writes:=20
[The S (for sentence)] represented a unit within which certain relationsh=
ips, structures, and constraints could be discussed without the inconvenien=
ce of answering questions about discourse. This usually got us into an =
argument about competence and performance, which I held, and hold, to be a =
corollary of the methodological choice of S as the domain of analysis and =
description. In informal speech, in contrast to formal lectures, =
addresses, sermons, etc., sentences tend to correspond to the breath =
group, so that the spoken sentence tends to be what one can say in one =
breath.
***
Note the use of the word "tend." I think Herb gives away too much with =
that word.
Do we need the category of "sentence" (or clause) to describe what people =
do with they speak?
A couple of thought experiences.
I. Try to describe well-formed tag questions (a structure that almost =
exclusively in the oral language) in English without the use of the =
category sentence. You know what tag questions are, don't you? Tag =
questions are easy to describe, aren't they?
II. Try to describe well-formed questions (again forms that are very =
frequent in the oral language) in English without the use of the category =
sentence. Some sentences to consider in your description.
1) Is the woman from France?
2) Does the woman live next door?
3) Is the woman who lives next door from France?
4) Does the woman who is from France live next door?
5) Yesterday, did the woman leave?
III. Try to describe the antecedents of her and herself in the following =
strings without reference to sentence. (I recognize that these sentences =
may not be common in the oral language, but they can be easily understood =
in the oral language.)=20
"herself" has to refer to Mary in the following.
6) Mary sees herself on television.
7) Mary wants to see herself on television.
"her" cannot refer to Mary.
8) Mary sees her on television.
9) Mary wants to see her on televison.
"herself" has to refer to Jane.
10) Mary wants Jane to see herself on television. (but remember 7)
"her" can refer to Mary
11) Mary wants Jane to see her on television. (but remember 9)
****
I recognize that I am suggesting the competence-performance distinction is =
crucial. By the way, I am not alone in this regard. The competence-perfor=
mance distinction is the basis for the suggestions that De Beaugrande in =
his "Forward to the basics" paper and Noguchi in his NCTE book use for =
their suggestions in how to show students how to determine whether a =
string they have written is an appropriate sentence.
Finally, given what I have written above, I have no idea what the =
following means:
". . . what a sentence can be depends very much on medium, genre, =
discourse pragmatics, and social setting, among other things."
Do the principles of well-formed tag questions, yes-no questions, and the =
antecedents of personal pronouns and antecedents change depending on =
medium, genre, discourse pragmatics, and social setting? =20
Obviously, the frequency of the use of various forms change and some forms =
are very rare in some kinds of discourse (just like certain lexical =
items), but I have no idea how medium, genre, social setting changes the =
principles for any grammatical structure in English.
Bob Yates, University of Central Missouri=20
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/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 21:16:38 -0400
From: "STAHLKE, HERBERT F" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: The Death of the Sentence? and the importance of
thecompetence-performance distinction
Bob,
Thanks for your thoughtful critique of my comments and your vigorous defens=
e of the sentence as a syntactic unit. I can't disagree with any of what y=
ou've argued. There is no question that the sentence is an important unit,=
and when we're talking about morpho-syntactic phenomena it is the domain o=
ver which and within which large numbers of grammatical phenomena are defin=
ed. I'd probably even agree that there is a set of minimal clause types th=
at we can define for a particular language that correspond to the speech ac=
ts that the language defines morphosyntactically--or did I just commit a ta=
utology? My argument is not with the reality or the importance of the sent=
ence as a linguistic unit; rather it is with the claim that S or IP or CP i=
s the starting point for grammar. As a domain over which to define a theor=
y of syntax it certainly makes good sense. But as a domain, it is an a pri=
ori that is chosen for methodological reasons, namely, because, as you have=
pointed out, so many constraints, rules, and relationships can be defined =
with rigor within that domain.
But let's look at phenomena that have syntactic consequences within sentenc=
es but that cannot be defined within the domain of the sentence: focus, to=
picality, reference, and tense, to start with. Many of the consequences fo=
r these can all be described at the sentence level for a particular languag=
e, but the larger phenomena are phenomena of discourse and of pragmatics, r=
endering their sentential effects epiphenomena.
But part of what I was getting at comes from my own experience working with=
speakers of other languages as well as with English speakers at various le=
vels of education and development. My note on my Pashto student and langua=
ge consultant was meant to suggest that what works as a well-formed sentenc=
e in one social milieu, for example, discourse around a cooking fire in the=
evening in a village somewhere and what works in another, say a profession=
al sociologist writing for publication in a journal, defines and permits ve=
ry different syntactic phenomena. A complex sentence with perhaps more tha=
n one clause in passive voice would simply not be comprehended, much less p=
roduced by an elder telling a folktale to the folk seated around the fire. =
This has nothing to do, obviously, with intelligence; it has to do with me=
dia, genre, and situation, as well as language-specific training. The same=
can be said for special morphosyntactic phenomena related to initiation ri=
tes, relationships between the sexes, etc. Even within literary written En=
glish, compare Henry James and Ernest Hemingway; their very different appro=
aches to the sentence in discourse reflects not just differences in style b=
ut even in world view, some of which can be quite conscious.
Of course, a comprehensive grammar must be able to describe all of this, bu=
t such a grammar has never yet been written. Huddleston&Pullum or Quirk et=
al. describe standard written English pretty thoroughly, but they do not e=
ven attempt to work across a full range of genres or registers.
