*subscribe to the myth

On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Robert Yates <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Off is not a "modifier" of send:  It is a particle of the phrasal verb
> "send off."
>
> Consider the following sentences:
>
> 1a) We sent off the message.
>   b  We sent the message off.
>   c) *We sent off it.
>   d)  We sent it off.
>
> (In fact, for this particular type of phrasal verb, when its object is a
> pronoun, the movement of the particle is obligatory.)
>
> Consider immediately, which is an adverb.
>
> 2a) *We sent immediately the message.
>  b)   We sent the message immediately.
>  c)   *We sent immediately it
>  d)   We sent it immediately.
>
> In English, it is ungrammatical to put an adverb between the main verb and
> its object.
>
> The purpose of sentences 1 and 2 is to show that "off" is a  different
> category of word from immediately.
>
> As native speakers of English, we never notice phrasal verbs like "send
> off" but they are one of the difficulties non-native speakers of English
> have in learning English.
>
> There are those who claim there is no important distinction between
> surface structure and some underlying deeper structure.  If that is the
> case, then obviously these two sentences have to have the same structure
> and the distinction is useless.
>
> 3) John is easy to please.
> 4) John is eager to please.
>
> Notice in (3) John is the one receiving pleasure (the object of please),
> but in (5) John is giving pleasure (the subject of please).
>
> So, we have the following: :
>
> 5) It is easy to please John.
> 6) *It is eager to please John.
>
> If there is no distinction between surface and some deeper structure, if
> also follows that the following sentence has no ambiguity.
>
> 7) Flying planes can be dangerous.
>
> 8a) Flying them can be dangerous.
>   b) They can be dangerous.
>
> It is possible for sentence diagramming to capture what I have noted
> above, but that requires the ability to show some kind of "movement" to
> account for the surface order of words.
>
> Bob Yates
> University of Central Missouri
>
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 12:27 PM,
>
>
> Richard Grant <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Craig,
>>
>> I like the idea of distinguishing a conjunction (in this case two
>> conjunctions: 'and so') whose adverbial function works beyond the sentence
>> level. Perhaps they could be called *metaconjunctions *or* transitional
>> conjunctions*.
>>
>> I've worked with undergraduate students for the past 16 years, and I've
>> yet to meet one who doesn't ascribe to the myth that coordinating
>> conjunctions "can't" start sentences, I'm assuming school grammars still
>> ignore the fact that professional writers regularly use them in that
>> position. And if secondary instructors deny the appropriateness of
>> coordinating conjunctions at the beginning of sentences, they likely
>> dismiss the conjunctions' other functions (such as being larger discourse
>> markers or acting as markers of parenthetical comments).
>>
>> Your hunch that the "And so" is functioning as a larger discourse marker
>> is correct. Here's the context that sets up the sentence I asked about.
>> (I'm including a fairly large chunk to show that this particular
>> sentence--which shows the consequence of an idea--is nested in a paragraph
>> that is marked off by another 'transitional conjunction'--but.
>>
>> *Some Private Causes of Unclear Writing*
>>
>> Unclear writing is a social problem, but it often has private causes.
>> Michael Crichton mentioned one: some writers plump up their prose, hoping
>> that complicated sentences indicate deep thought. And when we want to hide
>> the fact that we don't know what we're talking about, we typically throw up
>> a tangle of abstract words in long, complex sentences.
>>
>>      Others write graceless prose not deliberately but because they are
>> seized by the idea that good writing must be free of the kind of errors
>> that only a grammarian can explain. They approach a blank page not as a
>> space to explore ideas, but as a minefield of potential errors. They creep
>> from word to word, concerned less with their readers' understanding than
>> with their own survival. I address that issue in Lesson 2.
>>
>>      Others write unclearly because they freeze up, especially when they
>> are learning to think and write in new academic or professional setting. As
>> we struggle to master new ideas, most of us write worse than we do when we
>> write about things we understand better. If that sounds like you, take
>> heart: you will write more clearly when you more clearly understand what
>> you are writing about.
>>
>>      But the biggest reason most of us write unclearly is that we don't
>> know when readers will think we are unclear, much less why. Our own writing
>> always seems clearer to us than to our readers because we read into it what
>> we want them to get out of it. And so instead of revising our writing to
>> meet their needs, we sent it off the moment it meets ours.
>>
>> Williams, Joseph M. and Joseph Bizup. *Style - Lessons in Clarity and
>> Grace*. 12th ed. pp. 6-7. Pearson. Boston. 2017.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Hancock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Richard,
>>>
>>>     Bruce would be in a better position to say what the placement of
>>> "and so" in that way means within the diagramming system.
>>>
>>>     Sentence adverbials are usually intonationally marked--"as a result,
>>> instead of"--and are usually movable. A coordinating conjunction is pretty
>>> much locked into place at sentence opening. It has no role within the
>>> sentence. If you think of "and so" as a paraphrase of "as a result," you
>>> can make that case.
