Craig,

You have just changed the goal posts.

Biber et al. says nothing about effectiveness.  Are you suggesting that a text whose grammatical structures are not in percentages for that particular genre (although you need to remind everyone how general the categories are) is not effective?

And I doubt seriously that Langacker has anything to say about effectiveness.  If so, please point us to the relevant text.

And, I have no idea how a functional grammar defines effectiveness.  Please cite the relevant passages.

We have had this discussion before and you still haven't made any attempt to understand the point that I have made repeatedly.  Of course, the meaning of a passage is not determined by grammar alone.  I have given countless examples in which the SAME passage can have different meaning crucially depending on context.

If you truly are interested in the following (and of course it is right -- language as a formal system does not say what a particular text means) :

Even if you treat language as a purely formal system, you still
need to figure out how understanding that system might be of use in
reading and writing.

then you need a theory of interpretation.   That theory needs to go beyond grammatical form for that interpretation.  

What is YOUR theory of interpretation?

(This is important to me because a theory of interpretation is crucial for understanding why developing writers' texts are inappropriate.  My late colleague Jim Kenkel and i have several papers which do exactly that.)

Bob Yates, University of Central Missouri




>>> Craig Hancock <[log in to unmask]> 05/12/11 11:52 AM >>>
Bob,
     You can make the case that classical rhetoric (and the whole 19th
century rhetorical tradition) was essentially a study of effective
communication, one that didn't see a separation between studying
language and studying effective use. I'm not as well versed in it as I'd
like to be.
     The Australians have done a great deal with genre as intermediary
focus.  Cognitive grammar asserts a direct connection between language
and discourse (see Langacker, certainly, but others as well).   The
Longman Grammar (Biber et. al.) looks at language patterns in different
kinds of language use, notably conversation, fiction, news writing, and
academic writing. Rhetorical grammar tries to connect grammatical choice
to effective text.  Functional grammar sees form and function as
seamlessly connected, and they assert a textual metafunction woven into
the fabric of the clause.  From that perspective, language is what it is
because of what it does, and constructing text is part of that. If
grammar limits itself to the study of discreet sentences, it may have
little to offer reading and writing.
     Even if you treat language as a purely formal system, you still
need to figure out how understanding that system might be of use in
reading and writing.
     I'm certainly not the only person who believes language choice is
enormously important in the creation of an effective text.

Craig


On 5/12/2011 10:17 AM, Robert Yates wrote:
> Colleagues,
>
> I have no idea where the following statement by Craig comes from.
>
>
>>>> Craig Hancock<[log in to unmask]>  05/11/11 9:46 PM>>>
>      Karl points out that we can't judge a theory of language on the basis
> of its pedagogical utility, but pedagogical utility is very much at
> stake here. Can a theory of language (should a theory of language) be
> both true and useful? I think it should help us understand the nature
> of effective text.
>
> I know of no theory of language which lays out the principles of an "effective text."
>
> Perhaps, Craig would like to share with us what those principles might be.
>
> For example, is Huck Finn an effective text?  Is Hamlet an effective text?  Is the Gettysburg Address an effective text?
>
> If these are "effective texts," what principles, especially with regard to language, do they all appear to have?
>
> Bob Yates, University of Central Missouri
>
> 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/