At 04:57 PM 2/15/01 -0800, you wrote:
>I'm among those who believe that a conscious knowledge of grammar isn't
>necessary to being an excellent writer. This is because I believe that
>one internalizes any grammar with sufficient exposure and motivation.
>The exposure in this case would be reading many, many well-written
>texts. I also believe this because writing happens too fast for one to
>be constantly consciously consulting the many rules that come into play.

First of all, I must congratulate myself for putting the "A" (appositive)
word into play - it's been mentioned a couple of times, and it seems to
epitomize the innanity of remembering the names of things grammatical.  For
example, up until recently I could not have identified a predicate
nominative if my life had depended on it.

The thrust of many recent posts on this thread seem to focus on what is it
that makes good writers, and I have my own personal theory, which in many
ways reflects yours - namely, the "exposure" theory, although I believe it
is much broader than just reading, because good writing has not only sound
grammamtical structure, but it also sounds good - to paraphrase Hamlet - to
your "mind's ear."  This is, I believe, a result of exposure not just as a
reader, but also as a talker and as a listener.

And I think that it is this total exposure to language over an entire
lifetime is the key.  Has anyone ever done a study of great writers to see
what their family backgrounds are - and not just the best-known writers,
but also the everyday great writers for publications such as the Wall St.
Journal, The New Yorker, etc.?

Geoff Layton

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/