ATEG Archives

July 2006

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Phil Bralich <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 26 Jul 2006 07:44:19 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (39 lines)
>I agree with the statement you make in your article that there is 
>great confusion concerning words used to define grammatical terms. I 
>have recently reviewed 18 (eighteen) grammar books of different sizes 
>and origins, including Quirk’s “Comprehensive Grammar of the English 
>Language,“ and each one of the uses a different set of terms to 
>describe the grammar system of the English language. Standardization 
>of  grammar terminology would eliminate a lot of confusion and would 
>make different grammar books more accessible to teachers and students.

ATEG would be a good group to do this.  

>I do not have any trouble with the term *gerund* probably because I 
>learned this term when I was in grammar (junior high) school, but I 
>agree that the term is redundant. As you know, it comes from Latin 
>(gerundium), and can be easily abandoned as the term *participle* can 
>be used to describe both the verbal and the nominal functions of the 
>[-ing] form. 

The only reason I bring it up is because is so often confounding.  If the redundant and unnecessary nature of the term is pointed out, it clears students heads.  A "Ban the Gerund" movement might be eye catching and helpful to put together a list of standardized terminology.  How about the "Ban the Gerund" ATEG Working Group for the Standardization of Grammar Terminology.   

>Someone asked a question about *parts of speech,* a term which seems 
>rather counterintuitive for grammar (as grammar deals mainly with 
>written language), and I found out that some grammar book authors use 
>the term *word classes* to describe the same thing. I believe that 
>WORD CLASSES is much better than PARTS OF SPEECH to describe the 
>different categories into which we can prototypically categorize the 
>lexicon of every language.

Parts of Speech if fine for me.  It recognizes the more primary aspect of language as Speech.  The ability to analyze all Speech (not just writing) is what grammar offers.  


Phil Bralich

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/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2