Some types of writing error are in fact attempts to do things that speech does well but writing, especially formal writing, can't do so well. Comma splices often combine two clause where one clause would be spoken with a lower intonation contour to indicate that it is not being asserted. This is a meaning we convey easily in conversation but with some difficulty in writing. The dash is problematical precisely because it provides a way to interrupt the grammatical structure of a sentence, something that, again, we do easily in conversation but not so easily in writing. To use a dash well takes some practice, and most freshman writers don't have that practice--they need to experiment, but their instructors tend to penalize them for doing so.
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 12:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some music about"
Thank you. It actually is an informal post. I guess I was concerned with 1) comma splices and 2) is the second dash always necessary?
--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 8/13/14, Stahlke, Herbert <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some music about"
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 11:47 AM
I'd say it's a matter of
register. It's certainly not formal academic writing. The average freshman comp instructor would probably label it a sentence fragment. Hoowever, in dialog or in informal writing of other sorts it strikes me as both grammatical and apt. It has a clear topic-comment structure. Before the dash is background information, and after the dash is the predicate. Omission of subject pronoun and Be verb is a marker of informal, casual style.
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 10:59 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some music about"
Herbert,
Please help with the following:
Is this grammatically wrong?
"Running errands, doing the laundry, walking the dogs--ready for this day to be over."
Thanks!
--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 7/11/14, Stahlke, Herbert <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some music about"
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Friday, July 11, 2014, 11:43 AM
<[log in to unmask]>,<[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [216.183.137.164]
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:
x-forefront-prvs: 02698DF457
x-forefront-antispam-report:
SFV:NSPM;SFS:(377454003)(199002)(189002)(36756003)(106116001)(2171001)(80022001)(21056001)(31966008)(89122001)(19625215002)(20776003)(95666004)(107886001)(16236675004)(76482001)(64706001)(79102001)(99396002)(19580405001)(85852003)(66066001)(2656002)(74502001)(88552001)(83322001)(93886003)(99286002)(83072002)(19580395003)(81542001)(74662001)(106356001)(92566001)(50986999)(101416001)(92726001)(85306003)(54356999)(75432001)(76176999)(105586002)(87936001)(4396001)(77982001)(46102001)(19627405001)(81342001)(107046002)(86362001)(18121605002)(19627315001)(19607625011);DIR:OUT;SFP:;SCL:1;SRVR:CO2PR05MB684;H:CO2PR05MB682.namprd05.prod.outlook.com;FPR:;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoNoRecords;MX:1;LANG:en;
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_000_140509342553356225bsuedu_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: bsu.edu
X-Miami-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-Miami-MailScanner-ID: s6BFhmmO029062
X-Miami-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-Miami-MailScanner-From: [log in to unmask]
X-Spam-Status: No
--_000_140509342553356225bsuedu_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1256"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'd like to take Craig's thoughts a step further. As one who began his lin= guistic life doing field work on languages he knew little about, I'm sensit= ive to the influence a standard orthography has on our analyses. Suppose y= ou were doing field work on English with no orthography and little other in= formation to rely on--or be misled by. When you hear /aimn@go/ you would b= y no stretch of the imagination connect that to "I am going to go." Rather= , you'd identify the first person singular subject pronoun, the /m/ perhaps=
marking progressive aspect (although you'd properly have doubts about that=
conclusion), and the /n@/ as some sort of future or intentional marker wor= thy of considerably more research. Maybe, after comparing a number of dial= ects you might come up with a historical internal reconstruction that relat= ed the form to "am going to," but that would have about as much bearing on = your synchronic grammatical description as the equally historical discovery=
that the -t of "height" and the -th of "width" are the same thing.
I fear sometimes that the extent to which our descriptions look like our or= thography or our grammatical traditions, they are not evidence-based. The = fact is that the results of grammaticalization are frequently not recoverab= le except by diligent study by trained grammarians; they remain opaque to n= ormal native speakers.
Herb
Herbert F. W. Stahlke, Ph.D.
Emeritus Professor of English
Ball State University
Muncie, IN 47306
[log in to unmask]
________________________________
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask] DU> on behalf of Hancock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 10:13 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some musi= c about"
Bob,
Phonetic reduction is a dynamic process directly related to frequency. = Since =93going to=94 can now combine in auxiliary like ways with main verbs= , its use has dramatically expanded. Frequency of use correlates well with = phonetic reduction. It=92s an observation about how language shifts in form=
as it takes on new (expanded) function. Want to has expanded range of use = in the same way. The same patterns are at work in its reduction.The consens= us seems to be that it has modal like qualities.
Biologists make observations about form all the time without thinking o= f life itself as a formal system. What we need, I think, is the equivalent = of an anatomy and physiology. In the world of biology, the two are dynamica= lly connected. No one would argue (scientifically) that biological forms ar= e independent of function and no one would propose that forms are unimporta= nt.
