ATEG Archives

December 2004

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML 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:
kaboyates <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 31 Dec 2004 09:55:07 -0600
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2064 bytes) , text/html (2694 bytes)
It is tiresome to read about the shortcomings of a
transformational-generative grammar approach without understanding why
it remains an important perspective for many who study the nature of
language as their academic discipline.  Here is an example of  what I mean.

>Diagramming is especially useful for visual learners.  If it fell
>out of favor, I suppose that was due to the influence of
>transformational-generative grammar, but TG grammar is especially focused
>on "deep" structures, not on the surface structures that get
>diagrammed.
>
Consider two famous sentences that are used to argue for the importance
of an abstract representation for purposes of interpretation.

1) John is easy to please.
2) John is eager to please.

In (1), John is the one being pleased, but in (2) John is the one doing
the pleasing.

My understanding is that a concern for SURFACE STRUCTURE would not be
able to show this.  Conventional diagramming (and I may be wrong on
this) would diagram (1) and (2) the same.

Conventional diagramming could show this difference, but that would
require the addition of some "abstract" form to capture that John is the
underlying object of please in (1) but is the underlying subject of
please in (2).  Such an addition would destroy the "advantage" of
diagramming as showing "surface" structures.

This example is important for any teacher of English (L1 or L2) to
understand.  There are any number of examples of L2 learners
interpreting (1) as John doing the pleasing (in other words, just like
(2)), and Carol Chomsky has shown that many L1 learners of English until
about the age of eight also interpret (1)  like (2).

> There is room for both approaches.
>
This may be the case, but I don't understand the need for an approach
which does not accurately describe the knowledge that all competent
speakers of the language know.

Bob Yates, Central Missouri State University



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/


ATOM RSS1 RSS2