I was very excited over the posting of "From grammar quizzes to game-like practicing" and planned to send it to my professor for her upcoming grammar class at UCF this Spring. When I reached the end, however, I realized that it was she who had posted it. Oh, well.
Scott Catledge
Professor Emeritus
history and languages
retired
---- ATEG automatic digest system <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> There are 9 messages totaling 3574 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
> 1. Announcing Vyvyan Evans' The Language Myth: Why Language is not an
> Instinct (4)
> 2. Beowulf sentence a fragment? Yes. (4)
> 3. from grammar quizzes to game-like practicing
>
> 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/
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 17:42:15 +0000
> From: "Hancock, Craig G" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Announcing Vyvyan Evans' The Language Myth: Why Language is not an Instinct
>
> I wanted to call attention, for all of you who might be interested and haven’t noticed, to the publication of Vyvyan Evans new book (Cambridge University Press, 2014). It brings together in one place the developing evidence against the Generative view of language as instinctual and innate. The core perspective is that the generative view is more myth than science, developed at a time when we didn’t know nearly as much as we do now about language. In very readable form, he presents the evidence for a contrary view: that language is not unrelated to other animal communication, that there are no language universals (except those that arise from a universality of experience), that learning language draws on general properties of the mind (not unique to language), that language is interconnected with thought and with our interactions with the rest of the world.
> He is certainly not alone in this view, but others tend to argue for it as part of books or articles that focus more directly on one aspect or another of the functional/cognitive/usage based enterprise.
> As Dick Hudson points out in Language Networks: The New Word Grammar, the pedagogical implications are enormous. If grammar is innate and inevitable, then it stands to reason that our focus should be limited to the instances when it strays from prescriptive standards. If it is learned, functionally driven, and inextricably connected to both thought and discourse, then we have much to gain by understanding, nurturing, and mentoring progress. Even the question of whether to teach a formal grammar outside of the context of reading or writing seems irrelevant.
> There’s a huge opportunity for pedagogical approaches that take these new (empirically grounded) understandings into account.
>
> Craig
>
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Beth Young
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 11:07 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: from grammar quizzes to game-like practicing
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> I’ve developed some online games for grammar teaching and students do like the opportunity to practice that way. I use them in a class that teaches formal grammar, not writing, so the games are focused on sentence level grammar analysis, e.g., a roulette game helps them learn to identify the ten sentence patterns identified in our textbook (Martha Kolln’s Understanding English Grammar), a concentration game helps them match finite verb phrases to the corresponding verb expansion formula, a slot machine game demonstrates the importance of word order to syntax, etc.
>
> Unfortunately, most of these games were created by my university’s tech team and I can’t share them. If your university has a tech team, they might be able to get more info from our tech folks that create & maintain these widgets (https://materia.ucf.edu/).
>
> Google forms offers the ability to create surveys and to let students view the answers. I’ve used google forms to create a variety of activities; for example, this one is intended to help teach the concept of grammaticality: http://goo.gl/forms/Y14rSPQayd Students answer the questions, then view the responses (e.g., https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1EJLFoVCGMioQG9N2iEwevqad9oxiW6E6vFDlanyg3mk/viewanalytics ). They then try to figure out which two statements on the survey are ungrammatical (in a linguistic sense). The discussion can get pretty lively as students learn that an utterance they consider nonsensical would be considered unremarkable by someone else in the class.
>
> You could probably use Google forms to create a cloze test activity, too. I show students a text with every fifth word omitted. They try to fill in the blanks (this is sort of like “Mad Libs” except that I don’t label the part of speech that belongs in the blank). Then they view everyone’s guesses for every blank, plus the original words, and discuss: Which are easier to guess, form class words or structure class words? Which type of words would be easier for a nonnative speaker to guess? Why?
>
> Neither of these are practice activities, but I’m sure you could develop your own practice quizzes with that tool.
>
> I wouldn’t discount flashcards as a learning aid. My students make heavy use of flashcard decks to distinguish clauses from phrases, different types of clauses (nominal, adverbial, relative, independent), different types of phrases (prepositional, participial, etc.), active vs passive voice. I discovered that some students had to be taught how to use flashcards (!!!) but students report that practicing with flashcards has been useful.
>
> Hope this helps! Please let us know what else you find,
>
> Beth
>
> Beth Rapp Young
> Associate Professor, English
> Univ. of Central Florida
>
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Medley
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 9:27 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: from grammar quizzes to game-like practicing
>
> I appreciated reading comments about the online grammar quizzes. I have some of the same criticisms of these. However, I would like to give my students more chances to practice grammatical labeling and analysis--not in an error-focused but in a resource-focused mode. In other words, I want them to gain facility in identifying the meaning-making resources of the grammar. We don't have enough time for sufficient practice in class, and students don't seem motivated to use standard workbook types of practice. Taking a cue from Jose Bowen's Teaching Naked, I would like to build up a stock of online grammar games that would help students practice this kind of analysis. The problem I have encountered so far is finding a web-based resource that provides me with the kind of tools I need to make useful and attractive practice activities. A colleague in the biology department referred me to "Quizlet" -- a program that students (and teachers) can use to make flashcards. In experimenting with this program, I found it to be very limited. Does anyone else have experience using online game-making resources? Please recommend some.
>
> R. Michael Medley, Ph.D.
