On Tue, 31 Dec 1996 16:58:19 -0800 Johanna Rubba said:
>I think that if there is a future in applying linguistic theory to the
>teaching of grammar in schools, it is going to come from the connection
>between form and meaning/function. I think that is a more profitable road
>to go down than an approach which baldly states that grammar and meaning
>are separate components of language. And I'm biased, but I also think
>that approach explains more!
 
Let's take seriously this claim.  To control standard punctuation practices,
native speakers of English need to differentiate coordinating conjunctions from
subordinating conjunctions from conjunctive adverbs.  Now, most of the
handbooks list them.  The implication is that the distinction is ad hoc or
not very obvious.  That is not the case, however.   The following three
sentences mean, for all intents and purposes, the same.
 
   1)  Rush is a big wind bag, but people still listen to him.
   2)  Rush is a big wind bag although people still listen to him.
   3)  Rush is a big wind bag; however, people still listen to him.
 
If there is no obvious meaning difference across these three sentences, then
an approach which looks for a form/meaning connection is problematic for
motiviating the categories of the conjuctions.  On the other hand, it is
very easy to show that three types of conjunctions are different syntactically.
Notice that `but' can't move. `Although' and its clause can move to the front
of the independent clause.  `However' moves within its clause.  Those are
properties of the three conjunctions that make absolutely no appeal to
meaning and are properties that every native speaker knows.
 
Let me give one more example from an applied linguistic perspective
that an appeal to form/meaning reveals nothing.  Notice the verbs enjoy and
please "mean" approximately the same.
 
      4) I enjoy reading about Newt's troubles.
      5) Reading about Newt's troubles please me.
 
Note that the nouns are perhaps even closer.
 
      6) It gives me great pleasure/enjoyment to read about Newt's troubles.
 
The syntactic properties of the verbs are clearly different.  Now what is
interesting is how non-native speakers of English have such difficulty with
verbs like please (I am *boring (when bored is expected) in this class/ I
am *interesting in new fashions, etc.)  Again, if meaning/form are so connected
why should such verbs be so problematic for non-native speakers.  After all,
they demonstrate the meaning of such verbs in their non-target structures.
 
Of course, the other great mystery is why native speakers never seem to have
such difficulty with such verbs when meaning seems so close.
 
I think I have given two problems that native and non-native speakers
have in trying to control standard English that an appeal to form/meaning
provide to help in explaining the problem let alone offering insights in to
teach them.
 
Bob Yates, Central Missouri State University, [log in to unmask]