>>>
>>>     Why start a sentence with a coordinating conjunction? The school
>>> book grammars don't seem to account for it. Often, it's because the shift
>>> is a larger shift in the discourse. I would be interested in the sentences
>>> before it, whether "and so" refers back to a single clause or to a series
>>> of clauses. Maybe we should have a term for that kind of conjunction. I use
>>> the sentence "So we have come here today to dramatize an appalling
>>> condition" from King's *I Have a Dream *speech as a good example. It
>>> follows an opening paragraph talking about the hundred year old promise of
>>> emancipation and another denouncing the the fact that "one hundred years
>>> later" the promise hasn't been fulfilled, The march on Washington is
>>> positioned as a response (result) of all of that. Conjunctions often
>>> function to make connections at a higher level of the discourse.
>>>
>>>     I don't think deep structure versus surface structure is all that
>>> useful as a distinction. To say something differently is to say something
>>> different. A good question might be why the sentence is organized to put so
>>> much stress on "ours." "We send it off the moment it meets our needs
>>> instead of revising to meet theirs" would be a more straightforward
>>> version. I like their version much better, perhaps because it puts the two
>>> choices in a more balanced opposition. "Ours" feels very selfish when it
>>> comes. "The moment" makes it lazy. We are selfish and lazy. The structure
>>> of the sentence (I am reading it out of context) seems to make that
>>> judgment clear.  Those are good choices if they fit the overall purposes of
>>> the text.
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <
>>> [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Richard Grant <[log in to unmask]>
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 28, 2017 10:20 AM
>>>
>>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>>> *Subject:* Re: Request for Help with Diagramming a Sentence
>>>
>>> Craig, he has indeed! I was stunned that Bruce replied so quickly and
>>> that he was willing to go to such lengths to help a brother out. I
>>> appreciate your taking the time to check it as well.
>>>
>>> Does the fact that "The introductory "and so" would be placed above and
>>> to the left on its own horizontal line" mean the phrase is working as a
>>> sentence adverb--the way 'Consequently' or 'Therefore' would? That's the
>>> conclusion I came to when I was thinking about it, but my strengths lie
>>> more with writing on the surface level rather than analyzing the deep
>>> structure--or whatever folks are calling it these days.
>>>
>>> Richard
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Hancock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bruce,
>>>>
>>>>     You have done some heavy lifting.
>>>>
>>>>     I would see "to meet their needs" as adverbial, probably modifying
>>>> "revising" rather than "writing." It passes the "in order to" test.
>>>> (Revising...in order to meet their needs) as paraphrase. I'm not sure how
>>>> you handle adverbial infinitives in Reed/Kellog.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Craig
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> *From:* Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <
>>>> [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Bruce Despain <
>>>> [log in to unmask]>
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, January 27, 2017 8:26:39 PM
>>>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>>>> *Subject:* Re: Request for Help with Diagramming a Sentence
>>>>
>>>> Richard,
>>>>
>>>> The fact that ATEG doesn't accept attachments seems to require a
>>>> description of the Reed-Kellogg diagram in words.
>>>> Here is how I would be inclined to do it:
>>>>
>>>> The introductory "and so" would be placed above and to the left on its
>>>> own horizontal line.
>>>> The phrasal preposition "instead of" would be on a diagonal line
>>>> sloping away from the main verb "send" as and adverbial modification.
>>>> The object of the said phrasal preposition, "writing."  would extend
>>>> above its base on stilts being a gerund object on a jagged line separated
>>>> from its object by a short vertical stroke.
>>>> The "our" is an adjective modifier of "writing" diagonally and
>>>> extending from the jagged gerund line.
>>>> The noun object of "writing" is an infinitive phrase and belongs on
>>>> stilts with the "to" on a diagonal line down to the horizontal base of the
>>>> verb "meet."
>>>> The noun object "needs" of "meet" is separated from this verb with a
>>>> short horizontal stroke and has it adjective modifier "their" on a diagonal
>>>> line projecting downward.
>>>> The main horizontal base line is for the subject "we" separated from
>>>> its verb "send" with a perpendicular vertical line.
>>>> The adverbial particle "off" is considered a modifier of the verb
>>>> "send."  It's direct object "it" is separated with a short vertical stroke.
>>>>
>>>> The time noun "moment" is taken as object of an understood preposition
>>>> "x" also extending from "send" as an time modifier of the verb.
>>>> The phrase "it meets ours" is taken as an adjective (relative) clause
>>>> with an understood pronoun connective "x" meaning "at which."
>>>> The "which" is a modifier of "moment." and joined with that noun by a
>>>> dotted line. (If the understood nature is retained in the "x," that is
>>>> where the dotted line ends.)
>>>> The subject of the adjective clause "it" is on a base line separated
>>>> from its verb "meets" with the perpendicular line crossing the line.
>>>> The direct object of "meets" is represented by the pronoun "ours."
>>>>
>>>> Phew!
>>>> I'll send a R&K diagram to your personal e-mail, if you'd like.
>>>> Bruce
>>>>
>>>> --- [log in to unmask] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> From: Richard Grant <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>> Subject: Request for Help with Diagramming a Sentence
>>>> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 18:18:59 -0500
>>>>
>>>> Could someone with more practice/experiencing with sentence diagramming
>>>> please help me out with this?
>>>>
>>>> And so instead of revising our writing to meet their needs, we send it
>>>> off the moment it meets ours. (from Joseph Williams and Joseph Bizup's *Style,
>>>> Lessons in Clarity and Grace). *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Many thanks,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Richard
>>>> 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/
>>> 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/