ATEG Archives

July 2000

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:
David D Mulroy <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 18 Jul 2000 21:59:47 -0500
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (15 lines)
What is the real value of understanding grammar?  I've never thought that
it had anything to do with avoiding superficial "errors."  Just as a
person who understands terms like mammal and reptile is likely to pick
up more from a visit to a zoo than the guy who lumps all animals into
the same category, a person who understands the terms noun and
verb, subject and predicate etc. is likely to absorb more from language --
or so it seems to me. If this is true, there should be a higher
correlation between the understanding of grammatical terminology and
general vocabulary than between knowledge of other terminologies and
general vocabulary.  I'm wondering if anyone in ATEG knows of any research
bearing on this hypothesis.  Or if anyone has any thoughts on testing it
empirically.  (Thought you might enjoy a sentence fragment!)

Great conference, btw.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2