Herb - I, too, was among the few, the proud, the grammatically intense 
private school set who loved to diagram sentences and translate Latin 
vulgarities (not, mind you, the Vulgate).

However, I'd like to focus on the need for terminology issue, particularly 
the conversation with the car mechanic analogy.  The way I've heard this 
analogy applied to language courses, particularly at the high school, is 
somewhat as follows:  "If students don't know what a (FILL IN ONE OF THE 
EIGHT PARTS OF SPEECH) is and how it's used in a sentence, I can't explain 
to them what's wrong with their sentence and how to fix it."

I've always had problems with this one, for reasons that would take up too 
much of this post.  However, I rather liked another recent analogy – between 
the biologist and the grammarian rather than the mechanic and the 
grammarian.  Here, my suggestion was to compare the classification of living 
things not to sentences but rather to the types of meaning, to compare, for 
example, the three domains to the six parts of meaning; the various kingdoms 
to the various ways to construct each part of meaning, etc.

This analogy works, then, to support the use of terminology to effect 
understanding of how to create meaning – not just to learn the terminology 
itself.  And, it seems to me, that in grammar just as in biology, the 
concept of meaning comes first – that knowing the difference between, for 
example, different types of life precedes the knowledge of the terminology 
used to classify them.  So, for example, the fact that there is a major 
difference between humans and other life forms is a concept rather than a 
classification such as Archaea and Eubacteria just as the fact that there is 
a major difference between "when" information and "why" information is a 
concept rather than a classification such as prepositional phrases and 
dependent clauses.

In fact, it’s my contention that this is why “formal grammar” worked so much 
better for us than for today’s high school student (public school or private 
boarding school) – we were so much more literate (i.e., not so exposed to 
all forms of non-written media as students today).  Since we already knew 
how to create meaning, we just had to learn the terminology.  Today’s 
students, however, are so disassociated from the written word that they have 
to start at the very beginning, and focusing on terminology prevents that.

