Bob,
     It's good to find this level of agreement. My own sense is that the chess analogy is not as useful as, say, a tools analogy. We don't get things done through chess, but we do through language. So, in a sense, we haven't really acquired a circular saw if we don't know how to use it to cut angles or to mitre or to cut to a limited depth, all things my son is so much more adept at than I am. 
   But it's good to have a strong sense of agreement that the domain of grammar should include putting grammar to work It's not just about the forms.

Craig
________________________________________
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robert Yates [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 1:47 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The Domain of Grammar

The issue now is about our conception of language.  Craig is, of course, right.

>>> "Hancock, Craig G"  >>>
    Some of us seem far more articulate than others, even in non- school, non-prescriptive contexts. Some of us simply seem more adept at using language in all its manifestations.

However, is being an adept language user really the same kind of knowledge as knowing what the possible forms of the language are?

If you include that functional side to it, I don't think the assumptions hold. It's a more defensible position if you are looking primarily at forms. Native speakers speak grammatically if we decide that grammaticality is determined by what native speakers say.  Again, it seems circular to me.
   Eduard's point, even if a bit overly strident, is that many people use this reasoning as a basis for dismissing grammar from the curriculum. If our students are already "expert," then there is no value to direct study.
   This is quite different from saying that students' knowledge of language should be respected.
   From a usage based perspective, what  grammar we carry  was learned, but has now become automatic. It's there, but not something we normally notice.

 Being adept at using the language is not about our knowledge of what is possible, but being able to use that in an effective way.

It is not circular to say that I know the rules of chess, but I am not a very good chess player.  However, knowing the rules and knowing how to win is different kind of knowledge.  And, it is exactly the same for knowing what is possible in our language and how to use that knowledge effectively.

We all agree that we want our students to be effective language users and that is why we participate here.  There are those who claim that competence is enough.  Of course, such claims are wrong.

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/