David's post below has some really interesting detail about the
historical progress of grammar teaching.

David, any chance we can have a few titles/references on the
changing situation of grammar in the schools in these early
periods?

From:                   David D Mulroy <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:                Re: Deep thoughts
To:                     [log in to unmask]

> I think that you are mistaken about Shakespeare.  He and the other
> authors of the English Renaissance benefited from a return
> to basic grammar that had been decreed by Henry VIII. In the fifteenth
> century, grammatical instruction in the schools had suffered because
> scholars were preoccupied with theoretical or speculative grammars that
> raised some of the same philosophical issues as contemporary linguists
> address.
>
> Shakespeare's  basic textbook was Lily's grammar.  It is true that this is
> aimed at Latin but it is based on grammatical concepts that are easily
> transferred to English and have to be if they are to be understood. As a
> Latinist, I can assure you that English speakers do not and cannot learn
> about sentence subjects, prepositional phrases, participles, the passive
> voice, or appositives in Latin without understanding what they they refer
> to in English.  Shakespeare seems to me to be the clearest imaginable
> example of author who benefits from a deep, conscious understanding of
> grammar.  I suppose you could say that you he and the other masters of the
> 17th century show that you don't need to STUDY ENGLISH grammar, but that's
> only if you start Latin in the first grade, approach it with a grammatical
> syllabus, and make it the main subject studied.
>

-----------------------------------------------------
Sincerely, Robert Einarsson
please visit me at
www.artsci.gmcc.ab.ca/people/einarssonb

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/