This message was originally submitted by [log in to unmask] to the
ATEG
 
I am replying to part of Ed Vavra's message (as follows):
 
> Burkhard,
>      Perhaps part of the problem here is that we are
> thinking in terms of different audiences. Could you tell
> us what you teach, and to whom? Those of us who
> are teaching grammar and writing to American middle,
> high school, and Freshman college students appear to
> be looking for a simple (not simplistic) way of teaching
> students how words function in sentences, i.e., how
> words syntactically relate to each other. We hope (and
> believe) that if students understand this, they will better
> understand how the words in their own writing (and
> reading) interrelate. Most of us are not interested in
> linguistics, or even grammar per se.
 
Ed, I realize that you know much more about the membership of ATEG
than I do, so maybe your generalization above is a fair one.
However, as a not-very-active ATEG member and avid reader of this
forum (except when it degenerates into discussions of whether commas
belong inside or outside of quotation marks), I would like to dissent
from your statement that "most of us are not interested in
linguistics, or even grammar per se."  It certainly does not
characterize me, nor does it seem to characterize others who have
contributed some very worthwhile things to the discussions that go on
here.
 
 As a linguist who is also the father of middle and high
school students who are forced to study grammar, I am appalled at
what is taught to my children in the name of "grammar"
and even more appalled to think of the profits that so-called grammar
textbook authors and publishers are raking in because high school
students in NW Iowa are forced to spend so much time rote memorizing
traditional grammar terms and other minutiae of written language
usage.
 
You seem to be interested in the "utility" of what is taught
to students, especially with reference to their writing.  I feel more
concerned with (a) the "truth" of what is taught [does it fit
coherently with the facts of our language?] and (b) the skills of
critical thinking that may be developed (or stifled) by what is
taught about languages and how they work.   Ergo, for me linguistics
must play an important role in informing the teaching of grammar at
the secondary and tertiary levels.   Are ATEG people who think this
way about grammar instruction only a tiny minority?
 
Mike Medley
 
 
 
**********************************************************************
R. Michael Medley       VPH 211                Ph: (712) 737-7047
Assistant Professor     Northwestern College
Department of English   Orange City, IA  51041
**********************************************************************