[log in to unmask]"
type="cite">
Craig,
I don't think it is the messenger being attacked. Instead, what is being criticized is yet another instance of hand-waving. Yes, it is a very good thing to bring an article that you think interesting to the attention of the group. I thank you for it because it _really_ is a good thing. But to mention this article - even to summarize it - and then to suggest that ATEG should embrace some kind of (vague) functional orientation as opposed to some kind of (vague) "formalist" orientation is to engage in nothing more than hand-waving. To make this article and your assertions about it meaningful to this list, I think what is needed is to take the time to relate the data and claims of this article to the kinds of language/grammar/writing relevant to the concerns of ATEG members in order to show how insightfully it relates to those concerns. Otherwise, you are only preaching to your own choir, which is not very interesting because choirs don't demand very much.
It may very well be that this article will turn out to be fantastic for the goals of ATEG, but from what you have given us, there is no way of knowing what its relevance is. Also, when you are able to present the data and claims of this article and propose how they are relevant to the concerns of ATEG, then the list can really have something to discuss. And maybe it would provide some help for ALL OF US as we try to move forward - wherever "forward" happens to be.
As for your sense of being offended by the old story of the guy and the lamp post, try to be generous and don't assume that all of the qualities of the character in the story are being attributed to you and your post. It is up to you, but I think a better thing to do would be to take a deep breath and move on.
As for the implications that you draw from this article, I would caution you again that presenting gross misrepresentations of generative/formalist approaches to language helps no one. It is only in these gross misrepresentations of generative grammar where are found claims about "language" being "pre-wired into the brain." Even intro to linguistics texts don't make this claim - at least the ones that I have taught from over the years. Also, I don't think it is fair at all to say that generative grammar sees grammar as "rules." But I would be happy to be helped here by Bruce and Bill if they think they have something to say on this point.
* * * * * *
Before I call it a night, I would like to say something about ATEG , this list, and how we could think of ourselves. I am very uncomfortable with an ATEG that believes it knows God's truth. Anyone not belonging to that particular congregation is going to be pushed out, which is not a good thing. I really believe that we should be cautious about our claims. The phenomenon - language - we work with is not well understood. Moreover, we should remind ourselves that in addition to this task, we have taken on the further, and perhaps ultimately insurmountable tasks of understanding how the domains of language that might concern us are _learned_ and how they might be effectively _taught_.
Can any of us have confidence that we know all of God's truth in this context?
I am just speaking for myself, but I think we could take a lesson from the founder of this group, Ed Vavra. Whatever each of us may think of the strengths and weaknesses of KISS, it is easy to respect Ed's contributions to discussions on this list. To me at least, it is clear that Ed carefully reads the posts he responds to, and his responses are always thoughtful. He is not careless with anyone's posts. Importantly, Ed's posts also remind us why this list exists, and that is to develop our understandings of English grammar so that we can use these understandings to help learners.
Finally, it might be helpful, when any of us think that we have been injured in some way, to think of Ed, of his history here, and of how he has conducted himself. He started this list because he had a commitment to help learners and he believed that he had a set of good ideas on how that goal could be pursued. He hoped that through ATEG, a community of people could develop to further this goal.
Well, it didn't work out the way that Ed would have dictated, if he had been The King of ATEG. There can be no doubt that Ed feels some disappointment, given how much of himself he put into this organization. But Ed continues in good faith, and, very impressive to me, he continues to put his ideas on the line before this group. Of course, in doing so, he may be critical of other proposals, but always in an open, constructive way, and he has never to my knowledge tried to silence other participants, even if they disagreed with him.
Jim Kenkel
Eastern Kentucky University
________________________________________
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/