> Professor of English and Chair of Language & Literature
> Eastern Mennonite University
> 1200 Park Road, Harrisonburg, VA
> Office phone: 540-432-4051
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> “Language is the most massive and inclusive art we know, a mountainous and anonymous work of unconscious generations.” ― Edward Sapir<http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/195168.Edward_Sapir>
>
>
> [LISTSERV mailing list manager]<http://www.lsoft.com>
>
> [LISTSERV 16.0]<http://listserv.miamioh.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=ATEG>
>
>
>
>
> ATEG Digest - 2 Nov 2014 to 10 Nov 2014 (#2014-53)
> Table of contents:
>
> * The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites (4)
>
> 1. The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites
> * The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites (11/10)
> From: Nick Carbone <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> * Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites (11/10)
> From: Beth Young <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> * Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites (11/10)
> From: Nick Carbone <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> * Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites (11/10)
> From: "Hancock, Craig G" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>
>
>
>
> Browse the ATEG online archives.<http://listserv.miamioh.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=ATEG>
>
>
> [Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager]<http://www.lsoft.com/products/listserv-powered.asp>
>
>
> 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.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 11:53:07 -0600
> From: Robert Yates <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Announcing Vyvyan Evans' The Language Myth: Why Language is not an Instinct
>
> I need to read this book.
>
> Just one quick observation about language not being innate but is rather
> the result of general cognitive learning abilities.
>
> If there is true, then why is it the case that it is next to impossible for
> adults to achieve native-like competence in a second language yet children
> come close to native-like competence? Does Evans talk about this?
>
> Bob Yates
> University of Central Missouri
>
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Hancock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > I wanted to call attention, for all of you who might be interested
> > and haven’t noticed, to the publication of Vyvyan Evans new book (Cambridge
> > University Press, 2014). It brings together in one place the developing
> > evidence against the Generative view of language as instinctual and innate.
> > The core perspective is that the generative view is more myth than science,
> > developed at a time when we didn’t know nearly as much as we do now about
> > language. In very readable form, he presents the evidence for a contrary
> > view: that language is not unrelated to other animal communication, that
> > there are no language universals (except those that arise from a
> > universality of experience), that learning language draws on general
> > properties of the mind (not unique to language), that language is
> > interconnected with thought and with our interactions with the rest of the
> > world.
> >
> > He is certainly not alone in this view, but others tend to argue for
> > it as part of books or articles that focus more directly on one aspect or
> > another of the functional/cognitive/usage based enterprise.
> >
> > As Dick Hudson points out in *Language Networks: The New Word Grammar*,
> > the pedagogical implications are enormous. If grammar is innate and
> > inevitable, then it stands to reason that our focus should be limited to
> > the instances when it strays from prescriptive standards. If it is learned,
> > functionally driven, and inextricably connected to both thought and
> > discourse, then we have much to gain by understanding, nurturing, and
> > mentoring progress. Even the question of whether to teach a formal grammar
> > outside of the context of reading or writing seems irrelevant.
> >
> > There’s a huge opportunity for pedagogical approaches that take these
> > new (empirically grounded) understandings into account.
> >
> >
> >
> > Craig
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:
> > [log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Beth Young
> > *Sent:* Thursday, November 13, 2014 11:07 AM
> > *To:* [log in to unmask]
> > *Subject:* Re: from grammar quizzes to game-like practicing
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> >
> >
> > I’ve developed some online games for grammar teaching and students do like
> > the opportunity to practice that way. I use them in a class that teaches
> > formal grammar, not writing, so the games are focused on sentence level
> > grammar analysis, e.g., a roulette game helps them learn to identify the
> > ten sentence patterns identified in our textbook (Martha Kolln’s
> > Understanding English Grammar), a concentration game helps them match
> > finite verb phrases to the corresponding verb expansion formula, a slot
> > machine game demonstrates the importance of word order to syntax, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately, most of these games were created by my university’s tech
> > team and I can’t share them. If your university has a tech team, they might
> > be able to get more info from our tech folks that create & maintain these
> > widgets (https://materia.ucf.edu/).
> >
> >
> >
> > Google forms offers the ability to create surveys and to let students view
> > the answers. I’ve used google forms to create a variety of activities; for
> > example, this one is intended to help teach the concept of grammaticality:
> > http://goo.gl/forms/Y14rSPQayd Students answer the questions, then view
> > the responses (e.g.,
> > https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1EJLFoVCGMioQG9N2iEwevqad9oxiW6E6vFDlanyg3mk/viewanalytics
> > ). They then try to figure out which two statements on the survey are
> > ungrammatical (in a linguistic sense). The discussion can get pretty lively
> > as students learn that an utterance they consider nonsensical would be
> > considered unremarkable by someone else in the class.
> >
> >
> >
> > You could probably use Google forms to create a cloze test activity, too.
> > I show students a text with every fifth word omitted. They try to fill in
> > the blanks (this is sort of like “Mad Libs” except that I don’t label the
> > part of speech that belongs in the blank). Then they view everyone’s
> > guesses for every blank, plus the original words, and discuss: Which are
> > easier to guess, form class words or structure class words? Which type of
> > words would be easier for a nonnative speaker to guess? Why?
> >
> >
> >
> > Neither of these are practice activities, but I’m sure you could develop
> > your own practice quizzes with that tool.
> >
> >
> >
> > I wouldn’t discount flashcards as a learning aid. My students make heavy
> > use of flashcard decks to distinguish clauses from phrases, different types
> > of clauses (nominal, adverbial, relative, independent), different types of
> > phrases (prepositional, participial, etc.), active vs passive voice. I
> > discovered that some students had to be taught how to use flashcards (!!!)
