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 University > I 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/