Johanna Rubba wrote:
 
> Am I right in sensing a kind of disconnect on this list between some
> posters and others?
 
> We've had a discussion going on correcting grammar, and now one on
> 'ain't', and those concerned with 'what is correct' (Christine Gray,
> Donald Hocking, Bob Yates) don't seem to be responding to those who
> have responded to their messages with attempts to lay out a point of view
> which urges against the notions 'correct' and 'incorrect' where dialect
> differences are concerned, with arguments about whether or not the
> 'correct/incorrect' point of view can cause real harm.
 
I appreciate Johanna's insightful postings on matters of dialect variation
urging a viewpoint that such variation is not 'right' or 'wrong'and that
dubbing the variation so can cause harm to the student in the long run.
 
Strikes me that the issue of whether a piece of language is
'correct' or 'incorrect' goes beyond dialect differences into
the more general matters of how one views grammar in the classoom.
 
So, when a student uses a sentence fragment or a run on, or when they use the
wrong word, or stumble through other grammatical constructions (in attempt to
produce the standard dialect), teachers often characterize these language
issues in the same terms as have been cropping up in the dialect discussion --
'correct', or 'incorrect'.
 
Since anything that varies from the letter-of-the-law standard is often dubbed
'incorrect' (be it dialect variation [black english vs. standard english],
or variation off the grammatical standard for a given dialect [fragments/runons
, comma splices, word choice, etc. within the standard dialect),
it suggests to me that we all too often fall into the
role of being standard enforcers (in both senses).
 
Johanna has queried why some participants on the list have not replied to her
line of argument that issues of "ain't" aren't 'correct' or 'incorrect' but
variants. She suggested, seemed to me, that these participants seem to be
holding onto the notion of correct and incorrect.
 
I believe that to move away from seeing student writing (or speaking) as
'correct' or 'incorrect' also entails re-envisioning WHAT OUR ROLES are as
teachers.  To me, the correct/incorrect stance suggests we're attempting to
produce a uniform citizenry that looks just like us. What's the point?
 
alternatively, as teachers, we can help students learn to communicate more
effectively, to explore their ideas in a more systematic manner, and to express
that exploration in ways that others will understnd.  For a GIVEN audience,
then, one form of expression will be more or less conducive to getting the idea
across. If a given dialect variety works, fine. If not, consider changing it.
On the grammar front within standard English, if you lose your reader over a
sentence fragment ("WHAT do I do with this piece of information? Where does it
hook in?" the reader queries and stumbles), then that fragment's a problem.
 
but neither the dialect, nor the fragment is a problem in and of itself.
It all depends on the audience you're speaking to and the purpose you're trying
to achieve.
 
I wonder how the people are adhering to it's 'correct' or 'incorrect' of the
dialect, or the fragment (for example) view their role as teacher?
 
 
cheers,
 
rebecca wheeler
 
department of english
weber state university
ogden, utah 84408-1201
 
 
> I admit that I often adopt a 'strident' tone on this issue, and maybe
> that offends some posters. I don't intend offense, of course. I am sure
> that all teachers share genuine concern for the welfare of their
> students, and that's why grammar teaching is such a hot button in the
> first place. We all also have our individual areas of experience and
> expertise, and need to share and help each other.
 
> I also fear that the sometimes strained relations between practicing
> elementary and high school teachers and college professors may be
> interfering here. I have recently had several experiences in which, in
> spite of the best intentions and a sincere effort (more effective, I'll
> admit, than my efforts on this list) to be diplomatic were met with
> presumptions about my intentions -- assumptions that, as a professor,
 linguist,
> and Ph.D., I was only trying to assert my superiority, tell teachers
> what to do, criticize them unfairly, and bring yet another dubious
> airhead theory to teachers that wouldn't help them in the classroom.
 
> I hope this isn't happening. The most important thing we do is work
> together on ways to help children realize their full potential and become
> responsible, good citizens.
 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Johanna Rubba   Assistant Professor, Linguistics              ~
> English Department, California Polytechnic State University   ~
> San Luis Obispo, CA 93407                                     ~
> Tel. (805)-756-2184  E-mail: [log in to unmask]      ~
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~