Do many of us really believe that the perspectives are so clearly defined that linguists are in one camp and grammarians in the other? I do not. I am not a linguist; I don't know that I am a grammarian either. I try to teach my students how to become more proficient in their language use.
From my cursory reading in linguistics, I see major differences among the camps in linguistics. Certainly, most of us want to find more effective ways of teaching our students "grammar," but language development and methods have to be contextualized in some way. Some of the approaches we take will depend entirely on the language backgrounds our students enter with. The principal goal should be to teach the people sitting in front of us; it should not be on "my way." Gaining the different perspectives has helped me step outside myself and consider a number of different strategies. So, thank you, grammarians, linguists, members.
I probably should not have responded here. This call to separate was raised a year or so ago. As with any listserv, members need to scan the posts and delete those of no interest. If The Grammarians want a certain kind of discussion, why not type the word grammarian in the subject line of their posts? Perhaps, such a compromise could save a few folk time.
I hope everyone is having a fine summer. Here in Texas it has been hotter and dryer than hell.
Jack
________________________________
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brad Johnston [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 8:59 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Division?!?
Scott,
Try putting it to a vote of non-linguist grammarians, in which you and the rest of the foxes would not vote. Find out who the hens want in the hen house.
.brad.18july11.
.
________________________________
From: Scott Catledge <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 7:45 AM
Subject: Re: Division?!? ATEG Digest - 16 Jul 2011 to 17 Jul 2011 (#2011-129)
As a grammarian for three score years (starting with my first independent
hypotheses in grammar) and a
linguist of two-score years, I feel that the ATEG would be weakened if
linguists left the discussion,
particularly sociolinguists--not to say that diachronic linguists do not
have valuable input. If I were an
English major with no exposure to linguistics, I would be astounded that a
non-Chomsky world could exist,
much less flourish, in English linguistics and what such studies both added
to our knowledge of grammar and
explained some of our usage problems. United we stand; divided we may well
fall. As B. Franklyn stated, "We
must all hang together or decidedly we will all hang separately." There are
PC English professors out there
whose functional knowledge of literature is limited to Pope's statement,
"Whatever is, is right." and who
vociferously proclaim that any English expression is as good as any other
and that any attempt to expose the
student to Standard English is not only a violation of that student's rights
but an illegal discrimination
against that student's racial, ethnic, or cultural group that uses such
language.
I and many other English linguists-grammarians may remain in the main
grammar group as well but both groups
will suffer from the lack of adequate cross-pollination. Already both
English linguists and grammarians have
extremists amid them; dividing into smaller groups will only amplify their
voices. We need voices of reason
to keep thing running more smoothly.
Scott
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 06:35:31 -0700
From: Brad Johnston <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: All Gaul is divided
Regarding the possible division of the two main parts of ATEG, which I hope will be considered at the annual meeting, it seems to me that the goal of grammar is that we all might be on the same page, literally and figuratively, so that we might be better able to understand one another.
Understanding one another doesn't depend on where words and conventions came from as much as what they mean. Linguists look at what people actually say and write, (and said and wrote), whereas grammarians try to agree on what makes sense to most of us most of the time. Linguists have different training, different interests, and different goals. They look at what divides us (descriptive grammar), while grammarians look for what joins us together (prescriptive grammar).
When the linguists, who dominate the ATEG listserv, go off on one of their arcane tangents, the grammarians politely say to the linguists, "that's interesting", but it's rather like a corn farmer saying "that's interesting" to a cattle rancher who describes the particulars of raising Holsteins. What interests the linguists IS interesting, it just isn't what makes the grammar world go around.
The demonstrable result is that the linguists tend to carry on their exotic discussions on this listserv and the grammarians tend to lurk in the shadows. I propose to you that there should be a way to better serve the grammarians, of whom there are thousands in this country, and who each have questions about the day-to-day of teaching grammar.
The grammarians can go somewhere else, of course, and maybe they do, but since ATEG is the Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar, why is it not appropriate that ATEG concern itself with English Grammar and let the linguists go elsewhere and ponder, in a different venue, those things that interest them?
br-had.sun.17july11.
.
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/