> > but students report that practicing with flashcards has been useful.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hope this helps! Please let us know what else you find,
> >
> >
> >
> > Beth
> >
> >
> >
> > Beth Rapp Young
> >
> > Associate Professor, English
> >
> > Univ. of Central Florida
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [
> > mailto:[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>] *On Behalf
> > Of *Michael Medley
> > *Sent:* Thursday, November 13, 2014 9:27 AM
> > *To:* [log in to unmask]
> > *Subject:* from grammar quizzes to game-like practicing
> >
> >
> >
> > I appreciated reading comments about the online grammar quizzes. I have
> > some of the same criticisms of these. However, I would like to give my
> > students more chances to practice grammatical labeling and analysis--not in
> > an error-focused but in a resource-focused mode. In other words, I want
> > them to gain facility in identifying the meaning-making resources of the
> > grammar. We don't have enough time for sufficient practice in class, and
> > students don't seem motivated to use standard workbook types of practice.
> > Taking a cue from Jose Bowen's *Teaching Naked*, I would like to build up
> > a stock of online grammar games that would help students practice this kind
> > of analysis. The problem I have encountered so far is finding a web-based
> > resource that provides me with the kind of tools I need to make useful and
> > attractive practice activities. A colleague in the biology department
> > referred me to "Quizlet" -- a program that students (and teachers) can use
> > to make flashcards. In experimenting with this program, I found it to be
> > very limited. Does anyone else have experience using online game-making
> > resources? Please recommend some.
> >
> >
> > R. Michael Medley, Ph.D.
> >
> > Professor of English and Chair of Language & Literature
> >
> > Eastern Mennonite University
> > 1200 Park Road, Harrisonburg, VA
> >
> > Office phone: 540-432-4051
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > “Language is the most massive and inclusive art we know, a mountainous and
> > anonymous work of unconscious generations.” ― Edward Sapir
> > <http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/195168.Edward_Sapir>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [image: LISTSERV mailing list manager] <http://www.lsoft.com>
> >
> > [image: LISTSERV 16.0]
> > <http://listserv.miamioh.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=ATEG>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ATEG Digest - 2 Nov 2014 to 10 Nov 2014 (#2014-53) Table of contents:
> >
> > - The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for
> > Reviewing Grammar Sites <#149af6702f52cc4b_1499d3ac532ec463_S1> (4)
> >
> >
> > 1. The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for
> > Reviewing Grammar Sites
> > - The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for
> > Reviewing Grammar Sites
> > <http://?ui=2&ik=ffe8a3d384&view=att&th=1499d3ac532ec463&attid=0.1&disp=emb&zw&atsh=0>
> > (11/10)
> > *From:* Nick Carbone <[log in to unmask]>
> > - Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case
> > for Reviewing Grammar Sites
> > <http://?ui=2&ik=ffe8a3d384&view=att&th=1499d3ac532ec463&attid=0.2&disp=emb&zw&atsh=0>
> > (11/10)
> > *From:* Beth Young <[log in to unmask]>
> > - Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case
> > for Reviewing Grammar Sites
> > <http://?ui=2&ik=ffe8a3d384&view=att&th=1499d3ac532ec463&attid=0.3&disp=emb&zw&atsh=0>
> > (11/10)
> > *From:* Nick Carbone <[log in to unmask]>
> > - Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case
> > for Reviewing Grammar Sites
> > <http://?ui=2&ik=ffe8a3d384&view=att&th=1499d3ac532ec463&attid=0.4&disp=emb&zw&atsh=0>
> > (11/10)
> > *From:* "Hancock, Craig G" <[log in to unmask]>
> >
> >
> >
> > Browse the ATEG online archives.
> > <http://listserv.miamioh.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=ATEG>
> >
> > [image: Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager]
> > <http://www.lsoft.com/products/listserv-powered.asp>
> >
> >
> >
> > 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/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 11:56:56 -0600
> From: "Albert E. Krahn" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Beowulf sentence a fragment? Yes.
>
> I don't recall seeing any really good responses to this request over
> the last few digests:
>
> -------------
> Please read the following and tell me if you would consider the last
> sentence a fragment:
> "This quote from Beowulf exemplifies not only the best of man but
> the worst of man as well. For this quote is a reminder to all that
> standing by each other, through thick and thin, is the real test of
> being a man of true worth."
> ---------------------
>
> It is quite obviously a fragment in the technical sense. It is a
> subordinate clause. It begins with a subordinator. "For" here is
> equivalent to "because." It is not a coordinator.
>
> The writer made a simple mistake by including the "for." The sentence
> stands alone without it. It also could have worked all right had the
> writer changed the punctuation:
>
> . . . worst of man as well for this
> quote is . . .
>
> Some people might want to include a comma:
>
> . . . worst of man as well, for this
> quote is . . .
>
> (In the case of "for," the ambiguous subordinator/coordinator, the
> comma might be helpful, but with other subordinators it might be redundant.)
>
> ----------------------------
>
> But imagine the sentences reversed and with a more accurate subordinator:
>
> "Because this quote is a reminder to all that standing by each other,
> through thick and thin, is the real test of being a man of true
> worth, this quote from Beowulf exemplifies not only the best of man
> but the worst of man as well."
>
> Indeed, this order might be preferable because cause and effect would
> be in a better relationship.
> ---------------
> So, you could criticize the writer for: 1. logical order; 2.
> punctuation; or 3. word choice (for).
