Edith, Those are thoughtful suggestions. I'll take them into account and work on a revision. Craig> Craig, > I agree completely with the last part of the sentence in (a). My concern > was with using the word nonstandard. Even when the sentence tries to > make clear that it does not mean incorrect or less than, it is too easy > to read the word that way. So I would vote for a rephrasing that does > not use the word "nonstandard." > For the (b) part, the purpose of looking at favorite authors, as I read > it, is to help evaluate prescriptive advice. So I am thinking that one > could get stuck on one author who uses "nonstandard" exclusively and not > get the broad background one needs to do that evaluation. I think it is > quite possible to work on the phrasing to take care of this problem > also. > > As I said, it's not that I disagree with the points; I'm thinking about > how to be sure it all gets read right. > Thanks. > Edith > > -----Original Message----- > From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock > Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 1:13 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: position on Standard English > > Edith, > Thanks for the suggestions and the positive response. > I think the last part of (a) is meant to distinguish between > "standard" > and "correct". "Correct" has tended to mean something like "inherently > better", regardless of context. The point would carry over to your > objections in (b) as well; I like the idea that students would notice > the way community languages find their way into writing. I think it was > Paule Marshall who recounts ("Poets in the Kitchen") how finding work of > writers like Dunbar (in dialect) made her feel she, too, could be a > writer. To do so successfully, of course, means paying attention to the > structure (nature) of the dialect. It's like the "contrastive analysis" > that Johanna and Rebecca have been talking about. It actually deepens > our understanding of the standard if we can describe rule patterned > variation. Part of that, of course, means paying attention to the ways > (contexts) in which it can be used effectively. > You can't write fiction or drama without an ear for speech. Paul has > reminded us from time to time how important that is to an actor. > Of course, those reasons for the language could be made more > explicit. > I don't mean to defend this particular wording. > > Craig> > > > I have a couple of responses for consideration: >> In (a) I would prefer not using the term "nonstandard" at all. What >> about just ending the sentence after "important resources?" >> >> And in (b) the part about examining authors that the students admire >> might need a little re-thinking for phrasing. Students can certainly >> find fiction that would not conform to Standard English at all. >> >> Thanks for the good work on this. Can we get NCTE to endorse it? >> >> Edith Wollin >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 6:56 AM >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: position on Standard English >> >> This is a draft position on Standard English as worked out through >> much discussion by the New Public Grammar group and presented to the >> ATEG conference this past July. >> This fits in well with our recent discussion on "code-switching" as > >> an approach to non-standard dialects. I think we are looking for a >> more comprehensive exploration of language for all students, but >> "code-switching" would fit as a step toward accomplishing the goals >> set out below for a particularly at-risk community. Rebecca's program >> both affirms the value (and rule-driven) nature of community languages > >> and helps make Standard English more explicit. >> Here's the draft position. Comments, of course, are welcome. >> >> ATEG Scope and Sequence Project July, 2006 >> >> Position on Standard English >> >> 1) Each student has a right to the tools necessary to a confident and > >> competent public voice, including an understanding of Standard > English. >> a) We define Standard English as the language of mainstream >> American public life. It is not inherently better or more "correct" >> than minority or regional dialects, but valuable in being the shared >> language of public life. Community languages that differ from it >> should be thought of as valuable community languages and important >> resources, as nonstandard, but not incorrect or wrong. >> b) Standard English is better described by the corpus grammars >> than by the prescriptive handbooks, which are often at odds with >> current practice and generations behind. It is a living, viable, >> changing language, not a rigid and set one, and it gets much of its >> vitality from the contributions of a diverse people. Students should >> have a deep enough understanding of language to weigh prescriptive > advice. >> Students should be encouraged to look closely at the work of writers >> they admire. They should understand that Standard English includes >> many levels of formality and that language conventions differ widely >> in different public domains. >> c) Written languages require somewhat arbitrary conventions for >> the representation of language in a written form, and students should >> have the tools necessary for mastery of these. This includes >> standardized spelling, including spelling that shades into syntax. It >> also includes a deep enough understanding of syntax to fully >> understand the syntax based conventions for punctuation. We do not >> believe most people can master punctuation on the basis of intuition >> or "feel", especially if those are meant to lead toward conventional >> choices defined in more analytic ways. This also includes attribution >> conventions, which are important tools in ensuring honesty and >> integrity in the language of academic and public life. >> >> Craig >> >> 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/ > > 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/