In the biological world, it=92s hard to draw strict clear lines between=
categories in part because adaptation is constant.
Bybee=92s point=97and s=
he=92s not the only one making it=97is that language is more like biology t= han it is like physics and chemistry. In some ways, this is a renewed inter= est in empirical observation. This is certainly not a retreat from form.
Craig
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask] AMIOH.EDU] On Behalf Of Bob Yates
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 6:16 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some musi= c about"
I=92m confused by the following observation from Craig.
Sent from Windows Mail
From: Hancock, Craig G<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Sent: =FDThursday=FD, =FDJuly=FD =FD10=FD, =FD2014 =FD2=FD:=FD06=FD =FDPM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
As Bybee points out, the kind of phonetic reduction we get with 'gonna' and=
oughtta' is typical of grammaticalization. We don't say "I'm gonna New Yor= k" for "I'm going to New York," but we do say "I'm gonna take the train to = New York" or "It's gonna rain." We only use it for expressions of intention=
and prediction, which are modal in function. This would be a good formal a= rgument for "going to"
functioning as a constituent group when modal functi= ons are carried out, but not for physical
movement: going plus to New York.
Now, if I understand Craig correctly, language is not a formal system, yet = he just made a formal distinction between =93going to=94 verb vs.=94 going =
to=94 location. It seems to me that we are dealing with two different to= =92s. The to in =93going
to=94 marks a verb and the to in making a locatio= n is a preposition.
By the way, gonna reduction is also reflected in wanna.
Bob Yates, University of Central Missouri
--_000_140509342553356225bsuedu_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1256"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type"
content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1= 256"> <style type=3D"text/css"
style=3D"display:none"><!-- p { margin-top: 0px; m=
argin-bottom: 0px; } @font-face { font-family: Calibri; } @font-face { font=
-family: Tahoma; } p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0in 0= in 0.0001pt;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; } a:li= nk, span.MsoHyperlink { color: blue;
text-decoration:
underline; } a:visite=
d, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed { color: purple;
text-decoration: underline; }=
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate { margin:
0in 0in 0.0001pt; fo=
nt-size: 8pt; font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif; } p.MsoListParagraph, li.Mso= ListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; font-=
size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; } p.msolistparagraphcxsp= first, li.msolistparagraphcxspfirst, div.msolistparagraphcxspfirst { margin=
: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; line-height: 115%; font-size:
12pt; font-family: =
'Times New Roman', serif; }
p.msolistparagraphcxspmiddle, li.msolistparagra= phcxspmiddle, div.msolistparagraphcxspmiddle { margin:
0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5= in; line-height: 115%;
font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', ser= if; } p.msolistparagraphcxsplast, li.msolistparagraphcxsplast, div.msolistp= aragraphcxsplast { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in;
line-height: 115%; font-=
size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; } span.BalloonTextChar {=
font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif; } span.EmailStyle25 {
font-family: Calibr=
i, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); } .MsoChpDefault {
font-size: 10pt;=
} @page WordSection1 { margin: 1in;
}--></style> </head> <body
dir=3D"ltr"> <div id=3D"OWAFontStyleDivID"
style=3D"font-size:12pt;color:#000000;backgro=
und-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<p>I'd like to take Craig's thoughts a step further.
As one who began=
his linguistic life doing field work on languages he knew little about, I'= m sensitive to the influence a standard orthography has on our analyses.
&n= bsp;Suppose you were doing field work on English
with no orthography and little other information to rely on--or be misled = by. When you hear /aimn@go/ you would by no stretch of the imaginatio= n connect that to "I am going to go." Rather, you'd identif= y the first person singular subject pronoun, the /m/
perhaps marking progressive aspect (although you'd properly have doub= ts about that conclusion), and the /n@/ as some sort of future or intention= al marker worthy of considerably more research.
Maybe, after comparin=
g a number of dialects you might come up with
a historical internal reconstruction that related the form to "am goi= ng to," but that would have about as much bearing on your synchronic g= rammatical description as the equally historical discovery that the -t of &= quot;height" and the -th of "width" are the same
thing. </p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I fear sometimes that the extent to which our descriptions look like our=
orthography or our grammatical traditions, they are not evidence-based. &n= bsp;The fact is that the results of grammaticalization are frequently not r= ecoverable except by diligent study by
trained grammarians; they remain opaque to normal native speakers.<br> </p> <p><br> </p> <p>Herb <br> </p> <div> <p><br> </p> <p><br> </p> <div class=3D"BodyFragment"><font size=3D"2"> <div class=3D"PlainText">Herbert F. W. Stahlke, Ph.D.<br> Emeritus Professor of English<br> Ball State University<br> Muncie, IN 47306<br> [log in to unmask]</div> </font></div> </div> <div
style=3D"color: rgb(33, 33, 33);"> <hr tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"display:inline-block; width:98%"> <div id=3D"divRplyFwdMsg"
dir=3D"ltr"><font face=3D"Calibri, sans-serif"
co= lor=3D"#000000"
style=3D"font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b>
Assembly for the Teac=
hing of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Hanc= ock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]><br> <b>Sent:</b> Friday, July 11, 2014 10:13 AM<br> <b>To:</b> [log in to unmask]<br> <b>Subject:</b> Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna wr= ite me some music about"</font> <div> </div> </div> <div> <div class=3D"WordSection1"> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C= alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D">Bob,</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C= alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D">
Phon= etic reduction is a dynamic process directly related to frequency. Since = =93going to=94 can now combine in auxiliary like ways with main verbs, its = use
has dramatically expanded. Frequency of use correlates well with phonetic = reduction.
