I've gotten around the problem of reading "finished papers" in my UG
History of English classes by requiring that they hand in the major
paper for the course in sections scheduled across the semester. The
paper is an in-depth study of the history and usage of a word of their
choosing (I guide the choices a little at times). They first submit a
rationale for their choice; then an annotated literature review covering
the etymological and other works they plan to use; third, a
comprehensive exposition of the etymology, drawing on the OED (we've
done an assignment before then on how to read an OED entry), and finally
a discussion section, which can be socio-historical, literary, creative,
etc. (they have a lot of control over this section), that brings
together the salient historical, social, and linguistic information.
Doing it this way avoids last-minute rush jobs, gives them detailed
critique of each section for them to revise from, and produces vastly
better papers, some of which end up in their UG portfolios and a couple
have even turned into conference presentations at the annual Butler
University Undergraduate Research Conference. Students have indicated
that they like this approach. It takes away a lot of stress and steps
them gently through a very unfamiliar task.
Herb
Subject: Re: Syntax question
Johanna,
We may very well be comparing apples to oranges, and I apologize for
my role in the confusion.
I still don't have a problem with your Hrothgar sentence, though I
might suggest to a student a reversal of the name and pronoun. ("In his
speech to Beowulf, Hrothgar says...." ) I think the speech act nature
of the process probably takes out the likelihood of confusion. (Beowulf
wouldn't likely give a speech to himself.). I tried to give a parallel
example using Bush: "In his last press conference, Bush claimed..." or
"In Bush's last press conference, he claimed....", neither of which
seem problematic to me. As I said earlier, it's hard to judge outside of
context.
But clearly, students do write redundancies that are distracting,
and these overlap with these thematic openings. You may have reached for
an unclear example. (For me, at least, an unconvincing one.) I won't
argue for a minute with the idea that clear examples are out there.
I don't envy anyone the job of reading and grading "finished papers"
with no opportunity to interact with the writers during composition. If
the choice is between that and no paper at all, then do it. But I
always find a way to get an early draft to look at precisely because
the comments tend to become a defense of the grade (in a student's
mind), and we may very well be judging them on standards that are new
to their experience. Research tends to show, too, that students don't
correct "errors" as the result of red penciling them on papers. If you
work with drafts, you have a much better chance of bringing to light the
underlying principles, especially if you are offering new ways to do
something. We make comments about the meaning and then comments about
the form, and they often seem to be in completely different languages.
(This paper is very confusing and incorrect. It's a whole different
kind of attention.)
If you ask for first drafts, you might be deeply surprised at how
much more gratifying the experience becomes.
Teaching writing is hard work. Asking them to write and holding
them to high standards is very important. They won't write and they
won't work hard at it if we don't ask them to. I agree that we should
hold them to high expectations.
Craig
Johanna Rubba wrote:
> Let's clear up a few things here -- the original sentence under
> discussion was precisely the kind Bob and I have been talking about. I
> don't have it exactly, but the name appeared first:
>
> "In Hrothgar's speech to Beowulf, he ... "
>
> I objected only to the repeition of reference to Hrothgar, once via
> proper name and again via pronoun. I have no objection to introductory
> adverbials; they are fine orienters and feature in good writing.
>
> My main objection is stylistic -- as Bob notes, I doubt such
> structures appear much in mature writing. Novice writers spread info
> over excess syntactic units in other ways, too. However, there is a
> slight possibility of confusion, depending on context. The "he" might
> refer to a person mentioned in the speech; the proximity of
> male-marked "Beowulf" might also distract the rapidly-processing brain
> as it seeks antecedents for "he" (let's not forget that nouns nearer
> the verb than the "simple subject" are the prime culprits in
> subject-verb agreement errors). The context is not forgiving in the
> student examples I have seen. If it were, as I have said before, I
> would not even notice the structure as infelicitous.
>
> As to topic-comment, this terminology appears in some writing manuals
> with reference to structures such as "My father, he seldom votes".
> They are labeled outright ungrammatical, which I find a little
> extreme. I view the Beowulf example as similar. Topic-comment syntax
> is standard in some languages. A rough example I recall from my
> structure-of-Chinese course is "Elephant, nose is long", which would
> be translated as "Elephants have long noses". I can imagine a novice
> writer writing something like "As far as elephants, they have long
> noses".
>
> Considering introductory adverbials "topical" is not standard in
> discussions of syntax or writing, so far as I know. They are seen as
> orienting devices, and also can be connectors to what went before.
>
> I occasionally have students in my 300-level class who have never had
> to write a term paper before. In the main, those who have written
> papers have not been well-trained, or perhaps not held to high
> standards. A large number of them are going to be teaching writing, if
> they obtain their teaching credentials. Unfortunately, my class is not
> a writing class. It is a content class, and the students hand in a
> final draft of their term papers. For this reason, I advise them on
> how to check their papers for aspects of mature style before handing
> them in. I also urge them to use our writing lab and provide a list of
> typical problems.
>
> Lastly, with tongue in cheek and apologies to Bill McCleary, an
> illustration of how the structures under discussion slip into
> less-formal writing ...
>
> " For students who have not written a term paper before, they are
> overwhelmed."
>
> : )
>
> Johanna Rubba, Assoc. Prof., Linguistics
> Linguistics Minor Advisor
> English Department
> Cal Poly State University
> San Luis Obispo, CA 93047
> Tel. 805.756.2184
> Dept. Tel. 805.756.6374
> Home page:
> http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
>
> 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/
|
