ATEG Archives

July 2006

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:
Phil Bralich <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 27 Jul 2006 08:15:09 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
It simply does not restrict the definition to utterances.  It never has; it never will.  Your saying so does not change the 2000 years of experience of using it for oral and written speech.  If anyone felt that they would either have written a separate set for the "parts of writing" or changed the name themselves.  No one will agree with you on this.  All writing comes from speech.  Part of speech is just fine.  There is nothing wrong with "Word class"; it is simply not required.  Any improvement it offers is minimal, though mostly there is none.  Changing it would give the impression that for 2000+ years scholars were too foolish to notice that the term couldn't be used for writing.  They would have if there were a problem.  It is nothing other than narcissism that could make anyone think you should replace a 2000 year old term with the new one on such skewed logic.  

If you were to convince the ATEG group to use word class instead of part of speech you are likely to damage the effectiveness of the effort.  Certainly, publishers would not stop using the term "parts of speech".  

Phil Bralich

>
>I would appreciate if you explained why viewing *parts of speech* as 
>innacurate (because it restricts the definition to utterances)and 
>considering the term *word classes* (because this is just what 
>grammars do - classsify words into morphological classes) would be 
>consideredd *poor thinking.* What evidence supports your position?
>
>Eduard 
>
>
>
>On Wed, 26 Jul 2006, Phil Bralich wrote...
>
>>Highly doubtful.  Parts of Speech as the term for the categories of 
>isoated=
>> words is just not a problem.   Viewing it as inaccurate is just 
>poor think=
>>ing and will be viewed as such by others.  If you write the 
>arguments given=
>> early you will only mark the group as one that is dominated by poor 
>thinki=
>>ng.  You will not affect a change. =20
>>
>>Phil Bralich
>
>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/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2