It=92s an observation about how language shifts in form as it ta= kes on new (expanded) function.
<i>Want to</i> has expanded range of use in the same way. The same patterns=
are at work in its reduction.The consensus seems to be that it has modal l= ike qualities.</span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C= alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D">
Biol= ogists make observations about form all the time without thinking of life i= tself as a formal system. What we need, I think, is the equivalent of an
anatomy and physiology. In the world of biology, the two are dynamically c= onnected. No one would argue (scientifically) that biological forms are ind= ependent of function and no one would propose that forms are unimportant.
</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C= alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D">  =
;In the biological world, it=92s hard to draw strict clear lines between ca= tegories in part because adaptation is constant. Bybee=92s point=97and she= =92s not the
only one making it=97is that language is more like biology than it is like=
physics and chemistry. In some ways, this is a renewed interest in empiric= al observation.
This is certainly not a retreat from form.
</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C= alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C= alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D">Craig</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C= alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<div>
<div style=3D"border:none; border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt; padding:3.0pt 0i= n 0in 0in"> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><b><span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt; font-family:&quo= t;Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span
style=3D"font-=
size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
Assemb=
ly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Bob Yates<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, July 10, 2014 6:16 PM<br> <b>To:</b> [log in to unmask]<br> <b>Subject:</b> Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna wr= ite me some music about"</span></p> </div> </div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"> </p> <div> <div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif"">I=92m confused by the following observation from Craig.<= /span></p> </div> <div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif""> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif""> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif""> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif"">Sent from Windows
Mail</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif""> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div style=3D"border:none; border-top:solid
#E5E5E5 1.0pt; padding:4.0pt 0i= n 0in 0in"> <div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><b><span style=3D"font-family:"Calibri",&q=
uot;sans-serif";
letter-spacing:.25pt">From:</span></b><span
style=3D"=
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
letter-spacing:.25p=
t"> <a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]"
target=3D"_parent">Hancock,=
Craig G</a><br>
<b>Sent:</b> =FDThursday=FD,
=FDJuly=FD =FD10=FD, =FD2014 =FD2=FD:=FD0= 6=FD =FDPM<br> <b>To:</b> <a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]"
target=3D"_par=
ent">[log in to unmask]</a></span><span
style=3D"font-family:"C=
alibri","sans-serif""></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif""> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div id=3D"OWAFontStyleDivID">
<p style=3D"background:white"><em><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri&=
quot;,"sans-serif";
color:black">As Bybee points out,
t</span></e= m><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
co=
lor:black">he kind of phonetic reduction we get with 'gonna' and oughtta' i= s typical
of grammaticalization. We don't say "I'm gonna New York" for &qu= ot;I'm going to New York," but we do say "I'm gonna take the trai= n to New York" or "It's gonna rain." We only use it for expr= essions of intention and prediction, which are modal in function. This woul= d
be a good formal argument for "going to" functioning as a consti= tuent group when modal functions are carried out, but not for physical move=
ment:
<em><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">=
going</span></em> plus <em><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri",&=
quot;sans-serif"">to New
York</span></em>. </span></p>
<p style=3D"background:white"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri"=
;,"sans-serif";
color:black"> </span></p>
<p style=3D"background:white"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri"=
;,"sans-serif"; color:black">Now, if I understand Craig correctly= , language is not a formal system, yet he just made a formal distinction be= tween =93going to=94 verb vs.=94 going
to=94 location. It seems
to me that we are dealing with two different to=92s. The to in = =93going to=94 marks a verb and the to in making a location is a&= nbsp;preposition. </span></p> <p style=3D"background:white"><span style=3D"font-family:"Calibri"=
;,"sans-serif";
color:black"> </span></p>
<p style=3D"background:white"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri"=
;,"sans-serif"; color:black">By the way, gonna reduction is = also reflected in wanna. </span></p> <p style=3D"background:white"><span style=3D"font-family:"Calibri"=
;,"sans-serif";
color:black"> </span></p>
<p style=3D"background:white"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri"=
;,"sans-serif"; color:black">Bob Yates, University of Central Mis= souri </span></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </body> </html>
--_000_140509342553356225bsuedu_--
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/
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/
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/
|
