To echo Craig's observation -- I just completed an analysis of grammar/conventions/usage errors in about 200 high school students' timed academic essays and found only 11 instances of text-messaging language. I also gave the students a survey about their use of text messaging. 76% of students reported that they own a cell phone and about 50% reported sending more than 15 text messages per day (36% reported sending more than 30 text messages per day). It seems as if the high school students in my study engage in texting quite a bit but still understand that it is not appropriate/effective in academic writing. Amanda On 6/19/08 8:37 AM, "Craig Hancock" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Herb, > A corrolary to this--I'm not sure if you would agree--is that the > sentence EVOLVES over time, and it is something we all contribute to. > It isn't invented at the top and then imposed downward against the > unruly riffraff. > The best standards have everything to do with what works, what helps us > accomplish our communally evolving goals. > Text messaging is something we should delight in and admire. I have yet > to see any serious encroachment into the academic world. I have just > read 43 freshmen placement essays without a single instance of > text-messaging creeping over. > > Craig> > > Forty or so years ago I used to argue with transformational-generative >> grammarians, and they were that then, that the sentence, in particular the >> symbol S, was not a logical primitive but a methodological choice. It >> represented a unit within which certain relationships, structures, and >> constraints could be discussed without the inconvenience of answering >> questions about discourse. This usually got us into an argument about >> competence and performance, which I held, and hold, to be a corollary of >> the methodological choice of S as the domain of analysis and description. >> In informal speech, in contrast to formal lectures, addresses, sermons, >> etc., sentences tend to correspond to the breath group, so that the spoken >> sentence tends to be what one can say in one breath. In the early 70s I >> was teaching a linguistic field methods course with a linguistics grad >> student as native speaker. His language was Pashto, and as we got into >> the syntax of Pashto, we explored a variety of canonical sentence types >> and then started working on complex sentences, looking into subordinate >> clauses and the constraints that apply to complex sentence structures. >> The Pashto speaker paused at one point and said, "You can put together a >> sentence like that in Pashto, but no one every would. When people tell >> stories, argue with each other, talk about affairs of their families and >> communities, they use simple sentences." That just drove home further for >> me the observation that what a sentence can be depends very much on >> medium, genre, discourse pragmatics, and social setting, among other >> things. >> >> Herb >> >> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carol Morrison >> Sent: 2008-06-18 20:45 >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: The Death of the Sentence? >> >> >> I found this on leithart.com under the subheading: The History of the >> Sentence >> >> Ian Robinson's The Establishment of Modern English Prose in the >> Reformation and the Enlightenment (Cambridge, 1998) is a fascinating >> discussion of the history of the sentence and of English punctuation, and, >> despite its heavy-handed title, is a delight to read. >> >> Does the sentence have a history? Robinson shows that it does. Even in our >> day, when the well-formed sentence is described as the key to prose >> writing, there are many intelligible uses of language that do not employ >> well-formed sentences - lists, lecture notes, football broadcasts. >> (Robinson is not an opponent of the well-formed sentence; his are >> wonderful; but he recognizes that it is not the only possible unit of >> sense.) >> >> Prior to the modern period, Robinson argues, the sentence was not >> recognized as a syntactical unit at all: "Medieval grammar, following the >> classical tradition, was of course highly developed, but there never >> emerged in the medieval period any conception of the sentence as >> syntactical unit." The word "sentence" is used in the Middle Ages, but >> means something like "sense" or "gist." "Thou speakest sentences" says a >> character in Ben Jonson's Poetaster, and he does not mean that someone "is >> speaking dramatically but that he is speaking sense and, in particular, >> uttering weighty, authoritative dicta." >> >> --- On Wed, 6/18/08, Spruiell, William C <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> From: Spruiell, William C <[log in to unmask]> >> Subject: Re: The Death of the Sentence? >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Date: Wednesday, June 18, 2008, 4:42 PM >> >> Anyone who thinks that abbreviations and "squiggle" notations like >> >> ":-)" are a problem in current writing should be forced to try to >> >> read medieval manuscripts. Start with really expensive writing materials >> >> (vellum anyone?), make the writing process laborious (sharpen quill, grind >> >> stuff for ink, blot the vellum...) and throw in a bunch of insular monks >> (well, >> >> insular even for monks), and you get pages of squigglefest. At least the >> >> computer environment prevents some of the excesses of calligraphy that >> would >> >> otherwise occur. >> >> >> >> I suspect that the comments about sentences in that piece were actually >> >> comments about punctuation. If so, I'm not really sure how to maintain the >> >> claim that clearly demarcated sentences are necessary for clear thought, >> given >> >> that -- in all probability -- Plato, Aristotle, etc. didn't mark sentence >> >> boundaries in writing at all. Languages always have clause complexes; >> writing >> >> systems may or may not orthographically mark these in various ways. >> >> >> >> All that having been said (I don't usually adopt absolute positions, but >> >> I'll certainly use absolutes), I *do* tend to notice a link between >> >> orthographically-unstructured writing, etc. and bad argumentation in my >> >> students -- but I don't think the first causes the second. Instead, >> >> it's simply that students who don't read much good argumentation tend >> >> not to argue well, and if they're reading mainly text messages from other >> >> students, they're not reading much good argumentation. Other studies >> >> (including something from NCTE that I may be able to dig out later) have >> shown >> >> that students *are* reading a good bit -- but I suspect what they're >> >> reading is the kind of texts that are produced by others in their age >> group, >> >> and that emphasize easy social interaction over critical thinking. "U R >> >> teh uber-newb, d00d!" is fascinating in its own right, but if that's >> >> the kind of thing you're used to, you'll find academic or business >> >> writing quite alien. >> >> >> >> Bill Spruiell >> >> Dept. of English >> >> Central Michigan University >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar >> >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock >> >> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:35 PM >> >> To: [log in to unmask] >> >> Subject: Re: The Death of the Sentence? >> >> >> >>> >> >> Carol, >> >> I read the article in part because the inbox announced that Martha >> >> Kolln had been consulted. Martha's comments are about the only >> >> thoughtful part of it. It left me thinking that it's not the death of >> >> the sentence that's a problem, but the general shallowness of >> >> conversation about it, including those (Martha the main exception) in >> >> our "discipline" of English who weighed in. I suspect they thought >> >> any >> >> working journalist could handle the topic, but the results in this case >> >> are comic. >> >> The idea that the sentence was "invented several centuries" ago >> >> and >> >> "brought order to chaos" is the sort of silliness that fills the bulk >> >> of the article. >> >> It's high tine for NCTE to begin advocating at least some direct >> >> teaching about language. >> >> >> >> Craig > >> >> >> >> Hi everyone. This was in my NCTE inbox this morning, so some of you may >> >>> have read it. (This is only part of the article). I bolded the second to >> >>> last line because it interests me: Does anyone know who >> >> "invented" the >> >>> sentence? >> >>> >> >>> The Fate of The Sentence: Is the Writing On the Wall? >> >>> By Linton Weeks >> >>> Washington Post Staff Writer >> >>> Sunday, June 15, 2008; Page M01 >> >>> >> >>> The demise of orderly writing: signs everywhere. >> >>> One recent report, young Americans don't write well. >> >>> In a survey, Internet language -- abbreviated wds, :) and txt msging -- >> >>> seeping into academic writing. >> >>> But above all, what really scares a lot of scholars: the impending death >> >>> of the English sentence. >> >>> Librarian of Congress James Billington, for one. "I see creeping >> >>> inarticulateness," he says, and the demise of the basic component of >> >> human >> >>> communication: the sentence. >> >>> This assault on the lowly -- and mighty -- sentence, he says, is >> >>> symptomatic of a disease potentially fatal to civilization. If the >> >>> sentence croaks, so will critical thought. The chronicling of history. >> >>> Storytelling itself. >> >>> He has a point. The sentence itself is a story, with a beginning, a >>> middle >> >>> and an end. Something happens in a sentence. Without subjects, there are >> >>> no heroes or villains. Without verbs, there is no action. Without >>> objects, >> >>> nothing is moved, changed, destroyed or created. >> >>> Plus, simple sentences clarify complex situations. ("Jesus >> >> wept.") >> >>> Since its invention centuries ago, the sentence has brought order to >> >>> chaos. It's the handle on the pitcher, a tonic chord in music, a stair >> >>> step chiseled in a mountainside. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> 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/ >> > > 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/ -- Amanda Godley, Ph.D. Associate Professor English Education University of Pittsburgh 5111 Wesley W. Posvar Hall Pittsburgh, PA 15260 412-648-7313 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/