[log in to unmask]" type="cite">Craig, Having done a study of paragraph components in a variety of real-world texts as part of a graduate seminar on English prose style, I couldn't agree more with you that not all paragraphs fit the "topic sentence + supporting sentences" pattern. However, it is a basic pattern, and the students I am working with at the moment cannot tell a paragraph from a list of sentences. The point I was making with the post was that visual metaphors can be helpful devices in getting students to understand such concepts as focus, details, general statement, etc. I am in the midst of a research project that explores how grammar structures can be presented to second language learners and practiced through visual, musical, kinesthetic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal pathways. I have read some of the cautions about this kind of project from Howard Gardner and others, but I think that the correlations below, represent reasonable attempts at integrating grammar instruction with the theory of multiple intelligences: Musical – rhythm, stress, pitch, intonation contours that go with particular grammatical structures; elements of the grammar that permit us to talk about music, e.g. mental & verbal processes Visual/Spatial – gestures, body language, facial expressions [kinesics], and distance/orientation in relations to particular grammar structures; elements of the grammar that permit us to talk about space, line, color, arrangement, e.g. existential & relational processes Kinesthetic – kinesics (above) and pronunciation – i.e. fine motor control of the pronunciation of all grammatical elements; the differentiation of stressed content words and unstressed function words; elements of the grammar that permit us to talk about the body and movement, e.g. material processes Interpersonal – all the elements of grammar that participate prominently in realizing Halliday’s interpersonal functions-e.g. mood, modality, pronoun system, verbal & mental processes, epistemic phrases, etc. Intrapersonal – all elements of the grammar that allow us to reflect on what’s going on inside of us; self-regulation of what we speak/write through monitoring and evaluation based on our internal sense of the standards; elements of grammar that permit us to talk about our interior (e.g. mental & verbal processes) I would welcome comments and insights from readers on these correlations and the role of each of the mentioned intelligences in creating a full-bodied understanding of grammar-in-use. R. Michael Medley, Ph.D. Professor of English Eastern Mennonite UniversityI think that topic and support (your previous post) is a very useful distinction when it is happening within a text, but I'm not sure it fits all--or even most--texts. One of the things I find in looking at real world paragraphs is that they don't fit the prescriptive patterns that show up in traditional writing books, topic and support being one of them. Whatever utility they have for writing doesn't carry over to much real world reading. I also think we do harm when we don't offer these as ONE way to write. SFL patterns would be a very different lens.R. Michael Medley, Ph.D. Professor of English Eastern Mennonite University 1200 Park Road Harrisonburg, VA 22802 Ph: 540-432-4051 Fax: 540-432-4444 ************************************ "Understanding and shared meaning, when it occurs, is a small miracle, brought about by the leap of faith that we call 'communication across cultures.'" --Claire Kramsch 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/
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/