ATEG Archives

June 2007

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Hadley, Tim" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 2 Jun 2007 14:45:35 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1 lines)
Craig,



I'm watching your baseball team (on CSTV) in the NCAA regionals at Fayetteville, Arkansas, which is just 100 miles or so SW of me. At the moment (2.45 p.m. Saturday) they're playing Creighton, which is one of our Missouri Valley teams. Good luck!



Tim

 

Timothy D. Hadley

Assistant Professor of Professional Writing

English Department

Missouri State University

Springfield, MO 65897

office 417.836.5332, fax 417.836.4226

[log in to unmask]

Editor, ATEG Journal



-----Original Message-----

From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock

Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 8:12 AM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: Coordinating Conjunctions



> This has been a delightful conversation to pick up on some dozen

messages in.

   There are two parts to Peter's original question about and, or, for,

nor, so, yet, and but. Are they conjunctions? John's movability test is

a good one, and it's one that they will pass. Are they coordinate? In

other words, do they leave both sides equal? I would say yes for and,

but, or, nor, but not for so, yet, and--especially--for.  So when we

call them coordinating  conjunctions, I like to tell my students that

they are RECOGNIZED as coordinating conjunctions within a standard

grammar, which means (if we follow the best rule books) we can start a

sentence with any of them without making it a fragment. So these are

different questions, one about meaning, the other about the analysis (a

little faulty) behind traditional punctuation conventions. You can also

ask questions about their role in discourse flow.

   With my own students, a very high percentage of run-on sentences fit

the model of adverb opening second clause. So I think it is important

to talk about how adverbs are movable (nice test) but also that they do

not CONJUNCT. Subordinating conjunctions (not the adverbs, like however

or therefore or now or then)have a conjunctive function, but also

subordinate one clause to the other. (The subordinated clause has a

grammatical role in the main clause, more often than not adverbial.)

   You can make a case that "He wanted to please her, for she was the girl

of his dreams" is very close to "He wanted to please her because she

was the girl of his dreams." I would like to call both subordinate, but

traditional grammar (and the punctuation conventions that come with it)

recognize the "for" as coordinating. "For she was the girl of his

dreams" would not be a fragment in traditional grammar, but "because

she was the girl of his dreams" would.

   I do have a roughed out article on this somewhere, one that never got

past the extensive note stage. It's an intereresting area because it

highlights some of the different kinds of questions we can ask of

written language choice. What does it contribute to meaning? How does

it influence the flow of discourse? What does traditional grammar say

about it?



Craig



> In a message dated 6/1/07 3:01:05 PM, [log in to unmask] writes:

>

>

>> Perhaps “clause; however, clause” is the standard convention, but we

>> also

>> allow “S.  However, S” if the contrast is stronger. 

>>

>

> I've always taught that "clause; conjunctive adverb, clause" is the

> standard

> convention, but Ed Schuster, in his wonderful book Breaking the Rules,

> points

> out that, in fact, "clause. Conjunctive adverb, clause" is much more

> common.

>

>

> I wonder why I have been insisting on the semicolon version for all these

> years . . . and why almost all the handbooks do too.   Schuster recognizes

> Lynn

> Troyka's as the only one he is aware of that, at least, recognizes the

> equal

> correctness of the version with a period before the conjunctive adverb.

>

> Peter Adams

>

>

>

> **************************************

>  See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

>

> 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/


ATOM RSS1 RSS2