Thanks Craig, for the specific titles. I'll be looking them up.
I'm already persuaded that language is a complex adaptive system. There's value in teaching the more formal/systematic aspects, imo, but ultimately that won't be enough to explain how language works. I wish more students learned more about language throughout their schooling (as I'm sure we all do!)
Beth
________________________________
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Hancock, Craig G [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 3:06 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some music about"
Beth,
If we think of the patterns of language as closer to biology than to physics, then we would expect that elements of language may be on their way toward different group status as they expand or shift their patterns of use. Phrasal verbs, for example, evolve their phrasal status over time, which means that there is an inevitable in-between time when they would are hard to classify.
If you read nothing else by Bybee, I would recommend Language, Usage, and Cognition (Cambridge Univ Press, 2010), which makes a great case for language as a "complex adaptive system." If we think of language--especially the grammar--as a formal system, then the kind of test you mention (verb expansion formula) is more relvant. If it's a "complex adaptive system," then formal tests can ber an awkward lens. Bybee uses sand dunes as an analogy--language gives us "considerable variation among individual instances, as well as gradience and change over time" (Bybee p.1). "A theory of language could reasonably be focused on the dynamic processes that create languages and give them both their structure and their variance" (same page).
For a relevant Bybee article, I would also recommend "Cognitive Processes in Grammaticalization" which appears in the second volume of The New Psychology of Language (Michael Tomasello ed. Larence Birnbaum 2003). As Bybee points out, the kind of phonetic reduction we get with 'gonna' and oughtta' is typical of grammaticalization. We don't say "I'm gonna New York" for "I'm going to New York," but we do say "I'm gonna take the train to New York" or "It's gonna rain." We only use it for expressions of intention and prediction, which are modal in function. This would be a good formal argument for "going to" functioning as a constituent group when modal functions are carried out, but not for physical movement: going plus to New York.
This is a large shift away from the formal approaches to language that have been the norm for the last century. It certainly changes the conversation about what it's useful to know.
Craig
________________________________
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Beth Young <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 1:38 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some music about"
I noticed this discussion and found it to be very interesting!
Gregg, I would have analyzed the "me" as an indirect object, but that doesn't answer the question of why "me" instead of "myself," or why there's an indirect object in the first place. Perhaps the "me" instead of "myself" makes the sentence less formal and more intimate.
-- write me some music = I will do the writing for my own satisfaction and I don't care what anyone thinks about it
-- write myself some music = I will write music that I will use somehow
It reminds me of ain't--which we often use to convey a tone of, "no matter what anyone thinks, I'm just giving you the plain truth," e.g., "politics ain't beanbag."
The "gonna write" is an interesting puzzle, too. I can see how it acts like a modal, like "ought to" and "have to" (and I'm looking forward to reading Joan Bybee's articles, thanks Craig). Since that analysis doesn't fit the normal verb expansion formula T (modal) (have + -en) (be + -ing) MV, in my classes, we'd normally analyze "I am going to write" as having the verb "am going" and "to write . . . " as an adverbial infinitive phrase, but the modal explanation goes farther to explain meaning.
More and more I find myself reiterating to my students that the grammar I'm teaching = our attempt to describe what we do with language, but that there will always be aspects that don't fit neatly into the system.
Beth
________________________________
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Gregg Heacock [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 4:36 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some music about"
Hi Herbert,
I am pleased that you noticed my posting. Actually, there were two. The first followed Craig Hancock's response to Glenda Conway's query regarding lines from Langston Hughes' "Daybreak in Alabama": ". . . I'm gonna write me some music about/ Daybreak in Alabama . . . ."
That exchange, privately responded to by two ATEG members, never received a public response. Then, Marshall Myers engaged in a separate exchange with Glenda, a former student of his. She replied that "gonna write" would be said as "fixin' to write" where she comes from.
I will list both of my responses ahead of the exchanges that prompted them. I am interested in hearing your response.
Thanks for asking,
Gregg
*************************
First response
On July 1, 2014, at 6:08 PM, Gregg Heacock wrote:
Glenda,
Craig has referred to Joan Bybee, who has pointed out how language most commonly used gets bent toward a social purpose, one that binds the speaker to the listener together as members of a common culture. Given that, you might also look at other parts of that first line: ". . . I'm gonna write me some music . . ." What would you say about the word "me"? Is it an indirect object as in "I'm gonna get me some food"? Or, does it add something to the art of writing that intensifies the depth of the experience contained in the writing itself as it might be shared with others? When language gets bent toward social purposes, ambiguities arise that bind us ever more tightly in a culture. This, in turn, helps us survive. If evolution is about the survival of the fittest, then language evolves so that we might evolve, as well, by ascending to greater heights through the vitality of our culture. I think Langston Hughes was writing about that, as well.
