Hello all,

The list has been unusually quiet! I guess the spring term is just 
starting for many of you. We are already approaching mid-quarter!

Just wanted to share an observation that grew out of an assignment I 
made to my graduate intro linguistics class (degree of MA in English). 
The assignment was a set of questions designed to gauge what "lay" 
people know/think about language. It touched on the areas in which the 
usual myths abound: how children acquire their native language, whether 
one kind of English is better than another, and so on. The students were 
to brainstorm with a few other people to come up with answers.

The answers to most of the questions verified the usual myths, but the 
answers to one question struck me above all others: I asked the question 
"What is language made up of?"

The answers to these questions revealed a virtual vacuum. The answer in 
every case was very short, whereas others elicited lists of multiple 
items or short paragraphs. Most listed only words and in some cases also 
sounds; some also mentioned writing (not consider an essential part of 
language by  linguists). A few added "rules", but did not attempt to 
describe what kind of rules or how many.

Yet awareness of the vast knowledge base each human possesses about 
language is the main fundament to debunking most of the myths: (a) 
knowing how complex language is allows us to recognize what a huge feat 
young children of all backgrounds have accomplished; (b) knowing this 
provides the main argument against qualitative superiority/inferiority 
of languages/dialects with respect to each other; (c) knowing this 
enriches one's understanding of varying discourse styles for varying 
situations; (d) knowing this enables people to realize that "grammar" is 
more than just 20 or so rules for "getting it right when you write" plus 
mechanics, that it is rather a gigantic resource for shaping meaning in 
communcation.

Keep in mind that most of these students have an undergraduate degree in 
  "English" and are studying English literature (which is made of 
English language) for their degree.

This, I believe, is a strong argument for restoring teaching about 
language in school, but via a method that does more than deal with the 
rules for "correctness". Over the course of a (good) K-12 education, 
children learn about the great complexity of life on earth; about the 
vastness of human history; they learn complex mathematics; many learn 
chemistry and physics. They do not even get the equivalent of arithmetic 
as far as language is concerned. The lack of correct information about 
language leaves them with only the flat-earth stock of public "wisdom" 
about language.

Reading those answers was a very sad moment for me. How much can I teach 
these folks in ten weeks?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Johanna Rubba   Associate 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.  756-2596
• E-mail: [log in to unmask] •      Home page: 
http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

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/