Geoff

>From: "Stahlke, Herbert F.W." <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar              
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: What to do with 'put' [PPs following linking verbs]
>Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 11:21:43 -0400
>
>Geoff, Craig, and Bill,
>
>I'll readily admit to having a skewed bent for grammar.  When I was
>taking high school English, I had already had a strong does of parochial
>school grammar, diagramming and all, and I was taking German and Latin
>(required), so a significant portion of my life was spent on grammar,
>analysis, and terminology.  It didn't seem particularly strange or
>off-putting; in fact, it became a part of the boarding school culture,
>with multilingual puns and cracks about ablative absolutes and supines.
>It delights boys in boarding high schools to translate English taboo
>vocabulary into Latin, and I remember having some fun translating our
>school song into a parody of Classical Greek lyric verse.  We sang it at
>a school banquet, but I heard about it later from some of the faculty
>who disapproved of the liberties I had taken.
>
>So, if I haven't discredited myself completely in this discussion, let
>me come down firmly on the side of terminology.  Without a vocabulary we
>can't discuss a subject clearly or intelligently.  Ever try explaining
>to someone with no mechanical knowledge what's wrong with their car?  It
>really doesn't matter that grammarians don't agree completely on which
>terms to use or precisely what the mean.  Such matters rarely come up at
>the high school level.  And I certainly don't advocate terminology for
>its own sake.  We had a lengthy discussion some time back on the
>nominative absolute.  I think older children need to learn the
>construction, one that is useful in specific conditions, but I'm not
>sure that the term is all that important.  Passive, and the concepts it
>entails, on the other hand, is.  Part of the S&S project is to determine
>what terms are important and perhaps even to rank sets of terms for
>relevance, but that sort of argument, while appropriate to this group,
>has little place in the high school classroom.
>
>Let's be clear that debate among grammarians is fine but that most if it
>belongs among grammarians.
>
>Herb
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
>Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 9:36 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: What to do with 'put' [PPs following linking verbs]
>
>    Geoff,
>
>     Another way of talking about the difference between complements and
>modifiers is that information about time and place can come up in any
>sentence, but when that meaning is in complement role, it is the core
>meaning of the sentence.
>    "They hung Tom Dooley on Tuesday" therefore differs from "Tom
>Dooley's
>hanging is on Tuesday" in a very substantional way. One is primarily
>about the hanging and the other is primarily about the date. The second
>assumes the hanging as given; the first does not.
>     These are not just questions about analysis, but questions about
>nuances of meaning, particularly the kinds of choices a writer can
>make under the pressure of context.
>    We can probably draw a fault line down the center of this list
>between
>people who think it's useful to know about language and those who feel
>it's just important to use it.
>    "Who, what, where, when, and sometimes "why", as I was taught it, is
>a
>useful heuristic tool for writing classes, particularly in journalism
>(hence the distrust of "why".) I'm not convinced every sentence
>improves when we add additional meaning, and I'm not convinced it's the
>most important meaning in every kind of genre and text. (In a lab
>report, for example, you had better suppress the "who".) Certainly,
>many of our sentences are just about what "is".
>    I'm increasingly distrustful of claims that soft understandings can
>replace the need/usefulness of grammar.
>    I think your approach is helpful and interesting, but it doesn't
>replace the need for a deeper understanding of what language is and how
>it works.
>
>Craig
>
>
>Geoff,
> >
> >
> >
> > There's still a distinction between a "complement" PP and an
>"adverbial"
> > PP, and they are irrespective of which one is time and which one is
> > place. For example, consider the following:
> >
> >
> >
> > *         Fastow was in the pen after the trial.
> >
> > *         Lunch is at noon in the pen.
> >
> >
> >
> > In both, the first PP is a complement. The second is adverbial. Only
>the
> > second could be moved to the front:
> >
> >
> >
> > *         After the trial Fastow was in the pen.
> >
> > *         (not) *In the pen Fastow was after the trial.
> >
> >
> >
> > *         In the pen lunch is at noon.
> >
> > *         (not) *At noon lunch is in the pen. [different meaning]
> >
> >
> >
> > Dick Veit
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> > Richard Veit
> >
> > Department of English
> >
> > University of North Carolina Wilmington
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Geoffrey Layton
> > Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2006 11:31 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: What to do with 'put' [PPs following linking verbs]
> >
> >
> >
> > Before this interesting discussion runs out of steam, I wanted to add
>my
> > 2
> >
> > cents - specifically about how the interest level in this problem
>varies
> >
> >
> > based on the student audience.  To a class of undergrads or grad
> > students,
> >
> > the terminology may be of interest.  To high school students, however,
> > this
> >
> > entire discussion would be mind-numbing - except as it might generally
> >
> > relate to sentence development using "who-what-when-why-where-how"
> >
> > constructions.
> >
> >
> >
> > To use the "Fastow was in the pen" example, I have my students
>construct
> >
> >
> > sentences using "when" information first (based on using "old"
> > information
> >
> > first) followed by the S-V and then "where" information.
> >
> >
> >
> > So the sentence would read, then, "After the scandal, Fastow was in
>the
> >
> > penitentiary."  They would then be encouraged to add additional "when"
> > and
> >
> > "where" information, preferably using more varied construction,
> > including
> >
> > dependent clauses, resulting in a sentence that might read like this:
> > "Last
> >
> > month after the scandal while his co-defendants were still on trial,
> > Fastow
> >
> > was in the penitentiary where he had been sent immediately after his
> > trial."
> >
> >
> >
> > Please note that the terminology of all of these constructions is of
> > minor
> >
> > importance because all native speakers already know how to use each
>and
> >
> > every one of them.  After developing sentences such as this, students
> > then
> >
> > learn how to fill in the paragraph.  For example, the old "when"
> > information
> >
> > logically requires "who" "what" "why" and "how" explanations; the
> > "where"
> >
> > requires additional descriptive and action information.  And thus a
> > story is
> >
> > developed using a variety of complex, logical sentences, taught with
> > almost
> >
> > no "formal" grammar instruction whatsoever!
> >
> >
> >
> > Geoff Layton
> >
> >
> >
> > 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/