>
> But it is technically a fragment.
>
>
> Albert E. Krahn
> [log in to unmask]
>
> 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/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:00:19 -0500
> From: Nick Carbone <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: from grammar quizzes to game-like practicing
>
> Michael,
>
> If you go to http://bcs.bedfordstmartins.com/rewritingplus/ and request
> instructor access, you'll see a Peer Review game in the collection called
> Peer Factor -- direct link:
> s.com/rewritingplus/PeerFactor/Episode1/index.html. It basically runs using
> Adobe Flash. It's a simulation based game -- students join a peer review
> group, read an essay, the assignment that goes with it, and then see
> another group member make a comment.. When given a chance at their own
> comment, students use a multiple choice to select the kind of comment they
> think will help most. Scoring is based on a helpfulness meter.
>
> So a grammar version of this might be based on the writer reviewing a text,
> maybe playing the role of an apprentice copy editor who is charged with
> fixing and revising prose for publication, and you get a meaning making
> because their choices should be guided by making meaning clearer rather
> than applying a grammar term or rule.
>
> Meanwhile, for other game interfaces, some free:
> https://gamesined.wikispaces.com/Game+Creation+Tools
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Michael Medley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > I appreciated reading comments about the online grammar quizzes. I have
> > some of the same criticisms of these. However, I would like to give my
> > students more chances to practice grammatical labeling and analysis--not in
> > an error-focused but in a resource-focused mode. In other words, I want
> > them to gain facility in identifying the meaning-making resources of the
> > grammar. We don't have enough time for sufficient practice in class, and
> > students don't seem motivated to use standard workbook types of practice.
> > Taking a cue from Jose Bowen's *Teaching Naked*, I would like to build up
> > a stock of online grammar games that would help students practice this kind
> > of analysis. The problem I have encountered so far is finding a web-based
> > resource that provides me with the kind of tools I need to make useful and
> > attractive practice activities. A colleague in the biology department
> > referred me to "Quizlet" -- a program that students (and teachers) can use
> > to make flashcards. In experimenting with this program, I found it to be
> > very limited. Does anyone else have experience using online game-making
> > resources? Please recommend some.
> >
> > R. Michael Medley, Ph.D.
> > Professor of English and Chair of Language & Literature
> > Eastern Mennonite University
> > 1200 Park Road, Harrisonburg, VA
> > Office phone: 540-432-4051
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > “Language is the most massive and inclusive art we know, a mountainous and
> > anonymous work of unconscious generations.” ― Edward Sapir
> > <http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/195168.Edward_Sapir>
> >
> > [image: LISTSERV mailing list manager] <http://www.lsoft.com> [image:
> >> LISTSERV 16.0] <http://listserv.miamioh.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=ATEG>
> >> ATEG Digest - 2 Nov 2014 to 10 Nov 2014 (#2014-53) Table of contents:
> >>
> >> - The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for
> >> Reviewing Grammar Sites <#149a99d59958365e_1499d3ac532ec463_S1> (4)
> >>
> >>
> >> 1. The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for
> >> Reviewing Grammar Sites
> >> - The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for
> >> Reviewing Grammar Sites
> >> <http://?ui=2&ik=ffe8a3d384&view=att&th=1499d3ac532ec463&attid=0.1&disp=emb&zw&atsh=0>
> >> (11/10)
> >> *From:* Nick Carbone <[log in to unmask]>
> >> - Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case
> >> for Reviewing Grammar Sites
> >> <http://?ui=2&ik=ffe8a3d384&view=att&th=1499d3ac532ec463&attid=0.2&disp=emb&zw&atsh=0>
> >> (11/10)
> >> *From:* Beth Young <[log in to unmask]>
> >> - Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case
> >> for Reviewing Grammar Sites
> >> <http://?ui=2&ik=ffe8a3d384&view=att&th=1499d3ac532ec463&attid=0.3&disp=emb&zw&atsh=0>
> >> (11/10)
> >> *From:* Nick Carbone <[log in to unmask]>
> >> - Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case
> >> for Reviewing Grammar Sites
> >> <http://?ui=2&ik=ffe8a3d384&view=att&th=1499d3ac532ec463&attid=0.4&disp=emb&zw&atsh=0>
> >> (11/10)
> >> *From:* "Hancock, Craig G" <[log in to unmask]>
> >>
> >>
> >> Browse the ATEG online archives.
> >> <http://listserv.miamioh.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=ATEG>
> >>
> >> [image: Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager]
> >> <http://www.lsoft.com/products/listserv-powered.asp>
> >>
> >
> > 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/
> >
>
>
>
> --
> nick.carbone at gmail dot com
> http://ncarbone.blogspot.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/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 18:02:22 +0000
> From: "Hancock, Craig G" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Announcing Vyvyan Evans' The Language Myth: Why Language is not an Instinct
>
> Bob,
> He doesn’t respond to that directly (as an argument) but does say that language is “a special kind of cultural intelligence that other species don’t have.” The usage based position is that language arises from use and is sustained by use. Children are immersed in the native culture from the onset. I suspect he would address the difficulty in that way. Learning a language means acquiring a wide range of constructions, many of them schematic, each with their own context(s) of use. It shouldn’t be surprising that it’s hard to do that twice.
>
> Craig
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robert Yates
> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 12:53 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Announcing Vyvyan Evans' The Language Myth: Why Language is not an Instinct
>
> I need to read this book.
>
> Just one quick observation about language not being innate but is rather the result of general cognitive learning abilities.
