Whatever . . . 

Christine 

-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Edmond Wright
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 5:27 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Defining Traditional Grammar

> Dear Richard, Christine and Jane,

What is it 'to move on'?  We might take the George Herbert poem that Gregg
cited.  The first three lines provide a context in which a LIVING child is
being referred to:  the last line subverts all that, for we now see that a
DEAD one is the referent.  Our understandings have been updated;  our
selection from the continuum has been transformed -- and this is what any
informative statement does.  We have 'moved on', and the 'entity' in
'common' acceptance is not now what it was, not the same at all.  A dialogic
effect has been achieved.  One human being has hopefully re-ordered the
sortings of the world that another is doing.  This is the core of the
Statement, the core of grammar.  So the philosophical aspect is far from
irrelevant, and it is one that students can grasp.  As Jerome Bruner says,
'ant subject can be taught effectively in some intellectually honest form to
any child at any stage of development' ('Beyond the Information Given', A
London:  Allen & Unwin, 1973, p. 413).  So this discussion is certainly not
irrelevant to teachers of grammar.

Talkers of a language begin by taking for granted that there is one entity,
one subject, one sorting common to both, that is being referred to.  But
they only TAKE FOR granted that it is, and 'take for, means 'accept
something not wholly certain AS IF it is'.  They have to do this so that the
correction, the predicate can go through, so that 'the information given'
can be improved upon, gone 'beyond'.  If they didn't start with this
hypothesis of singular reference they could never bring the DIFFERING
understandings into some kind of overlap, the overlap that (hopefully)
allows the updating to go through.

Notice that SINGULAR entityhood is not sacrosanct.  Consider this fragment
of dialogue between two bird-watchers engaged in counting birds:

A:  D'you know that bird you just counted?
B:  Well, what about it?
A:  It was two-and-a-bit leaves.

How 'singular' was B's use of the pronoun 'it'?  Or A's, for that matter?

Edmond


Dr. Edmond Wright
3 Boathouse Court
Trafalgar Road
Cambridge
CB4 1DU
England

Email: [log in to unmask]
Website: http://www.cus.cam.ac.uk/~elw33
Phone [00 44] (0)1223 350256

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/