Herb-

Thanks.  I appreciate all these patient answers to what might seem like
foolish questions.  I'm just one of those crazy people who figures if she
doesn't ask, she'll never know...

Anyway I do appreciate these posts.  Not just Herbs, either - I know many of
you have been replying, and I've found the comments helpful.  I'm just
trying not to spam our inboxes with a lot of "thank you" posts.

-patty

-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stahlke, Herbert F.W.
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 1:08 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: On innate knowledge of language

Patty,

I agree with your statement of what we don't agree on but not of what we
do agree on.  That is, the phrase "innateness of language" would mean
different things to various of us.  But we do agree that the knowledge
that permits us to perform language is not knowledge most of us can
articulate.  The knowledge about language, that allows us to identify
parts of sentences, parts of speech, etc., is explicit knowledge and is
what should be taught.  Then we get into disagreement as to what parts
of this knowledge should be taught, what they should be called, and how
and when they should be taught.

Herb

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/