Ed,
I don’t want to quibble over terms.
We do far too much of that in grammar anyway. And if gerundive works, use it.
The form/function distinction in modern grammar allows us to call and –ing
form a participle in the realm of form but to describe the different uses it
has in the realm of function. Actually, I prefer “–ing form”
to “participle”, “gerund”, or “gerundive”
because those terms come from a grammatical tradition, Latin, where they make
sense and label things that really are different while none of them describes
what –ing forms in English do. But, again, the test of terms is what
works, and only secondarily what makes sense linguistically. We’re talking
about names simply as deictics, not as full content words.
As to relative “that”, it’s
a problem only if it’s not recognized that English has zero-subjects, a
subset of what linguists call “zero-anaphora”, a phenomenon found
in a lot of languages, including English. In a linguistically well-motivated
grammar, “that” relatives involve zero anaphora. This is obvious
in “The book that I read 0”, where 0 represents the empty DO
position. But it also works in subject position. This is not a case of double
function. It’s a case of careful, well-motivated description. But in
K12 I wouldn’t introduce zero-anaphora. I’d treat it as double
function. I do, however, talk about in college grammar classes, to get
students to see how English obeys systematic principles that are found widely
in other languages. That’s a legitimate goal when training teachers. It’s
not when teaching high school kids. By the way, this analysis of relative “that”
isn’t just my oddball notion. You’ll find it also in
Huddleston&Pullum’s Cambridge English Grammar and in a large number
of syntactic studies.
Herb
Herb,
I appreciate all of your comments. As for passive voice and moveable adverbs,
in the KISS curriculum adverbs (moveable and not) and adjectives are introduced
in grade three. Passive voice is started, theoretically, in grade five. If the
curriculum is spread out over several years, many things can be included that I
basically ignore in dealing with my college students. Thus I don't spend any
time on adjectives and adverbs, and this semester I skipped the only lesson in
my materials on passive voice. There is simply not enough time to deal with
them effectively when students start at zero. I would, however, definitely
agree that both moveable adverbs and passive voice should be included in a
multi-year plan.
As
for sliding constructions, they are related to alternative explanations. For
example, in the sentence from Aesop's fables "I
am helping to lay up food {for the winter,"} some people will see
"for the winter" as an adjective that describes "food" and
others will see it as an adverb that modifies (purpose) "to lay up."
Thus alternative explanations are introduced and allowed within KISS even at
the third grade level, and alternative explanations are very close to sliding
constructions. Phrasal verbs can be explained as sliding, as can the passive
vs. PA question in "The eggs were scrambled."
Thus far most users of KISS have reported little, if any problem in having
students accept the idea that a word or construction can be explained in more
than one way.
I'm having a problem with your discussion of "that." If
"that" is not the subject of "fit" in
This room has three long red velvet booths that fit eight people
each.
then what is? I
do note, however, that pedagogically you agree that in working with K-12
students, "that" can be explained as the subject. Can't it function
as both the subject and a subordinating conjunction, or does your grammar not
allow double functions?
The question of gerundives is, for me, of particular interest. Quite frankly, I
laugh (and cry) at those members of this list who insist that we teach a
distinction between form and function, and who then use "participle"
to designate both a form and a function. This causes major confusion for many
teachers. Hunt claimed that the gerundive does not develop before college. He
did not use that term, in fact he does not name the construction. But all of
his examples fit the KISS gerundive. I think Hunt is wrong, but I do agree with
him that the gerundive is a late developing construction. I'll note that I have
seen it in the writing of some fourth graders, but we should not base
instruction on what "some" few students can do. I have, however, seen
a push to get all fourth or fifth graders to use gerundives. In part this push
is the result of teachers seeing "going" in "She was going to
the store," and, as a result, saying that most fourth graders use
"participles." This is a complicated question, but my basic point is
that I believe we do need a term to distinguish the form (participle) from the
function (the KISS gerundive). I can't remember for certain, but if I remember
correctly, I got the term from Paul Roberts.
Again, thanks for your comments. I think that we agree that basic concepts
— prep phrases, adjectives, adverbs, subjects, finite verbs really should
be mastered by students before they get to college. I would also suggest that
ATEG could propose a minimal set of terms, comparable to what I have previously
suggested, that should be mastered by specific grade levels. ATEG could also
indicate that that minimal list is subject to revision. I have the sense that
some people want an entire plan, including morphology, etc., etc. I don't think
that ATEG itself can agree on a comprehensive plan within the next decade.
Shouldn't the group start with a much shorter list?
Ed
>>> [log in to unmask] 10/5/2005 12:11:29 PM >>>
Ed,
Latin has certainly contributed to the
confusion, as has the whole spirit of prescriptivism. And your argument
for clear, stable terminology is sound. I might point to a few terms in
KISS that are a idiosyncratic, like your use of “gerundive”, but
the point is that we have to decide first what we need names for, that is, the
content and concepts, and then agree on terminology, with, inevitably, some
room for variation.
Herb
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/