>
> If there is true, then why is it the case that it is next to impossible for adults to achieve native-like competence in a second language yet children come close to native-like competence? Does Evans talk about this?
>
> Bob Yates
> University of Central Missouri
>
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Hancock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> I wanted to call attention, for all of you who might be interested and haven’t noticed, to the publication of Vyvyan Evans new book (Cambridge University Press, 2014). It brings together in one place the developing evidence against the Generative view of language as instinctual and innate. The core perspective is that the generative view is more myth than science, developed at a time when we didn’t know nearly as much as we do now about language. In very readable form, he presents the evidence for a contrary view: that language is not unrelated to other animal communication, that there are no language universals (except those that arise from a universality of experience), that learning language draws on general properties of the mind (not unique to language), that language is interconnected with thought and with our interactions with the rest of the world.
> He is certainly not alone in this view, but others tend to argue for it as part of books or articles that focus more directly on one aspect or another of the functional/cognitive/usage based enterprise.
> As Dick Hudson points out in Language Networks: The New Word Grammar, the pedagogical implications are enormous. If grammar is innate and inevitable, then it stands to reason that our focus should be limited to the instances when it strays from prescriptive standards. If it is learned, functionally driven, and inextricably connected to both thought and discourse, then we have much to gain by understanding, nurturing, and mentoring progress. Even the question of whether to teach a formal grammar outside of the context of reading or writing seems irrelevant.
> There’s a huge opportunity for pedagogical approaches that take these new (empirically grounded) understandings into account.
>
> Craig
>
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Beth Young
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 11:07 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: from grammar quizzes to game-like practicing
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> I’ve developed some online games for grammar teaching and students do like the opportunity to practice that way. I use them in a class that teaches formal grammar, not writing, so the games are focused on sentence level grammar analysis, e.g., a roulette game helps them learn to identify the ten sentence patterns identified in our textbook (Martha Kolln’s Understanding English Grammar), a concentration game helps them match finite verb phrases to the corresponding verb expansion formula, a slot machine game demonstrates the importance of word order to syntax, etc.
>
> Unfortunately, most of these games were created by my university’s tech team and I can’t share them. If your university has a tech team, they might be able to get more info from our tech folks that create & maintain these widgets (https://materia.ucf.edu/).
>
> Google forms offers the ability to create surveys and to let students view the answers. I’ve used google forms to create a variety of activities; for example, this one is intended to help teach the concept of grammaticality: http://goo.gl/forms/Y14rSPQayd Students answer the questions, then view the responses (e.g., https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1EJLFoVCGMioQG9N2iEwevqad9oxiW6E6vFDlanyg3mk/viewanalytics ). They then try to figure out which two statements on the survey are ungrammatical (in a linguistic sense). The discussion can get pretty lively as students learn that an utterance they consider nonsensical would be considered unremarkable by someone else in the class.
>
> You could probably use Google forms to create a cloze test activity, too. I show students a text with every fifth word omitted. They try to fill in the blanks (this is sort of like “Mad Libs” except that I don’t label the part of speech that belongs in the blank). Then they view everyone’s guesses for every blank, plus the original words, and discuss: Which are easier to guess, form class words or structure class words? Which type of words would be easier for a nonnative speaker to guess? Why?
>
> Neither of these are practice activities, but I’m sure you could develop your own practice quizzes with that tool.
>
> I wouldn’t discount flashcards as a learning aid. My students make heavy use of flashcard decks to distinguish clauses from phrases, different types of clauses (nominal, adverbial, relative, independent), different types of phrases (prepositional, participial, etc.), active vs passive voice. I discovered that some students had to be taught how to use flashcards (!!!) but students report that practicing with flashcards has been useful.
>
> Hope this helps! Please let us know what else you find,
>
> Beth
>
> Beth Rapp Young
> Associate Professor, English
> Univ. of Central Florida
>
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Medley
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 9:27 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: from grammar quizzes to game-like practicing
>
> I appreciated reading comments about the online grammar quizzes. I have some of the same criticisms of these. However, I would like to give my students more chances to practice grammatical labeling and analysis--not in an error-focused but in a resource-focused mode. In other words, I want them to gain facility in identifying the meaning-making resources of the grammar. We don't have enough time for sufficient practice in class, and students don't seem motivated to use standard workbook types of practice. Taking a cue from Jose Bowen's Teaching Naked, I would like to build up a stock of online grammar games that would help students practice this kind of analysis. The problem I have encountered so far is finding a web-based resource that provides me with the kind of tools I need to make useful and attractive practice activities. A colleague in the biology department referred me to "Quizlet" -- a program that students (and teachers) can use to make flashcards. In experimenting with this program, I found it to be very limited. Does anyone else have experience using online game-making resources? Please recommend some.
>
> R. Michael Medley, Ph.D.
