On Mon, 16 Mar 1998, Robert Einarsson wrote:
 
> Johanna's rude reply to the inquiry about Latin based instruction
> shows a very poor understanding of language structure, linguistic
> epistemology, and the history of education.  It consists of re-cycled
> educationist jargon.
 
Wow! And such a poor understanding from someone who has a Ph.D. in
theoretical linguistics from the U. of California, San Diego; has been a
language teacher for a number of years, and now a teacher of linguistics
for some years. And had a wonderful education in the history of English at
the U. of Manchester from some top scholars in the field. And several
courses in philosophy of language, in which writings of, among others,
Quine, Searle, Davidson, and Rorty figured. I admit I am not
an expert in the history of education, but I am learning more about it as
I explore more for my teacher-prep and history of English classes.
 
I did, of course, expect that some would find my answer rude. I apologize
for being as abrupt as I was, and admit to indulging in a desire to shock.
 
I want to reassure those who read my postings to this list that I am not a
dilettante in the matters I write on. Nor am I an 'anything goes'
relativist who believes that the essence of children's education should
be that they are permitted to 'express themselves' freely with no
attention to form or detail. Please don't make assumptions about my
ideology or agenda without consulting me first; I don't recycle jargon,
and I don't even know what 'educationist' means. There is basis for my
claims of the inaccuracy and, yes, harm of traditional grammar in
linguistic science, educational research and the experience of many
educators and students.
 
I would like to see a proof that, for instance, nouns are subjects of
sentences, and not noun phrases; or that pronouns take the place of nouns
and not noun phrases; or that a sentence expresses a 'complete thought'.
Yet these are the claims made in most, if not all, of the textbooks on
grammar recently adopted by the State of California for use in the
schools.
 
I have visited Mr. Einarsson's interesting website and look forward to
reading his paper on grammar as language theory. I read some bits of the
18th century writings on grammar and found them intriguing (keeping in
mind, however, that these are writers who had had virtually no exposure to
languages such as Greenlandic Eskimo, which challenges every traditional
notion of 'part of speech' and 'sentence', maybe even 'word'). I don't
have time to do so now. But I will do it. A quick scan of his website
seems to indicate that he includes a lot of the things that are on my list
in his grammar syllabi.
 
Clearly, there is a split among those who care deeply about grammar
teaching and the benefits it can have for students. I believe we have
common ground in wanting the best education for children and adults, and
in wanting to inspire students to the same fascination for language and
love of its order that attracts so many of us to grammar and linguistics.
I hate to see rancorous feelings across the divide; I suppose sometimes
that can't be avoided. I ask simply that those who find my proposals
doubtful be willing to consider evidence that I think supports my claims;
and that they be willing to offer evidence that supports theirs. I
wouldn't make claims in this field at all unless I felt that I had a
scientific basis for them.
 
Maybe it will reassure some to know that I hold very strict standards when
judging my own students' writing. When they are assigned to write
something in formal English, I expect them to conform to all but the most
hopelessly dead rules of formal grammar (some rules are bound to die, as
even formal grammar changes over time). I enforce comma rules, colon
rules, apostrophe rules, 'complete sentence' rules, and larger rhetorical
standards such as coherence, good organization and careful thought to the
audience. My students are sometimes puzzled by this seeming paradox. But a
careful examination of what my beliefs about language are based on
resolves the paradox.
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Johanna Rubba   Assistant Professor, Linguistics              ~
English Department, California Polytechnic State University   ~
San Luis Obispo, CA 93407                                     ~
Tel. (805)-756-2184  E-mail: [log in to unmask]      ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~