Edith,
   Those are thoughtful suggestions. I'll take them into account and work
on a revision.

Craig>


 Craig,
> I agree completely with the last part of the sentence in (a). My concern
> was with using the word nonstandard. Even when the sentence tries to
> make clear that it does not mean incorrect or less than, it is too easy
> to read the word that way. So I would vote for a rephrasing that does
> not use the word "nonstandard."
> For the (b) part, the purpose of looking at favorite authors, as I read
> it, is to help evaluate prescriptive advice. So I am thinking that one
> could get stuck on one author who uses "nonstandard" exclusively and not
> get the broad background one needs to do that evaluation. I think it is
> quite possible to work on the phrasing to take care of this problem
> also.
>
> As I said, it's not that I disagree with the points; I'm thinking about
> how to be sure it all gets read right.
> Thanks.
> Edith
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 1:13 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: position on Standard English
>
> Edith,
>   Thanks for the suggestions and the positive response.
>   I think the last part of (a) is meant to distinguish between
> "standard"
> and "correct". "Correct" has tended to mean something like "inherently
> better", regardless of context. The point would carry over to your
> objections in (b) as well; I like the idea that students would notice
> the way community languages find their way into writing. I think it was
> Paule Marshall who recounts ("Poets in the Kitchen") how finding work of
> writers like Dunbar (in dialect) made her feel she, too, could be a
> writer. To do so successfully, of course, means paying attention to the
> structure (nature) of the dialect. It's like the "contrastive analysis"
> that Johanna and Rebecca have been talking about. It actually deepens
> our understanding of the standard if we can describe rule patterned
> variation. Part of that, of course, means paying attention to the ways
> (contexts) in which it can be used effectively.
>   You can't write fiction or drama without an ear for speech. Paul has
> reminded us from time to time how important that is to an actor.
>    Of course, those reasons for the language could be made more
> explicit.
> I don't mean to defend this particular wording.
>
> Craig>
>
>
> I have a couple of responses for consideration:
>> In (a) I would prefer not using the term "nonstandard" at all. What
>> about just ending the sentence after "important resources?"
>>
>> And in (b) the part about examining authors that the students admire
>> might need a little re-thinking for phrasing. Students can certainly
>> find fiction that would not conform to Standard English at all.
>>
>> Thanks for the good work on this. Can we get NCTE to endorse it?
>>
>> Edith Wollin
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 6:56 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: position on Standard English
>>
>>    This is a draft position on Standard English as worked out through
>> much discussion by the New Public Grammar group and presented to the
>> ATEG conference this past July.
>>    This fits in well with our recent discussion on "code-switching" as
>
>> an approach to non-standard dialects. I think we are looking for a
>> more comprehensive exploration of language for all students, but
>> "code-switching" would fit as a step toward accomplishing the goals
>> set out below for a particularly at-risk community. Rebecca's program
>> both affirms the value (and rule-driven) nature of community languages
>
>> and helps make Standard English more explicit.
>>    Here's the draft position. Comments, of course, are welcome.
>>
>> ATEG Scope and Sequence Project     July, 2006
>>
>> Position on Standard English
>>
>> 1)  Each student has a right to the tools necessary to a confident and
>
>> competent public voice, including an understanding of Standard
> English.
>>    a)  We define Standard English as the language of mainstream
>> American public life.  It is not inherently better or more "correct"
>> than minority or regional dialects, but valuable in being the shared
>> language of public life.  Community languages that differ from it
>> should be thought of as valuable community languages and important
>> resources, as nonstandard, but not incorrect or wrong.
>>     b)  Standard English is better described by the corpus grammars
>> than by the prescriptive handbooks, which are often at odds with
>> current practice and generations behind.  It is a living, viable,
>> changing language, not a rigid and set one, and it gets much of its
>> vitality from the contributions of a diverse people. Students should
>> have a deep enough understanding of language to weigh prescriptive
> advice.
>> Students should be encouraged to look closely at the work of writers
>> they admire. They should understand that Standard English includes
>> many levels of formality and that language conventions differ widely
>> in different public domains.
>>     c)  Written languages require somewhat arbitrary conventions for
>> the representation of language in a written form, and students should
>> have the tools necessary for mastery of these.  This includes
>> standardized spelling, including spelling that shades into syntax. It
>> also includes a deep enough understanding of syntax to fully
>> understand the syntax based conventions for punctuation.  We do not
>> believe most people can master punctuation on the basis of intuition
>> or "feel", especially if those are meant to lead toward conventional
>> choices defined in more analytic ways. This also includes attribution
>> conventions, which are important tools in ensuring honesty and
>> integrity in the language of academic and public life.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> 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/
>>
>
> 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/
>

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/