> Professor of English and Chair of Language & Literature
> Eastern Mennonite University
> 1200 Park Road, Harrisonburg, VA
> Office phone: 540-432-4051<tel:540-432-4051>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> “Language is the most massive and inclusive art we know, a mountainous and anonymous work of unconscious generations.” ― Edward Sapir<http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/195168.Edward_Sapir>
>
>
> [LISTSERV mailing list manager]<http://www.lsoft.com>
>
> [LISTSERV 16.0]<http://listserv.miamioh.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=ATEG>
>
>
>
>
> ATEG Digest - 2 Nov 2014 to 10 Nov 2014 (#2014-53)
> Table of contents:
>
> * The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites (4)
>
> 1. The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites
> * The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites<http://?ui=2&ik=ffe8a3d384&view=att&th=1499d3ac532ec463&attid=0.1&disp=emb&zw&atsh=0> (11/10)
> From: Nick Carbone <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> * Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites<http://?ui=2&ik=ffe8a3d384&view=att&th=1499d3ac532ec463&attid=0.2&disp=emb&zw&atsh=0> (11/10)
> From: Beth Young <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> * Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites<http://?ui=2&ik=ffe8a3d384&view=att&th=1499d3ac532ec463&attid=0.3&disp=emb&zw&atsh=0> (11/10)
> From: Nick Carbone <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> * Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites<http://?ui=2&ik=ffe8a3d384&view=att&th=1499d3ac532ec463&attid=0.4&disp=emb&zw&atsh=0> (11/10)
> From: "Hancock, Craig G" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>
>
>
>
> Browse the ATEG online archives.<http://listserv.miamioh.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=ATEG>
>
>
> [Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager]<http://www.lsoft.com/products/listserv-powered.asp>
>
>
> 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 h
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 10:48:56 -0800
> From: Karl Hagen <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Beowulf sentence a fragment? Yes.
>
> In a technical sense, it isn’t obvious at all that the for-clause is a fragment.
>
> The problem is that “for” sits on the boundary between coordination and subordination. It has certain qualities of both categories. Unlike “because” and other clear subordinators, for-clauses cannot be fronted within their own sentence. Compare (rewriting the original to make it more comprehensible):
>
> (1) Because this quote reminds us that loyalty is the true test of manhood, it exemplifies the warrior ethos of Beowulf.
> (2) *For this quote reminds us that loyalty is the true test of manhood, it exemplifies the warrior ethos of Beowulf.
>
> It also can’t be coordinated:
>
> (3) This quote exemplifies the warrior ethos of Beowulf because it reminds us that loyalty is the true test of manhood and because it warns that without constant heroism society is doomed.
> (4) *This quote exemplifies the warrior ethos of Beowulf, for it reminds us that loyalty is the true test of manhood and for it warns that without constant heroism society is doomed.
>
> These restrictions make it resemble the pure coordinators.
>
> “For” differs from the pure coordinators in that it’s restricted to appearing with finite clauses and that you can’t chain for-clauses in a series. Those features make it seem more like a subordinator.
>
> So whether you classify “for” as a subordinator or a coordinator depends on which of these features you find most salient. Most contemporary usage manuals implicitly group “for” with the coordinators, given the FANBOYS rules for creating complete sentences. If you accept that categorization as standard, then the only remaining question is whether or not you think it’s permissible to start a sentence with a coordinator, something the vast majority of usage books license.
>
> So while I would say that there certainly is some evidence to classify “for” as a subordinator (or a preposition, if you prefer the CGEL terminology), I find it extremely problematic to regard it as an unquestionable fragment, particularly for the purpose of docking points from a student’s composition, since punctuating sentences starting with “for” is clearly approved of by many usage books, as well as long historical precedent.
>
> Karl
>
> > On Nov 14, 2014, at 9:56 AM, Albert E. Krahn <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > I don't recall seeing any really good responses to this request over the last few digests:
> >
> > -------------
> > Please read the following and tell me if you would consider the last sentence a fragment:
> > "This quote from Beowulf exemplifies not only the best of man but the worst of man as well. For this quote is a reminder to all that standing by each other, through thick and thin, is the real test of being a man of true worth."
> > ---------------------
> >
> > It is quite obviously a fragment in the technical sense. It is a subordinate clause. It begins with a subordinator. "For" here is equivalent to "because." It is not a coordinator.
> >
> > The writer made a simple mistake by including the "for." The sentence stands alone without it. It also could have worked all right had the writer changed the punctuation:
> >
> > . . . worst of man as well for this quote is . . .
> >
> > Some people might want to include a comma:
> >
> > . . . worst of man as well, for this quote is . . .
> >
> > (In the case of "for," the ambiguous subordinator/coordinator, the comma might be helpful, but with other subordinators it might be redundant.)
> >
> > ----------------------------
> >
> > But imagine the sentences reversed and with a more accurate subordinator:
> >
> > "Because this quote is a reminder to all that standing by each other, through thick and thin, is the real test of being a man of true worth, this quote from Beowulf exemplifies not only the best of man but the worst of man as well."
> >
> > Indeed, this order might be preferable because cause and effect would be in a better relationship.
> > ---------------
> > So, you could criticize the writer for: 1. logical order; 2. punctuation; or 3. word choice (for).
> >
> > But it is technically a fragment.
> >
> >
> > Albert E. Krahn
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
> > 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/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 22:05:05 +0000
> From: Bob Yates <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Announcing Vyvyan Evans' The Language Myth: Why Language is not an Instinct
>
> Craig,
>
>
> I have not read the book. I plan to.
>
>
> Here are some problems with a usage account.
>
>
> See the work of Jenny Singleton and her study of Simon. (Her work is mentioned in Pinker; I was at the University of Illinois when she was doing her dissertation on Simon.). Simon was born deaf. His parents are deaf. His parents’ American Sign Language was not very standard because they were late learners of ASL. Simon’s only input was from the incomplete ASL of his parents. Singleton compared Simon's knowledge of ASL to those who learned ASL from parents whose ASL was standard. The usage account predicts, I believe, Simon should look like his parent and not those whose ASL was standard. Simon's ASL was like those exposed to standard ASL. That is a result that does not support a usage account.
