Hi Herbert,

I am pleased that you noticed my posting.  Actually, there were two.   
The first followed Craig Hancock's response to Glenda Conway's query  
regarding lines from Langston Hughes' "Daybreak in Alabama":  ". . .  
I'm gonna write me some music about/ Daybreak in Alabama . . . ."

That exchange, privately responded to by two ATEG members, never  
received a public response.  Then, Marshall Myers engaged in a  
separate exchange with Glenda, a former student of his.  She replied  
that "gonna write" would be said as "fixin' to write" where she comes  
from.

I will list both of my responses ahead of the exchanges that prompted  
them.  I am interested in hearing your response.

Thanks for asking,

Gregg

*************************
First response

On July 1, 2014, at 6:08 PM, Gregg Heacock wrote:

Glenda,

Craig has referred to Joan Bybee, who has pointed out how language  
most commonly used gets bent toward a social purpose, one that binds  
the speaker to the listener together as members of a common culture.   
Given that, you might also look at other parts of that first line:   
". . . I'm gonna write me some music . . ."  What would you say about  
the word "me"?  Is it an indirect object as in "I'm gonna get me some  
food"?  Or, does it add something to the art of writing that  
intensifies the depth of the experience contained in the writing  
itself as it might be shared with others?  When language gets bent  
toward social purposes, ambiguities arise that bind us ever more  
tightly in a culture.  This, in turn, helps us survive.  If evolution  
is about the survival of the fittest, then language evolves so that  
we might evolve, as well, by ascending to greater heights through the  
vitality of our culture.  I think Langston Hughes was writing about  
that, as well.

Gregg

*************
On July 1, 2014, at 4:17 PM, Craig G. Hancock wrote:

Glenda,
     This "be going to" construction has been written about very  
thoughtfully by Joan Bybee. It has gramamticalized fairly recently  
(since Shakespeare's time) from a construction for expressing  
movement toward a place, to a construction expressing intention, to a  
construction that expresses epistemic prediction. ("I am going to New  
York. I am going to write a novel. It is going to rain hard.) In  
those last two manifestations, it can act as a substitute for "will."  
The best way to analyze your example, i think, is as modal auxiliary  
for "write." When the construction is followed by a noun ("I am going  
to the store"), "to the store" functions as a prepositional phrase.
     It's interesting to know that all our modals have  
gramamticalized from lexical verbs, most of that during the period  
for which we have written records. Bybee uses this as a key part of  
her argument for seeing language as "a complex adaptive system."
     Unlike "will," be going to can also convey past intention. ("I  
was going to pay my bills, but I ran out of money."
     Lanston Hughes' work makes for great classroom study since he  
uses nonstandard forms so thoughtfully and wisely.

Craig

*************
On July 1, 2014, at 4:17 PM, Glenda Conway wrote:

Subject: "I'm gonna write"--verb + infinitive or verb + auxiliary?

Greetings—

Today, in my Advanced English Grammar class, I showed Langston  
Hughes’s “Daybreak in Alabama” as an example of a poem with two  
sentences.

I realized while showing the poem that I was not sure how to divide  
the slots of the first main clause, which is

…I’m gonna write me some music about
Daybreak in Alabama….

Shall I think of “I’m gonna write” as being equivalent to “I will  
write,” thus considering “[a]m gonna” as an auxiliary to “write”?

Or shall I think of “I’m gonna write” as being equivalent to “I am  
going to write,” thus considering “to write…” an adverbial infinitive  
phrase?

I would love to read some discussion on this clause and to be able to  
share it with my students afterward.


Thanks,

Glenda Conway

*************************
Second response

On July 5, 2014, at 7:39 AM Gregg Heacock wrote:

Hi Glenda,

Though terminology associated with grammar and syntax is useful in  
grouping words associated with the concept of making something  
happen, I think such categorization is most productive if it leads to  
an analysis of steps taken in making things happen.  Actions break  
down into steps.  Conditionals are considerations of circumstances  
required or desired to take action.  Our ability, intent, and  
obligation are also factored in.  The question arises, though, in  
terms of focus.  If you are going to get married, "married" is the  
focus.  The same would be so if you were fixin' to get married.  But,  
what if you are preparing to get married?  When does our focus shift  
from the goal to the steps taken to achieve that goal?

The same question arises when a student writes, "I started to climb  
the fence."  How does "started" differ from the act of climbing?   
John R. Searle writes that the grammar of action breaks down into  
many steps.  But, in these, action begins with the general intent to  
act, followed by a direct intent that initiates the action, itself.   
I think that young writers have an unconscious awareness of that  
second intention that shows up in their writing as "started to."  The  
question is: What does that signify to the reader.

The other question is this:  When does a term like "fixin' to"  
achieve a cultural buy-in to what is being said because it asserts a  
shared belief:  "Around here we like take our own good time when  
doin' somethin' so it don't cause no problems."  Our brains love this  
stuff, especially that "around here" that we now hear in commercials  
selling solid principles of financial planning.  When words acquire  
strong emotional overtones, they have been bent to a social purpose  
that changes their meaning and significance to an audience.

I would say, Glenda, in connecting with Marshall as you have, you  
have introduced personal information (speaking of social purpose)  
that adds greatly to the discussion you initiated some time ago.  Let  
me go back to the beginning to ask about the use of "me" in Langston  
Hughes' line "I'm gonna write me some music . . ."  Is it like: "I'm  
gonna sit right down and write myself a letter"?  Is it like: "I'm  
gonna write it myself"?  Or, is it something else?  And, if so, what  
grammatical, syntactical term would be used to categorize it?  This  
is not a rhetorical question.  I really don't know.

Perhaps someone out there can help me.

Thanks,

Gregg

*************
On Jul 4, 2014, at 6:36 PM, Glenda Conway wrote:

Hi Marshall!

Where I live, the wording is "I'm fixin' to. We like to take our own  
good time when doing so won't cause a disaster.

Are you retired? Where are you living?

It's so good to hear you here.

Glenda

*************
On Jul 4, 2014, at 6:20 PM, Marshall Myers wrote:

Glenda,

Old classmate here!

“Going to” is many times regarded as a two-word modal auxiliary like  
the related “can,” may,” might” and others.

“I’m going to go”
“I may go.”

Marshall Myers

*************************
Herbert, I am curious to hear your response. –– Gregg
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/