Gregg
*************
On July 1, 2014, at 4:17 PM, Craig G. Hancock wrote:
Glenda,
This "be going to" construction has been written about very thoughtfully by Joan Bybee. It has gramamticalized fairly recently (since Shakespeare's time) from a construction for expressing movement toward a place, to a construction expressing intention, to a construction that expresses epistemic prediction. ("I am going to New York. I am going to write a novel. It is going to rain hard.) In those last two manifestations, it can act as a substitute for "will." The best way to analyze your example, i think, is as modal auxiliary for "write." When the construction is followed by a noun ("I am going to the store"), "to the store" functions as a prepositional phrase.
It's interesting to know that all our modals have gramamticalized from lexical verbs, most of that during the period for which we have written records. Bybee uses this as a key part of her argument for seeing language as "a complex adaptive system."
Unlike "will," be going to can also convey past intention. ("I was going to pay my bills, but I ran out of money."
Lanston Hughes' work makes for great classroom study since he uses nonstandard forms so thoughtfully and wisely.
Craig
*************
On July 1, 2014, at 4:17 PM, Glenda Conway wrote:
Subject: "I'm gonna write"--verb + infinitive or verb + auxiliary?
Greetings—
Today, in my Advanced English Grammar class, I showed Langston Hughes’s “Daybreak in Alabama” as an example of a poem with two sentences.
I realized while showing the poem that I was not sure how to divide the slots of the first main clause, which is
…I’m gonna write me some music about
Daybreak in Alabama….
Shall I think of “I’m gonna write” as being equivalent to “I will write,” thus considering “[a]m gonna” as an auxiliary to “write”?
Or shall I think of “I’m gonna write” as being equivalent to “I am going to write,” thus considering “to write…” an adverbial infinitive phrase?
I would love to read some discussion on this clause and to be able to share it with my students afterward.
Thanks,
Glenda Conway
*************************
Second response
On July 5, 2014, at 7:39 AM Gregg Heacock wrote:
Hi Glenda,
Though terminology associated with grammar and syntax is useful in grouping words associated with the concept of making something happen, I think such categorization is most productive if it leads to an analysis of steps taken in making things happen. Actions break down into steps. Conditionals are considerations of circumstances required or desired to take action. Our ability, intent, and obligation are also factored in. The question arises, though, in terms of focus. If you are going to get married, "married" is the focus. The same would be so if you were fixin' to get married. But, what if you are preparing to get married? When does our focus shift from the goal to the steps taken to achieve that goal?
The same question arises when a student writes, "I started to climb the fence." How does "started" differ from the act of climbing? John R. Searle writes that the grammar of action breaks down into many steps. But, in these, action begins with the general intent to act, followed by a direct intent that initiates the action, itself. I think that young writers have an unconscious awareness of that second intention that shows up in their writing as "started to." The question is: What does that signify to the reader.
The other question is this: When does a term like "fixin' to" achieve a cultural buy-in to what is being said because it asserts a shared belief: "Around here we like take our own good time when doin' somethin' so it don't cause no problems." Our brains love this stuff, especially that "around here" that we now hear in commercials selling solid principles of financial planning. When words acquire strong emotional overtones, they have been bent to a social purpose that changes their meaning and significance to an audience.
I would say, Glenda, in connecting with Marshall as you have, you have introduced personal information (speaking of social purpose) that adds greatly to the discussion you initiated some time ago. Let me go back to the beginning to ask about the use of "me" in Langston Hughes' line "I'm gonna write me some music . . ." Is it like: "I'm gonna sit right down and write myself a letter"? Is it like: "I'm gonna write it myself"? Or, is it something else? And, if so, what grammatical, syntactical term would be used to categorize it? This is not a rhetorical question. I really don't know.
Perhaps someone out there can help me.
Thanks,
Gregg
*************
On Jul 4, 2014, at 6:36 PM, Glenda Conway wrote:
Hi Marshall!
Where I live, the wording is "I'm fixin' to. We like to take our own good time when doing so won't cause a disaster.
Are you retired? Where are you living?
It's so good to hear you here.
Glenda
*************
On Jul 4, 2014, at 6:20 PM, Marshall Myers wrote:
Glenda,
Old classmate here!
“Going to” is many times regarded as a two-word modal auxiliary like the related “can,” may,” might” and others.
“I’m going to go”
“I may go.”
Marshall Myers
*************************
Herbert, I am curious to hear your response. –– Gregg
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/