Don,
   In order to understand standard punctuation practices, it's already
necessary to differentiate between restrictive and non-restrictive
modification. This would, of course, relate to the postnominal groups:
prepositional phrases, relative clauses, participial and infinitive
groups, appositional noun phrases and so on. This is not just a
punctuation decision, but an attention to important differences in
meaning. One limits and the other describes. So there's good reason to
attend to this.
   The other problem comes in when you want to talk about what the rule
books call "coordinate" adjectives, as opposed to "cumulative." The
general rule is that coordinate adjectives have commas between them,
cumulative adjectives don't. I have never had much luck with those
terms without talking about the set order of operations in a noun
phrase: determiners (and predeterminers and postdeterminers) at the
start, coordinate adjectives next, and then noun modifiers, then the
head noun, then the word groups that come after. It's a tough call as
to how much detail to go into (or how much you want to hold them
accountable.)  But in a noun phrase like "none of my first seven
attempts" (was succesful), all the modification is aimed at telling
which "attempts" are in focus. If I then say "they were clumsy,
halfhearted attempts", the reader already knows which attempts are in
focus and the modification adds information. Students at the college
level seem to grasp this right away, and they seem to accept it as
useful.
   In practice (in the actual world, where this stuff matters), it's often
hard to draw the line between limiting and describing. "Give this to
the tall kid in the back." Everything in the noun phrase "the tall kid
in the back" is identifying. In other words, you need all that
information to determine who to give it to. I have never presented that
to a group that didn't understand it.
   I don't know what level this would make sense. On the other hand, I was
deeply impressed with the level of sophistication you already bring to
the classroom, and I don't think this is any more difficult than what
you already cover.
   In Christensen's system, is a nonrestrictive (postnominal) modifier
given special attention? (level 2?) If I have it right, a restrictive
modifier would participate on the same level as its noun phrase. Does
that make sense?
   I tend to make the same point, or try to, with intonation. Since
intonation intersects with punctuation at this point, this ought to
satisfy those who want to focus on "correctness." It also allows the
writer to layer in "additional meaning" to the core sentence.
   My frame of reference is different, but I think you're asking useful
questions.
   These are also distinctions that show up in any serious grammar.

Craig


  >


Dear all,
>
> I’d like to hear people’s opinions on two topics, one regarding adjectives
> and the other, student readiness.
>
> How comfortable are people with having adjectives broken down into two
> subgroups, Limiting and Descriptive? Limiting adjectives are most easily
> recognized by the fact that they do not go through the
> positive-comparative-superlative changes. They include articles,
> demonstratives, quantifiers, ordinals, and possessive pronouns.
> Descriptive
> adjectives, on the other hand, do just that—describe—and except for words
> like “perfect” and “unique” can be made comparative and superlative. Yes,
> there might be a debate about whether to include those pronouns, but I
> think
> they fit nicely here. One reason I ask is that I saw that list of TEN
> parts
> of speech, which added articles and numerals as separate ones, and I
> wondered how far that subdividing can/should go.
>
> Also, I understand Martha’s use of the term “adjectival,” which includes
> anything that can modify a noun—from the above limiting and descriptive
> adjectives, to prepositional phrases, participial phrases, and adjective
> clauses. In fact, Book Two in my series of grammar books arranges things
> just that way, by function rather than form, for adjectives, adverbs, and
> nouns. That book is intended for grades eight and nine, where I feel the
> students are ready to step back and contemplate the relationships,
> similarities, and possibilities of these grammatical elements.
>
> But in order to reach that level, of course, I guess they have to have
> studied the forms, especially the phrases and clauses parts, which I do in
> Book One. Is that a logical sequence? Could they learn functions first?
> Could they play around with ten ways to describe a canoe in grade six, and
> deduce the forms rather than having direct instruction in them? Which
> leads
> to my big question: When are kids really ready to make the leap from an
> adjective simply being the word “big” to the clause “which was hand
> crafted
> by a Penobscot Indian”?
>
> Don Stewart
> ___________________
> Keeper of the memory and method of Dr. Francis Christensen
> writeforcollege.com
> epsbooks.com
>
> 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/