Of course, there is the even more basic problem facing many of us: students
who are unable to identify verbs. It seems to me that this problem precedes
the inability to conjugate verbs. It is a very real problem among American
high school students from all "groups" (ethnicities, socio-econmic
backgrounds, dialectical backgrounds, etc.).
It still worries me that the biggest factor underlying the problem is the
lack of self-motivated, self-directed reading among our students. Is there
any evidence?
Paul E. Doniger
The Gilbert School
----- Original Message -----
From: Susan Witt <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2000 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: D. Mulroy's posting
> At 6/26/00, you wrote:
> >As a general rule, the college students with whom I deal are incapable of
> >conjugating the verb BE. Of course, they can use its forms correctly.
>
> I learned how to conjugate verbs when I took a foreign language in high
> school. When I was working with High School students, they did not know
> how to conjugate verbs, but once I showed them and did a few examples with
> them, they did not have any trouble with it. These were students who
spoke
> a non-standard dialect, did not write complete sentences, and read an
> average of 2 years below grade level.
>
> If no one has ever explained what it means to conjugate a verb, then of
> course the student won't understand how to do it. That doesn't mean they
> are not capable of doing it, or that they don't have conscious control
over
> the language. It simply means that they don't understand what it is you
> want them to do.
>
>
> >You could say that they have subconscious knowledge of its grammar in the
> >same sense that birds have a subconscious knowledge of aerodynamics. I
> >assume that education is ultimately aimed at conscious knowledge. I find
> >it hard to believe that many English teachers apparently view as
> >inconsequential the fact hardly any high school graduates can produce a
> >coherent account of the relationships between BE, IS, WAS, and BEEN. If
> >we are going to try to impart to our students any conscious knowledge of
> >the English language at all, wouldn't that be a good place to start?
What
> >would be an example of something about grammar that is more important to
> >know, consciously that is?
> >
> >
> >
> >On Fri, 23 Jun 2000, Johanna Rubba wrote:
> >
> >> Maybe D. (is it David?) Mulroy was just using shorthand in his
> >> description of a particular student's abilities, but if not, I'd like
to
> >> encourage him (and everybody) to maintain at all times a distinction
> >> between two kinds of knowledge of language: conscious and subconscious.
> >> People keep saying things like 'he had no idea how to conjugate BE' and
> >> 'the author obviously has no grasp of basic sentence structure'. This
> >> student had both, of course, but that knowledge lies below the level of
> >> conscious awareness. What Mr. Mulroy is lamenting is the student's lack
> >> of CONSCIOUS or explicit knowledge of terminology, and slips in the
> >> ability to notice what is wrong with a sentence that the student has
> >> written. I have no doubt that this student used the verb 'be' perfectly
> >> grammatically in his speech and writing most of the time. The sentence
> >> from his work that was cited --
> >>
> >> > "Generally, the importance of having the ability to write papers and
to
> >> > construct a well-composed essay is considered very important
throughout a
> >> > student's education and even in their career."
> >>
> >> shows a probable processing error -- the sentence is long and complex,
> >> and the first constituent containing 'importance' was out of conscious
> >> awareness by the time the second one was produced. Errors like this
> >> occur _constantly_ in speech and are rarely noticed [unless the speaker
> >> is a male member of the Bush family] and most often tolerated, since
> >> what people focus on most in talk is understanding the message. It's
not
> >> surprising to find an error like this at all. Most people would catch
an
> >> error like this in revision, if they had the time and were practiced at
> >> revision. Even in revision, one must keep the long and complex subject
> >> phrase in awareness while checking the predicate. This is a cognitive
> >> challenge for a novice editor, although the repetition of 'important'
> >> screams at us more-practiced people. Novice editors have a lot to pay
> >> attention to.
> >>
> >> Why is it important to keep this distinction in mind? Because
statements
> >> like 'he doesn't know how to ... ' can be interpreted as a lack of
> >> linguistic ability. This is a false and dangerous assessment. Many of
my
>
> >> students have gotten the message from grammar and writing classes, and
> >> from the general atmosphere, it seems, that they don't know English or
> >> that their English is bad. They often go on to conclude from this that
> >> they're stupid and have less intellectual ability than they actually
> >> have. Students certainly lack METALINGUISTIC knowledge -- the knowledge
> >> of descriptive terms and categories of grammatical analysis, and
> >> explicit knowledge of how constituents build sentences. And many
> >> students _do_ lack linguistic ability in the formal, written mode. But
> >> if their past schooling has not required them to read and write
> >> extensively, and if they have spent 6+ hours per day watching
> >> television, can we blame them for lacking this? You can't learn a
> >> language you're not exposed to.
> >>
> >> My students report great relief and a much more positive attitude
> >> towards learning grammatical metalanguage when I make clear to them how
> >> much _subconscious_ knowledge of English they possess, and how they can
> >> use that to help them with things like comma splices, etc. They still
> >> report that the material is difficult and challenging, but they are
> >> relieved of the stigma of 'not knowing their own language'.
> >>
> >> It is also tremendously helpful to discuss explicitly matters such as
> >> the structural differences between speech and writing (see Pam
Dykstra's
> >> great work on incorporating this into writing instruction) and the
> >> linguistic/metalinguistic difference itself.
> >>
> >> It is also a very good idea to point out the intrinsic logic of certain
> >> typical errors. Comma splices, for instance, are likely to occur
between
> >> two sentences that are closely related in meaning and in rhetorical
> >> function in the text. Fragments are likely to be 'afterthoughts' that
> >> are again closely related in meaning to what went before. So students
> >> are actually cuing to meaning relationships when they make these
errors.
> >> They just signal the meaning relationships in the wrong way -- they
> >> violate punctuation rules. When I cast these errors in this light,
> >> students realize that there is a 'method to their madness' -- that
their
> >> errors aren't just random stupidity. They are aware of rhetorical links
> >> in their writing -- they just do not know how to use punctuation
> >> conventionally in such situations.
> >>
> >> Research on second-language acquisition has demonstrated the importance
> >> of affective or emotional factors as determinative of motivation and
> >> confidence in learning; I think these factors are being recognized in
> >> learning in general these days. They're important in learning grammar,
too.
> >>
> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >> Johanna Rubba Assistant Professor, Linguistics
> >> English Department, California Polytechnic State University
> >> One Grand Avenue . San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
> >> Tel. (805)-756-2184 . Fax: (805)-756-6374 . Dept. Phone. 756-259
> >> . E-mail: [log in to unmask] . Home page:
http://www.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
> >> **
> >> "Understanding is a lot like sex; it's got a practical purpose,
>
> >> but that's not why people do it normally" - Frank
Oppenheimer
> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>
> >
> Susan Mari Witt
>
>
>
> 240 ERML, MC-051
> 1201 W. Gregory
> Urbana, IL 61801
>
> Phone: (217) 333-1965
> Fax: (217) 333-4777
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
|
