Ditto for me, Nancy -- I was able to get to the url, but there was no
content. If you can email it, that would be wonderful.
I don't think that reader response theory, interpretive work limning
whatever literary texts, need be in conflict with the work of attending to
language. Are you familiar with Carol Lee's brilliant work with students
who speak AAEV? If so, you know how much attention to language Lee insists
on.
In fact, I would argue that the critical feminist work you cite depends on
their hyper-sensitivity to language AND ITS LIMITS. Kristeva did her
dissertation on language, you know.
Attention to language should be integral to critical readings. Critical
Discourse Analysis takes this perspective typically with texts of popular
culture, but it applies even more so to the deliberate uses & stylizations
of language in literature. IMHO. :)
Judy
At 01:11 PM 6/30/01 -0400, you wrote:
>Nancy--I am the director of the Bluegrass Writing Project and am fascinated
>by your description of your presentation. However, when I try to open it,
>Netscape shuts down. Could you e-mail it to me as an attachment? Also,
>I'd be very interested in reading your articles--can you share the
>citations? Thanks. Liz Spalding
>
>
>At 08:50 AM 6/30/01 -0400, you wrote:
>>Just a couple of comments here. "Don't think; look" seems to reflect one
>>theory regarding literary criticism--New Criticism. It's not that academics
>>who embrace a different theory disregard thinking. Their thinking goes in a
>>somewhat different direction. And while there are certainly a lot of New
>>Critics still out there, other lit crit theories have taken hold, theories
>>that respect the reader as an agent in the meaning-making/literature-making
>>process. Many of you probably earned your bachelors degrees when New
>>Criticism was king. I did. I actually loved it. But waiting in the wings
>>was a more powerful, I think, theory driving lit crit, one that would be
>>embraced by the growing number of academics who came from different
>>cultures. And certainly there were more women entering the academy. These
>>women were reading
>>Cixous, Rosenblatt, and Kristeva, not to mention Bakhtin, Derrida, and
>>Barthes. Different voices, different ideas, different schemas. These
>>academics were looking for lit crit theories that weren't so eurocentric, so
>>(sorry) phallocentric.
>>
>>When you are talking about reading, you really cannot avoid talking about
>>writing too. As I explain it to 7th graders--all reading is writing. All
>>writing is reading. But we also need to understand that reading and writing
>>are both psycho-sociolinguistic process that are, in many respects, similar.
>>So when we look at grammar in the context of an already written text, we
>>have to remember that text is called into being by a reader who brings to
>>the text experience as a writer. That text does not stand alone. And if we
>>look at the cognitive processes of writing and reading, we see some
>>similarities. And, both processes are transactive. They require a
>>gathering of thoughts, if you will, a pre-engagement process. And both ask
>>the reader/writer to constantly predict and adjust.
>>
>>If you are looking at a k-12 language arts curriculum (and I realize some of
>>you are thinking in a more post secondary mode) grammar should be just one
>>of many conversations that happen. As a teacher, my job is to engineer
>>conversations and experiences for my students. Text is always the topic of
>>conversation, whether it is oral, written, or visual texts.
>>
>>A couple days ago I was a keynote speaker for a national writing project
>>site at Michigan State. I was invited to talk about grammar because of two
>>articles I had published. My powerpoint presentation for the keynote is now
>>on-line and you are welcome to look at it. Remember that my audience was
>>k-12 teachers. Some of them had a fairly good knowledge of grammar. Others
>>did not know what a preposition was. So, the writing invitation at the end
>>(which incorporates a poem by Gary Snyder) deals with grammar at a basic
>>level. Some of you no doubt will cringe, either at the research and theory
>>I cite, or the way I contextualize a grammar lesson into a larger
>>conversation/experience about written language and how it works.
>>
>>But you are welcome to look at it. I plan to add a couple slides to the
>>writing invitation since I cannot provide directions or discussion prompts
>>in the moment they way I could during the presentation itself.
>>
>>Enjoy or cringe as your experience and philosophy tell you.
>><http://www.npatterson.net/rcwp/grammarrcwp.htm>
>>
>>Nancy
>>
>>At 11:59 AM 6/30/01 -0400, you wrote:
>> > Paul's example is a fine one--starting with the students' perception
>> >of a certain general characteristic in the style of the text, and tracing
>> >that charactertistic back to a grammatical feature. This seems to me
to be
>> >what "discovering" grammar is about. It could be extended to many
responses
>> >that students have to texts, maybe even the vaguest ones, such as "it's
>> >descriptive" and "it's hard to follow." Traditionally, it seems to me,
>> >classroom discussions of literature move toward interpretation and become
>> >quite general quite quickly; students often get into discussions and
simply
>> >stop looking at the book. (I tell them, as a professor of mine did once,
>> >"Don't think; look.") The awareness of style and its effects is not a
>> >particularly strong thread in English education. But the language arts
>> >goals stress the value of meaningful discusssions of language, and so
>> >students should have practice in articulating their impressions of a style
>> >and then understanding the qualities, including the grammatical ones, that
>> >create the style. Not always easy to do. Thus Paul's comments are
helpful.
>> >Maybe to teach confidently this way, teachers would benefit from a greater
>> >repertoire of "grammar in the context of literature" examples.
>> >
>> >On another aspect of grammar and reading, I recall some discussion on this
>> >listserv a few months ago suggesting anecdotally that going over basic
>> >sentence patterns during a reading course had improved reading
comprehension
>> >among weak readers (native English speakers). That is something I want to
>> >try the next time I teach developmental reading. If it is true, it
seems to
>> >me very significant. (The reverse is very likely true--the more one
reads,
>> >the easier it is to grasp sentence patterns, and grammar in general.
But we
>> >would expect that.) If some formal exposure to sentence structure
>> >configurations helps weak readers, that seems to me as important as the
>> >saying that knowing grammar improves writing--and may be just as
elusive to
>> >prove one way or the other.
>> >
>> >Brock Haussamen
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>Nancy G. Patterson
>>Portland Middle School, English Dept. Chair
>>Portland, MI 48875
>>
>>"To educate as the practice of freedom is a way of teaching that anyone can
>>learn."
>>
>>--bell hooks
>>
>> [log in to unmask]
>>http://www.msu.edu/user/patter90/opening.htm
>>http://www.npatterson.net/mid.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"
>>
>>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
>Dr. Elizabeth Spalding
>Assistant Professor
>Department of Curriculum and Instruction
>309 Dickey Hall
>University of Kentucky
>Lexington, KY 40506-0017
>Phone:(606)257-4127
>Fax: (606)257-1602
>[log in to unmask]
>
>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/
|