As to competence and performance, perhaps my jaundiced view reflects the ti=
mes in which I learned our craft, the mid-60s to early 70s. Syntactic theo=
ry was changing rapidly during that period, even moreso than now, and there=
were competing approaches growing up that were making interesting claims d=
emanding response, all before the generative semantics vs. autonomous synta=
x war redefined the theory landscape. It was an exciting time to be doing =
linguistics, but one of the disagreements that arose regularly at conferenc=
es, in classrooms, and even in publication was where the line was drawn bet=
ween competence and performance. Broadly put, anything that your theory di=
dn't treat belonged in performance. Anything it did was part of competence=
. I remember having an argument in a syntax class with Barbara Partee in w=
hich I was trying to convince her that the grammar must take into account s=
hifts in stress and accent in describing the behavior of quantifiers and ne=
gation. Barbara dismissed those variables as "mere performance." A few ye=
ars ago I was interviewing job candidates at the Winter LSA in Chicago, and=
Joan Bresnan delivered the presidential address in which she argued that g=
rammatical theory now could and must account for such shifts in stress and =
accent. Thus over the course of my career, the interaction of stress and a=
ccent with quantifiers, negation, and focus has shifted quite clearly from =
performance to competence.
I recognize that theories change as they are tested, and as they change the=
y gain in explanatory power, and this is, of course, what has happened. Bu=
t it does rather undermine the notion competence vs. performance. This is =
not to say that native speakers don't have intuitions of grammaticality. C=
learly 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. What has been described as the compete=
nce/performance dichotomy is simply too simplistic to account for human lin=
guistic behavior. At the very least these categories have to exist as regi=
ons on a continuum, but I'm not sure that even that suggestion isn't merely=
an attempt to save a notion that now has half a century of literature.
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]
OHIO.EDU] On Behalf Of Robert Yates
Sent: 2008-06-21 12:25
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The Death of the Sentence? and the importance of thecompetence=
-performance distinction
I am sorry I am coming late to this discussion. I agree with everything th=
at has been said. My colleague Jim Kenkel and I have been looking at a col=
lection of essays written by first year native and non-native speaking coll=
ege students to understand the non-standard punctuation. ALL of the essays=
had sentences that were punctuated according to the standard rules. Those=
that were non-standard appeared to be following principles to show the rel=
ationship between various ideas.
I am very reticent to question Herb, but there are reasons why the concept =
of the sentence is more that a "methodological choice." It is a category t=
hat reflects English speakers knowledge of the language.
Herb writes:
[The S (for sentence)] represented a unit within which certain relationsh=
ips, structures, and constraints could be discussed without the inconvenien=
ce of answering questions about discourse. This usually got us into an arg=
ument about competence and performance, which I held, and hold, to be a cor=
ollary of the methodological choice of S as the domain of analysis and desc=
ription. In informal speech, in contrast to formal lectures, addresses, se=
rmons, etc., sentences tend to correspond to the breath group, so that the =
spoken sentence tends to be what one can say in one breath.
***
Note the use of the word "tend." I think Herb gives away too much with th=
at word.
Do we need the category of "sentence" (or clause) to describe what people d=
o with they speak?
A couple of thought experiences.
I. Try to describe well-formed tag questions (a structure that almost exclu=
sively in the oral language) in English without the use of the category sen=
tence. You know what tag questions are, don't you? Tag questions are easy=
to describe, aren't they?
II. Try to describe well-formed questions (again forms that are very freque=
nt in the oral language) in English without the use of the category sentenc=
e. Some sentences to consider in your description.
1) Is the woman from France?
2) Does the woman live next door?
3) Is the woman who lives next door from France?
4) Does the woman who is from France live next door?
5) Yesterday, did the woman leave?
III. Try to describe the antecedents of her and herself in the following s=
trings without reference to sentence. (I recognize that these sentences ma=
y not be common in the oral language, but they can be easily understood in =
the oral language.)
"herself" has to refer to Mary in the following.
6) Mary sees herself on television.
7) Mary wants to see herself on television.
"her" cannot refer to Mary.
8) Mary sees her on television.
9) Mary wants to see her on televison.
"herself" has to refer to Jane.
10) Mary wants Jane to see herself on television. (but remember 7)
"her" can refer to Mary
11) Mary wants Jane to see her on television. (but remember 9)
****
I recognize that I am suggesting the competence-performance distinction is =
crucial. By the way, I am not alone in this regard. The competence-perfor=
mance distinction is the basis for the suggestions that De Beaugrande in hi=
s "Forward to the basics" paper and Noguchi in his NCTE book use for their =
suggestions in how to show students how to determine whether a string they =
have written is an appropriate sentence.
Finally, given what I have written above, I have no idea what the following=
means:
". . . what a sentence can be depends very much on medium, genre, discourse=
pragmatics, and social setting, among other things."
Do the principles of well-formed tag questions, yes-no questions, and the a=
ntecedents of personal pronouns and antecedents change depending on medium,=
genre, discourse pragmatics, and social setting?
Obviously, the frequency of the use of various forms change and some forms =
are very rare in some kinds of discourse (just like certain lexical items),=
but I have no idea how medium, genre, social setting changes the principle=
s for any grammatical structure in English.
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/
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/
------------------------------
End of ATEG Digest - 20 Jun 2008 to 21 Jun 2008 (#2008-140)
***********************************************************
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/
|
