Herb- Thanks. I appreciate all these patient answers to what might seem like foolish questions. I'm just one of those crazy people who figures if she doesn't ask, she'll never know... Anyway I do appreciate these posts. Not just Herbs, either - I know many of you have been replying, and I've found the comments helpful. I'm just trying not to spam our inboxes with a lot of "thank you" posts. -patty -----Original Message----- From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stahlke, Herbert F.W. Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 1:08 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: On innate knowledge of language Patty, I agree with your statement of what we don't agree on but not of what we do agree on. That is, the phrase "innateness of language" would mean different things to various of us. But we do agree that the knowledge that permits us to perform language is not knowledge most of us can articulate. The knowledge about language, that allows us to identify parts of sentences, parts of speech, etc., is explicit knowledge and is what should be taught. Then we get into disagreement as to what parts of this knowledge should be taught, what they should be called, and how and when they should be taught. Herb 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/