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/