Phil,

 

This topic keeps coming up.  What do you define as traditional grammar?
Do you mean the scholarly tradition of grammar study and teaching so
well exemplified by Jespersen and continuing today in scholars like
Biber, Greenbaum, Huddleston, Kolln, Quirk, Pullum, etc.?  If so, I
doubt if many would disagree with you.  On the other hand, if you're
talking about the descriptions and proscriptions found in the average
freshman writing handbook, I suspect you'd find a fair bit of
disagreement.  So define what you mean.

 

Herb

 

________________________________

From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Phil Bralich
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:46 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The role of English teachers

 

The real problem is that there are few if any traditional ideas that
need to go.  Someone should actually sit down and make a list of ideas
that need to be expunged from grammar teaching and you would see there
are actually only a few if any.  The real problem is that people want to
wallow around in a sea of unaccountability where pontification and
pretense take precedence over good sense.  

 

We should not be talking in terms of modern versus traditional grammar
as there is nearly zero difference.  Instead we should speak merely of
teaching grammar and put the whole false problem behind us.  

 

If any one disagrees, please draw up a list of tradtional notions that
should be abandonded.  

 

Phil Bralich



	-----Original Message----- 
	From: "Paul E. Doniger" 
	Sent: Aug 16, 2006 7:22 PM 
	To: [log in to unmask] 
	Subject: The role of English teachers 
	
	
	

	Peter Adams raised an interesting issue with: "In fact, I am
wondering why the role of English teachers seems to always be to slow
down this process and defend the traditional conventions." Is this
really the role of English teachers? What do others think about this?

	 

	Personally, I don't see myself as a defender of traditional
conventions at all. I suspect that many of my colleagues in the high
school English classroom feel the same as I do. I rather see the English
teacher in me as a promoter/fascilitator of deep thinking (and critical
and creative thinking) through the disciplines of reading, writing,
listening, and speaking. Grammar instruction is one item in the toolbox,
albeit an important one (and a too often neglected one at that).
However, it's not for me so much as a teaching of convention as it is a
teaching of the way language works -- as a means towards better/deeper
thinking in these four disciplines.

	 

	I'd add that as a drama teacher, grammar is important in a
similar way. When I ask my acting students to point up the nouns or
"play to (or 'with' or 'on')" the verbs, I need first to make sure they
know what these words are. My goal for them, however, is not
grammatical, but theatrical -- I want them to make the language
meaningful and rich, and to bring the text across clearly to the
audience.

	 

	Paul D.

	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/

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/ 

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/