Janet,
What an interesting example! It almost seems as if each sentence is
backward, with the important information first. I suspect this student
would never talk this way, but is treating writing as if it were a
strange language. We sometimes eat too much because we buy food in big
containers? I'm guessing.
You're right; all the information seems in the wrong places.
Craig
I have always worked with developmental writers at the college level (32
> years). In all that time, I don't think I have ever tried to teach
> students to vary sentence starts. The only time I talk to students
> about how sentences start is if they are starting sentences in a way
> that interferes with such things as old-new information placement,
> coherence and other factors which interfere with the reader's ability to
> understand.
>
> The following is a passage written by a student exiting a developmental
> composition class. Several of the sentences seem to illustrate this
> problem. It's not that the sentences are too uniform; it's that the
> information seems to show up in the wrong place. My personal take on
> this is that the student is learning to use sources and write more
> sophisticated sentences, but she hasn't had a lot of practice. It's
> pretty easy for students to get into a sentence and then not be able to
> figure out how to get out. Also, she may not have been taught to
> consider the needs of her audience. We use a sentence combining workbook
> in these classes; I think I see evidence that she is trying to use some
> of those structures. I think students at this stage need assistance in
> learning to make conscious choices about sentence structure which will
> lead to clearer, more coherent, and reader-friendly writing. Of course,
> I am fortunate that at my institution, classes are small, so I have time
> to work with students individually.
>
>
> "For example, eating a great amount of popcorn in a large container
> proves a behavior in mind and not of hunger. It is an amazing discovery
> of what this can do in our behavior. A choice that is made by the mind
> and not the stomach is part of a behavior and choice that we tend to
> make. An educator discovered that food size does matter in the way of
> making the right choice. This is one study of method discovered by an
> educator by the name of Brian Wansink, who attempted several different
> scientific tests. Comparing size portions of food and the size of
> dishware has a lot to do with how choices and behaviors are made by
> people discovered by Mr. Wansink, the author of the book," Mindless
> Eating." Decisions made by people are like a structural design of
> choices was another discovery made by a psychologist. The way choices
> are presented to people is a question of making the right one. The point
> is, we need to consider the importance of making the right decisions,
> eating habits, and the state of mind."
>
> Janet
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 5:59 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Sentences beginning with conjunctions
>
> It's a delight to be away from the list for a day and then find my
> position so well argued in the meantime.
> The "training wheels" metaphor would work if "varying sentence
> openers"
> was an easier way to write. It's not. It's a little like trying to get
> kids to learn to ride with one eye shut. It's not good advice or good
> training.
>
> Craig>
>
> Varying sentence openings is a topic in every handbook ever written,
>> beginning in very early years---at least by grade seven, I'm sure---
>> and continuing into every college handbook on the market. You'd think
>> with that much repetition, it would have taken hold somewhere along
>> the line.
>> I'd rather see the space devoted to how to achieve coherence.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>> On May 18, 2009, at 9:58 PM, Jan Kammert wrote:
>>
>>> I think it was someone on this list who, months ago, talked about
>>> training wheels in teaching. Telling students to vary the way their
>>> sentences start seems to me like training wheels.
>>>
>>> Eventually the wheels come off. It is hard to get those wheels off
>>> for some kids, though. Today a student told me that a sentence
>>> cannot start with a pronoun. I have never heard that one before!
>>>
>>> Are you familiar with 6 trait writing? One of the traits is
>>> sentence fluency. One part of sentence fluency is starting
>>> sentences in different ways. Craig, if you can look at 6 trait
>>> writing, I'd love to hear what you think about it.
>>> Jan
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Original message from Susan van Druten
> <[log in to unmask]
>>> >: ----------
>>>
>>>
>>>> Craig,
>>>> Unless you have taught average students in high school (or younger
>>>> grades), I think you should rethink your stance. Don't just trust me
>>>> on this. Maybe others who are on this list will chime in: Is
>>>> teaching struggling writers to consider varying their sentence start
>>>> is a helpful strategy? If you were intimately familiar with that
>>>> type of student writing, you would know that I am not exaggerating
>>>> just how robotic their essays can be.