>
>
>
>
> 2) How does a usage account explain judgments about the following two pairs of sentences?
>
>
>
> A) Bob needs someone to work for.
>
> B) Bob needs someone to work for him.
>
>
>
>
> C) These are the letters I threw away without reading.
>
> D) These are the letters I threw away without reading them.
>
>
> A and B have different meanings but C and D have the same meaning. What is it about “use” that explains this fact? Or, what is different about the “constructions” in AB and CD, based on use, that leads to the obvious differences in meaning?
>
>
> 3) How does the usage base account explain the following judgments: E is a possible question in English and F isn't a possible question?
>
>
> E) What does Bob like rum with?
>
> F) *What does Bob like rum and?
>
>
> If I understand the account correctly, we are not born with categories like conjunction and preposition, so how is that distinction learned with our general cognitive learning skills and how is the constraint on moving a wh- out of one and not another based solely on usage? (I assume whether I order a rum with coke or a rum and coke I will get the same drink.)
>
>
> 4) Finally, here is a sentence that I don't think anyone has ever heard or read, yet every proficient speaker of English knows is a possible sentence.
>
>
> G) There is the woman whose daughter my daughter is prettier than.
>
>
> Based solely on usage, how does anyone know that this sentence that only occurs in linguistics texts a possible English sentence?
>
>
> Bob Yates
>
> University of Central Missouri
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Hancock, Craig G
> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 12:02 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Bob,
>
> He doesn’t respond to that directly (as an argument) but does say that language is “a special kind of cultural intelligence that other species don’t have.” The usage based position is that language arises from use and is sustained by use. Children are immersed in the native culture from the onset. I suspect he would address the difficulty in that way. Learning a language means acquiring a wide range of constructions, many of them schematic, each with their own context(s) of use. It shouldn’t be surprising that it’s hard to do that twice.
>
>
>
> Craig
>
>
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robert Yates
> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 12:53 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Announcing Vyvyan Evans' The Language Myth: Why Language is not an Instinct
>
>
>
>
> I need to read this book.
>
>
>
>
>
> Just one quick observation about language not being innate but is rather the result of general cognitive learning abilities.
>
>
>
>
>
> If there is true, then why is it the case that it is next to impossible for adults to achieve native-like competence in a second language yet children come close to native-like competence? Does Evans talk about this?
>
>
>
>
>
> Bob Yates
>
>
> University of Central Missouri
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Hancock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
>
> I wanted to call attention, for all of you who might be interested and haven’t noticed, to the publication of Vyvyan Evans new book (Cambridge University Press, 2014). It brings together in one place the developing evidence against the Generative view of language as instinctual and innate. The core perspective is that the generative view is more myth than science, developed at a time when we didn’t know nearly as much as we do now about language. In very readable form, he presents the evidence for a contrary view: that language is not unrelated to other animal communication, that there are no language universals (except those that arise from a universality of experience), that learning language draws on general properties of the mind (not unique to language), that language is interconnected with thought and with our interactions with the rest of the world.
>
> He is certainly not alone in this view, but others tend to argue for it as part of books or articles that focus more directly on one aspect or another of the functional/cognitive/usage based enterprise.
>
> As Dick Hudson points out in Language Networks: The New Word Grammar, the pedagogical implications are enormous. If grammar is innate and inevitable, then it stands to reason that our focus should be limited to the instances when it strays from prescriptive standards. If it is learned, functionally driven, and inextricably connected to both thought and discourse, then we have much to gain by understanding, nurturing, and mentoring progress. Even the question of whether to teach a formal grammar outside of the context of reading or writing seems irrelevant.
>
> There’s a huge opportunity for pedagogical approaches that take these new (empirically grounded) understandings into account.
>
>
>
> Craig
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Beth Young
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 11:07 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: from grammar quizzes to game-like practicing
>
>
>
> Hi Michael,
>
>
>
> I’ve developed some online games for grammar teaching and students do like the opportunity to practice that way. I use them in a class that teaches formal grammar, not writing, so the games are focused on sentence level grammar analysis, e.g., a roulette game helps them learn to identify the ten sentence patterns identified in our textbook (Martha Kolln’s Understanding English Grammar), a concentration game helps them match finite verb phrases to the corresponding verb expansion formula, a slot machine game demonstrates the importance of word order to syntax, etc.
>
>
>
> Unfortunately, most of these games were created by my university’s tech team and I can’t share them. If your university has a tech team, they might be able to get more info from our tech folks that create & maintain these widgets (https://materia.ucf.edu/).
>
>
>
> Google forms offers the ability to create surveys and to let students view the answers. I’ve used google forms to create a variety of activities; for example, this one is intended to help teach the concept of grammaticality: http://goo.gl/forms/Y14rSPQayd Students answer the questions, then view the responses (e.g., https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1EJLFoVCGMioQG9N2iEwevqad9oxiW6E6vFDlanyg3mk/viewanalytics ). They then try to figure out which two statements on the survey are ungrammatical (in a linguistic sense). The discussion can get pretty lively as students learn that an utterance they consider nonsensical would be considered unremarkable by someone else in the class.
>
>
>
> You could probably use Google forms to create a cloze test activity, too. I show students a text with every fifth word omitted. They try to fill in the blanks (this is sort of like “Mad Libs” except that I don’t label the part of speech that belongs in the blank). Then they view everyone’s guesses for every blank, plus the original words, and discuss: Which are easier to guess, form class words or structure class words? Which type of words would be easier for a nonnative speaker to guess? Why?
