I read again the Pullum article and could not disagree with his opinion. He gives enough background about the authors to make it understandable that it is the publishers trying to make a buck that are to be blamed for its popularity. The unfortunate thing about it is that so many English teachers have fallen into their snares. It is time that grammar recovers its rightful place in the school curriculam, but alas, there does not seem to be a cadre of teachers prepared to take up the challenge. I think it is like trying to teach mathematics through reading and practice without a sound basis in the principles or analytic skills involved.

About a year ago Geoffrey Pullum, one of the authors and editors of the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, published a trenchant critique of Strunk and White’s Elements of Style. I believe there was brief discussion of the critique at the time, and the topic continues to come up on Language Log and other linguistic blog sites. Pullum’s critique is available at http://chronicle.com/article/50-Years-of-Stupid-Grammar-/25497/ and is worth a read—or a reread—as a critique of popular knowledge of grammar and even of grammatical knowledge among those of us apparently specialized in the area. I’d be interested in what ATEG readers think of what Pullum has to say.

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/