>>>>
>>>> When I cover parallel structure in AP and honors classes, we talk
>>>> about the difference between purposeful repetition (emphasis, humor,
>>>> known-new, hooks, etc.) and repetition born by uninspired, lazy
>>>> writing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 18, 2009, at 8:30 AM, Craig Hancock wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Susan,
>>>>> If I saw the same writing, I might very well agree that change is
>>>>> needed, but I wouldn't use "sentence variety" as a motivation. I'm
>>>>> sure
>>>>> we can find many instances where good writers maintain subjects for
>>>>> longer stretches than that. The last time this came up on the
>>>>> list, I
>>>>> was teaching Frost's "Acquainted With the Night" and observed that
>>>>> ALL
>>>>> the sentences in that poem begin with "I have." Look closely at
>>>>> Obama's
>>>>> acclaimed speech on race, and you'll see many instances of sentence
>>>>> openers repeated many times. I kn ow that because my grammar class
>>>>> worked on a passage as an optional final.
>>>>> Francis Christensen deals with many of these issues in "Notes
>>>>> toward a
>>>>> new Rhetoric" in an essay called "Sentence Openers." (Among other
>>>>> things, he reports in his samples that 8.75% of sentences in
>>>>> expository
>>>>> writing for professional writers start with the fanboy
>>>>> conjunctions. In
>>>>> fiction, it was 4.55%. He called it a sign of "a mature style.")
> The
>>>>> essay is largely an argument against calls for unique sentence
>>>>> openers
>>>>> for purposes of variety.
>>>>> He ends the essay in this way: "What we need is a rhetorical
>>>>> theory of
>>>>> the sentence that will not merely combine the ideas of primer
>>>>> sentences, but will generate new ideas. In such a rhetoric,
> sentence
>>>>> elements would not be managed arbitrarily for the sake of secondary
>>>>> concerns such as variety. They would be treated functionally and
> the
>>>>> variety--and its opposite, parallelism and balance--allowed to grow
>>>>> from the materials and the effort to communicate them to the
>>>>> reader."
>>>>> since Ed brought up the issue, I would add that he found about
>>>>> 28.5% of
>>>>> sentences in professional expository writing open with adverbials.
>>>>> The
>>>>> number is smaller (20%) for fiction. There is great variability,
>>>>> though, byu author. The highest he found was for Rachel Carson's
>>>>> "The
>>>>> Sea Around Us", 79/200, almost 40%. The most common subject in
>>>>> fiction,
>>>>> by the way, is a pronoun.
>>>>>
>>>>> Craig>
>>>>>
>>>>> Craig,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Varying sentence starts and known-new are different concepts.
>>>>>> Students should do both. You have nicely analyzed my writing, but
>>>>>> your analysis is irrelevant to my point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My students start their sentences with "He" five times in a row.
>>>>>> Or
>>>>>> "There is" or "It is" five times in a row.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 17, 2009, at 7:13 PM, Craig Hancock wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Susan,
>>>>>>> I honestly didn't get the point. But let me try again to
>>>>>>> describe your
>>>>>>> own writing. "We" brings you and I into focus. "a teacher" is the
>>>>>>> subject of the subordinate clause that starts sentence two. "I"
> is
>>>>>>> main
>>>>>>> clause subject. "That" refers back to the previous two sentences
>>>>>>> and is
>>>>>>> hardly "stylistic" in its choice. Do you start the second
>>>>>>> paragraph
>>>>>>> with "but" to prove a point? It seems a very good example of
>>>>>>> what I
>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>> talking about earlier. "A teacher" heads that sentence, a
>>>>>>> carryover
>>>>>>> from the previous paragraph and very much a given. Students then
>>>>>>> come
>>>>>>> into play, with "they" in the subordinate clause subject slots.
