Your message summarizes perfectly why I'm not teaching writing at the university level anymore. The hours I spent responding to papers, critiquing rewrites, etc., took over my life. If I ever teach at that level again, I'll opt for speech instead. Linda >----- ------- Original Message ------- ----- >From: Susan van Druten <[log in to unmask]> >To: [log in to unmask] >Sent: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:02:05 > >Students do need our advice, but they need our >specific advice and >not our generic advice. That's why current class >sizes in >composition are stupid. > >Some students need to hear that they should >avoid verbs of being >avoid passive voice >avoid adjectives >avoid adverbs >avoid sentences that start with "Because" >avoid sentences that start with subject/verb >constructions >avoid "you" >avoid "I" > >and some students need to hear the opposite advice. > > >If the teacher makes a blanket statement to the >class, she is >undoubtedly hitting a few targets and missing many >others. Writing >is not like math. Math has no style. Writing >students come to class >with bad and good habits that feed their style. >They need to hear >specific advice from their readers when their style >misses the mark. >A teacher with a class of 35 students in five >classes can't do that >for them. That's what makes it stupid. > >Susan > > > > > >On Apr 19, 2009, at 1:20 AM, Scott Woods wrote: > >> I generally don't give my students advice. I >certainly don't refer >> them to manuals. Usually, I show them what works >in the writing of >> others, have them practice writing like that, >then train them to do >> those things consistently. For instance, when >they edit their >> papers, I have my students identify all their >verbs, circle all >> "be" verbs, decide the function of each "be" >verb--linking, >> passive, auxiliary--then make a choice about >changing the linking >> to action, passive to active, progressive to >simple. All I want >> them to do is choose for each verb. I also have >them make a choice >> for each action verb about increasing its >specificity. This works >> for noun specificity as well. >> >> Scott Woods >> >> --- On Fri, 4/17/09, Paul E. Doniger ><[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> From: Paul E. Doniger <[log in to unmask]> >> Subject: Re: An expert speaks? was ATEG Digest - >14 Apr 2009 to 15 >> Apr 2009 (#2009-86) >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Date: Friday, April 17, 2009, 4:44 PM >> >> For the record, although I never analyzed this in >any statistical >> or methodical way, many of my (high school - >honors level) >> students' papers seem to run into trouble when >they get carried >> away by adjectives and adverbs (I'm talking about >academic, not >> creative writing here). I wonder if anyone else >has any experience >> with this. >> >> Paul D. >> >> "If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could >condemn it as an >> improbable fiction" (_Twelfth Night_ >3.4.127-128). >> >> >> From: Craig Hancock <[log in to unmask]> >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 9:05:43 AM >> Subject: Re: An expert speaks? was ATEG Digest - >14 Apr 2009 to 15 >> Apr 2009 (#2009-86) >> >> Bill, Scott, >> If the corpus grammars tell it accurately, >writing with nouns and >> verbs is good advice for fiction (Biber found a >negative >> correlation for attributive adjectives), but not >for journalism or >> academic writing, which build lots of meaning >into the noun >> phrases. Of course, saying adjectives should be >used sparingly is >> not the same as saying they are unimportant. The >lone adjective may >> be the most important word in the sentence. But >English teachers >> especially seem to equate literacy with >literature. >> I thought Pullum was a bit arrogant in the >review, a bit >> disrespectful of the writing teacher's >perspective. And it may very >> well be that linguists are much to blame for not >giving us a >> discourse friendly grammar to work with. There's >some good advice >> in the little book, but enough problems to negate >that out. I >> usually tell students who own the book not to pay >attention to >> anything but the style sections. >> >> Craig >> Spruiell, William C wrote: >> > Scott: >> > >> > I've had similar students --- but the advice >they need is more >> along the >> > lines of, "use specific nouns, not fluffy >ones." The problem really >> > isn't the adjectives and adverbs. And at least >some of those >> students >> > aren't deliberately being verbose, or >displaying signs of functional >> > illiteracy (they probably know a fair number of >highly specific >> > nouns...but they're part of the students' >passive vocabulary, rather >> > than being part of the active pool that is >deployed when writing). >> > Instead, they've adopted a common strategy of >marking out a >> general area >> > with the noun and then using modifiers to home >in on a particular >> spot >> > in within it. >> > In fact, it's the same thing professional >writers do when they >> come out >> > with sentences such as "The fact that these >results have been >> observed >> > indicates that the phenomenon is real." "Fact" >is fluffy -- but >> since I >> > know the genre, I know when I can get away with >using it (if that >> > sentence bothers you, all I can say is that >amazing numbers of >> articles >> > have been published with near-equivalents). >Students pick up on that >> > kind of practice, but they don't yet have >enough exposure to >> scientific >> > genre to know which words can be used in >particular cases without >> coming >> > across as "gauche." >> > >> > This simply highlights one of Pullum's points: >One of S&W's major >> > injunctions is that writers should be clear and >concise, but they >> wrote >> > THEIR OWN RULE in a way that attacked a side >effect of the actual >> > problem rather than the problem itself, and >implied there was >> something >> > wrong with entire classes of words that are >only problematic when >> > they're used as part of a compensation >mechanism. It's as if I >> watched >> > someone using glue to connect two pieces of >wood that should instead >> > have been nailed together, and then proclaimed >that glue is a bad >> thing. >> > I'd probably figure out my mistake once I saw >people trying to nail >> > wallpaper. >> > >> > Bill Spruiell >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Assembly for the Teaching of English >Grammar >> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of >Scott >> > Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 1:08 PM >> > To: [log in to unmask] >> > Subject: Re: An expert speaks? was ATEG Digest >- 14 Apr 2009 to >> 15 Apr >> > 2009 (#2009-86) >> > >> > Pulliam is the stupid one if he does not >understand what The >> Little Book >> > means by "Write with nouns and verbs, not with >adjectives and >> adverbs," they >> > insist. >> > (The motivation of this mysterious decree >remains unclear to me.) >> > >> > Anyone who had ever graded English themes, >especially descriptive >> > writing, >> > has been exposed to students who use plain >verbs and generic >> nouns, both >> > of >> > which are accompanied by a plethora of adverbs >and adjectives >> > respectively >> > when more descriptive verbs and nouns would do >a far better job with >> > less >> > effort. The only explanation that I can give >for such students is >> > either >> > functional illiteracy or sheer laziness (many >theme assignments >> have--or >> > used to have--a minimum number of words). The >slovenly among >> them use >> > any >> > gimmick to expand their impoverished thoughts >and expression. >> > >> > I cannot believe that Professor Pulliam has >taught English without >> > having >> > encountered such students: his extreme >prejudice towards The >> Little Book >> > seems to have blinded him to the extent that he >can only see >> vices and >> > never >> > virtue. The Little Book has its faults; >however, I would trust >> Shrunk >> > and >> > White over a "grammarian" who has had too >little contact with >> writing to >> > understand the motivation for the very sound >advice: >> > >> > "Write with nouns and verbs, not with >adjectives and >> adverbs." (The motivation of this decree is quite >clear to me and >> has been since >> > Freshman English.) >> > >> > Scott Catledge >> > Professor Emeritus >> > >> > During the "God is dead" fad of the 60's, I had >a bumper sticker >> that >> > said, >> > "My God is alive--sorry about yours." >> > >> > My understanding of the "motivation" is clear >to me--sorry it's not >> > clear >> > to him. Perhaps he should teach a Freshman >English course sometime. >> > >> > 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/ 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/