>
>
>
> Neither of these are practice activities, but I’m sure you could develop your own practice quizzes with that tool.
>
>
>
> I wouldn’t discount flashcards as a learning aid. My students make heavy use of flashcard decks to distinguish clauses from phrases, different types of clauses (nominal, adverbial, relative, independent), different types of phrases (prepositional, participial, etc.), active vs passive voice. I discovered that some students had to be taught how to use flashcards (!!!) but students report that practicing with flashcards has been useful.
>
>
>
> Hope this helps! Please let us know what else you find,
>
>
>
> Beth
>
>
>
> Beth Rapp Young
>
> Associate Professor, English
>
> Univ. of Central Florida
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Medley
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 9:27 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: from grammar quizzes to game-like practicing
>
>
>
>
> I appreciated reading comments about the online grammar quizzes. I have some of the same criticisms of these. However, I would like to give my students more chances to practice grammatical labeling and analysis--not in an error-focused but in a resource-focused mode. In other words, I want them to gain facility in identifying the meaning-making resources of the grammar. We don't have enough time for sufficient practice in class, and students don't seem motivated to use standard workbook types of practice. Taking a cue from Jose Bowen's Teaching Naked, I would like to build up a stock of online grammar games that would help students practice this kind of analysis. The problem I have encountered so far is finding a web-based resource that provides me with the kind of tools I need to make useful and attractive practice activities. A colleague in the biology department referred me to "Quizlet" -- a program that students (and teachers) can use to make flashcards. In experimenting with this program, I found it to be very limited. Does anyone else have experience using online game-making resources? Please recommend some.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> R. Michael Medley, Ph.D.
>
> Professor of English and Chair of Language & Literature
>
> Eastern Mennonite University
> 1200 Park Road, Harrisonburg, VA
>
> Office phone: 540-432-4051
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> “Language is the most massive and inclusive art we know, a mountainous and anonymous work of unconscious generations.” ― Edward Sapir
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> LISTSERV mailing list manager
>
> LISTSERV 16.0
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ATEG Digest - 2 Nov 2014 to 10 Nov 2014 (#2014-53)
>
> Table of contents:
> The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites (4)
> The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites (11/10)
> From: Nick Carbone <[log in to unmask]>
> Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites (11/10)
> From: Beth Young <[log in to unmask]>
> Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites (11/10)
> From: Nick Carbone <[log in to unmask]>
> Re: The Ineleluctable Attraction of Grammar Quizzes and the Case for Reviewing Grammar Sites (11/10)
> From: "Hancock, Craig G" <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Browse the ATEG online archives.
>
> Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 23:02:53 +0000
> From: GERALD W WALTON <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Beowulf sentence a fragment? Yes.
>
> It is quite obviously a fragment in the technical sense. It is a subordinate clause. It begins with a subordinator. "For" here is equivalent to "because." It is not a coordinator.
>
> The writer made a simple mistake by including the "for." The sentence stands alone without it. It also could have worked all right had the writer changed the punctuation:
>
> Correct.
>
> And I wonder about current-day usage of "so" in similar situations. It seems to me that many people put it in the coordinator category with words like "and" and "but." I consider it a subordinate conjunction (or whatever the term is) like "therefore."
>
> And the use of "for" reminds me of a sentence I remember from a 1955 textbook. How is for used in the sentence "For me to go now is impossible"? Betcha nobody reading this will classify it the way that author did.
>
> gww
>
>
>
> 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/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 17:26:53 -0800
> From: Karl Hagen <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Beowulf sentence a fragment? Yes.
>
> Please reread what I wrote. I provided evidence that ‘for’ is not unambiguosly a subordinator and noted that the rules in most usage books classify ‘for’ with the coordinators. Semantic similarity of ‘for’ and ‘because’ is no evidence at all for lexical categorization. If it were, then ‘however’ would be considered a coordinator because it is more or less equivalent in meaning to ‘but’ in many contexts.
>
> If you prefer, on balance, to call it a subordinator, I understand the choice, but to simply dismiss sentences that start with “for” as in error overlooks the fact that a lot of standard authorities disagree with you. By dismissing it as a “simple” mistake you are erecting your particular analysis into a hard-and-fast rule that many, many other well-educated writers don’t follow.
>
> And, of course, the use of “for” you cite in your final example is entirely different, as this is the marker of an infinitive clause. At issue is “for” with a finite clause.
>
>
> > On Nov 14, 2014, at 3:02 PM, GERALD W WALTON <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > It is quite obviously a fragment in the technical sense. It is a subordinate clause. It begins with a subordinator. "For" here is equivalent to "because." It is not a coordinator.
> >
> > The writer made a simple mistake by including the "for." The sentence stands alone without it. It also could have worked all right had the writer changed the punctuation:
> >
> > Correct.
> >
> > And I wonder about current-day usage of "so" in similar situations. It seems to me that many people put it in the coordinator category with words like "and" and "but." I consider it a subordinate conjunction (or whatever the term is) like "therefore."
> >
> > And the use of "for" reminds me of a sentence I remember from a 1955 textbook. How is for used in the sentence "For me to go now is impossible"? Betcha nobody reading this will classify it the way that author did.
> >
> > gww
> >
> >
> > 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/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of ATEG Digest - 13 Nov 2014 to 14 Nov 2014 (#2014-55)
> **********************************************************
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/
|