> "A
>>>>>>> teacher" is again the subject of the next sentence. "I" is the
>>>>>>> subject
>>>>>>> of the next two sentences, and "they" (standing in for students)
>>>>>>> ends
>>>>>>> the paragraph. You are doing what I am talking about, making the
>>>>>>> starts
>>>>>>> of your sentences "given", even repeating subjects ("a teacher",
>>>>>>> "they", "I")to build coherence. In almost every case, there is
>>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>>> about the subject itself that calls attention. It's "given", with
>>>>>>> attention on the new information to follow.
>>>>>>> If you are speaking/writing about your own understandings
> (your
>>>>>>> surprise at what I believe, what you have noticed, your
>>>>>>> intentions and
>>>>>>> expectations), then "I" is the natural choice of subject. The
>>>>>>> "new"
>>>>>>> information comes in the second part of the sentences. I suspect
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> the sentences in the third paragraph are short and clipped
>>>>>>> because you
>>>>>>> want them to sound simple, but the "I" subjects don't pose a
>>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>> I do not vary my subjects. If anything, I work hard to keep a
>>>>>>> topic in
>>>>>>> focus for longer stretches of text, something I'm told the
>>>>>>> computer
>>>>>>> assessments are designed to pick up as a sign of sophistication.
>>>>>>> Inexperienced writers jump topics (and subjects) much too
>>>>>>> quickly, and
>>>>>>> it's not unusual for them to say they have been taught to do
> that.
>>>>>>> (Notice how "Inexperienced writers" is followed by "them" and
>>>>>>> "they" in
>>>>>>> the above compound sentence. "It's" is a dummy subject. "They"
>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>> starts the sentence to come.) They may be naturually coherent,
> but
>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>> been advised against following those instincts when they write.
>>>>>>> If you pick up a collection of award winning essays, you'll
> find
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> point verified essay after essay. Good writers repeat. They
>>>>>>> sustain
>>>>>>> subjects for long stretches, building in new information as they
>>>>>>> go.
>>>>>>> You also seem to do that when you write, at least in your recent
>>>>>>> post.
>>>>>>> I always spend time with classes looking at exactly this
>>>>>>> coherence
>>>>>>> building in effective texts. I underline the subjects in a
>>>>>>> paragraph of
>>>>>>> student writing just to direct attention to how quickly a topic
> is
>>>>>>> shifting in their text. They see it right away and adjust.
>>>>>>> Our advice should be based on observations about how meaning
>>>>>>> happens
>>>>>>> and on how effective writing works.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Craig
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On May 16, 2009, at 9:20 PM, Craig Hancock wrote:
>>>>>>>>> You don't help students by giving them
>>>>>>>>> a false description of language because you believe they aren't
>>>>>>>>> capable
>>>>>>>>> of the truth.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe we don't actually disagree. If a teacher actually told
> her
>>>>>>>> students that good writers never start sentences with the word
>>>>>>>> "because" or an essay that doesn't have a thesis at the end of
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> first paragraph is wrong and an example of bad writing, then I
> am
>>>>>>>> with you. That is false information.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But a teacher who tells her students that they can only
>>>>>>>>>>>>> write in
>>>>>>>> pencil, or that they must show their work, or that their essay
>>>>>>>> must
>>>>>>>> have 5 paragraphs is not giving them false information. Should
> a
>>>>>>>> teacher clarify that the rule about "because" is only for this
>>>>>>>> class
>>>>>>>> and that when they are older they may break this rule? Yes. I
>>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>> that probably does happen. I think it is too much for some
>>>>>>>> students
>>>>>>>> to process, and what they retain is just the rule itself.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Vary sentence starts" would be another example of bad advice.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am surprise that you believe this. I notice you vary your
>>>>>>>> sentence
>>>>>>>> starts. I do too. I would only break that rule to prove a
>>>>>>>> point. I
>>>>>>>> hope I have proved it. I am not sure if I have. I hope you
>>>>>>>> will let
>>>>>>>> me know.
>>>
>>> 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/
|
