At 04:57 PM 2/15/01 -0800, you wrote: >I'm among those who believe that a conscious knowledge of grammar isn't >necessary to being an excellent writer. This is because I believe that >one internalizes any grammar with sufficient exposure and motivation. >The exposure in this case would be reading many, many well-written >texts. I also believe this because writing happens too fast for one to >be constantly consciously consulting the many rules that come into play. First of all, I must congratulate myself for putting the "A" (appositive) word into play - it's been mentioned a couple of times, and it seems to epitomize the innanity of remembering the names of things grammatical. For example, up until recently I could not have identified a predicate nominative if my life had depended on it. The thrust of many recent posts on this thread seem to focus on what is it that makes good writers, and I have my own personal theory, which in many ways reflects yours - namely, the "exposure" theory, although I believe it is much broader than just reading, because good writing has not only sound grammamtical structure, but it also sounds good - to paraphrase Hamlet - to your "mind's ear." This is, I believe, a result of exposure not just as a reader, but also as a talker and as a listener. And I think that it is this total exposure to language over an entire lifetime is the key. Has anyone ever done a study of great writers to see what their family backgrounds are - and not just the best-known writers, but also the everyday great writers for publications such as the Wall St. Journal, The New Yorker, etc.? Geoff Layton 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/