ATEG Archives

June 2000

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:
Harry Noden <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 24 Jun 2000 01:14:46 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (63 lines)
Hi Johanna,

        I agree with much of what you said. My point was not to
suggest that theory and practice be divided. I feel the marriage of
both are "essential" in all aspects of education. Personally, most of
my professional life has been an effort to translate sound theory
into practical classroom applications.

        However, observing comments on this listserv, I do get the
sense that there are two distinct, (almost uncompromising and
sometimes arrogant) attitudes that occasionally evoke abrasive
exchanges rather than enlightened discussion. Your following comment
in which you characterize your favored group (the other group) is a
case in point.


You wrote:
         "The other group [as opposed to the first group]  seems to
advocate teaching grammar as a way of bringing students to a deeper
understanding of the structure of English -- focusing not just on
what is problematic for students in their writing, but on
understanding how grammar (syntax) functions in language in putting
meanings together and in creating textual coherence and style."


        Doesn't this suggest that the first group (which I suppose
would include me) is unconcerned with bringing students a deep
understanding of the structure of English? Aren't you also suggesting
that there are a number of individuals on this listserv who are
unconcerned with teaching students how syntax functions to create
meaning and how language communicates through textual coherence and
style? If so, I would have to disagree. If not, I apologize for
misinterpreting your comment. But my point is that grouping, whether
yours or mine, doesn't accomplish much.

        I think we have to recognize that every approach to grammar
and every type of grammar yields benefits unique to its own
perspective. Just as the scientist, the historian, and the artist
view a mountain stream from totally different viewpoints, so it is
with grammarians.

        Our task should be to share the successes of our own
perspectives as we search for common threads, rather than attacking
views that don't easily harmonize with our own beliefs. One who loves
the music of jazz should be able to appreciate why a friend might
love blues, even though he or she doesn't share that same passion.
Both are lovers of music.


Harry











        Dance like nobody is watching. Love like you'll never get hurt.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2