ATEG Archives

November 1999

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:
Judy Diamondstone <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 21 Nov 1999 07:35:27 -0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (60 lines)
I should know better, but --
in response to Robert Einarsson's 2 postings:

I assume your grammatical understanding is sufficient to assist you in
adapting the tone of your message to the tenor of a discussion list -- or to
set the tenor as you did: antagonistic; belittling of others' views. If you
did intend to do so, perhaps I am wrong to view stylistic flexibility as a
function of communicative competence. I suppose it is an attribute of
character -- 'built in' as it were.
jd


At 02:50 PM 11/19/99 -0700, you wrote:
>In his response to Fr Laurence, Michael Medley is conveniently
>changing the grounds of the argument.
>
>The debate, all of a sudden, is no longer between "teach literature
>vs. teach grammar."
>
>(What was Fr Laurence thinking of!)
>
>The real debate was all the more vague ... "Teach grammar, of
>course, who ever said we shouldn't! it's just when, what kind, how
>much..."
>
>So, then why are we hearing about all of these studies that prove
>that grammar is not possible to learn?  Why are we hearing about
>those who define "English" as a "literature" department?  Why are
>we hearing that the history of grammar teaching as we know it
>never happened?
>
>Personally, I don't see a need to "go back to the beginning of this
>discussion" and re-trace our steps to find out what we're talking
>about.
>
>If the debate is "how much, when, how," then there's really no
>debate:  we all say "teach grammar."
>
>R. E.
>
>>As I see it
>> the participants in this discussion do NOT fall into the camps  "teach
>> literature" vs. "teach grammar." Neither camp is precluded from talking
>> about the rhetorical effects of grammatical and syntactic choices. The
>> crux of the issue is what or how much terminology do we need in order to
>> talk about those things.  Or what is the most helpful, illuminating, or
>> transparent terminology for talking about those things?  I believe there
>> is an ATEG subcommittee working on this question, is there not? Are they
>> getting anywhere? R. Michael Medley, Ph.D. Director, Intensive English
>> Program Eastern Mennonite University Harrisonburg, VA 22802 Office: (540)
>> 432-4051 Home: (540) 574-4277
>


Judith Diamondstone  (732) 932-7496  Ext. 352
Graduate School of Education
Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey
10 Seminary Place
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1183

ATOM RSS1 RSS2