Re: Active versus passive (WAS Displays versus Appears-Which One? )

[Bruce Byfield <bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com>]

Dick Margulis wrote:
> 
> And Bruce, I agree with you. But the vocabulary used to write the rules of prescriptive grammar is still needed to discuss grammar descriptively.

I agree on the value of the vocabulary. My point was that the
vocabulary came from descriptive grammar, not prescriptive grammar.
Prescriptive grammar simply happened to spread some of the
vocabulary around.

> The fact is that the generative grammar of linguists and the descriptive grammar of English teachers are both valid. They address different needs, though. Understanding the way languages (spoken tongues) evolve is a wonderful thing. Being able to communicate concrete ideas in writing to a broad audience in a way that minimizes misunderstanding is also a wonderful thing. These two wonderful things are largely orthogonal to each other, so we should try to use the two senses of the word _grammar_ apart from each other, lest we cause more confusion than we relieve.

At some point, learning to communicate often does involve slogging
through the rules of grammar, just as (voice recognition software
notwithstanding), effective use of a computer involves learning
touch-typing. However, I think that prescriptive grammar handicaps
the professional writer as much as it helps: 

- It teaches a misleading overview of its subject, falsely
presenting the language as static. 

- It is generally out of sync with the spoken language by at least a
decade or two.

- In the form that it is usually presented, it cripples writers by
burdening them with false, arbitrary rules. At their worst, these
rules can actually interfer with communication.

So far as I'm concerned, grammar is useful only so far as it helps
you to communicate clearly. If this is the goal, then prescriptive
grammar is often a distraction. I believe that, if a more
descriptive approach was taken, then students would not only have a
better grasp on why the subject is important, but would also be able
to focus on the aspects of grammar that are needed for clarity. 

For example, what constitutes a complete sentence is useful
knowledge. So is knowing when sentence fragments are used in
everyday speech. If you have these pieces of information, you can
see what's missing in a sentence (and decide whether you want it
missing), increase parallelism, and so on. By contrast, the
arbitrary rule that you must never use sentence fragments is an
irrelevant, half-educated tradition. Yet more people seem to be
indocrinated with the arbitrary rules than with the useful
knowledge. Far from being against the teaching of grammar, I think
it should be extended, and done at a far more sophisticated level
than it is now.

-- 
Bruce Byfield, Outlaw Communications
Contributing Editor, Maximum Linux
604.421.7189 bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com

"To conclude,I'll tell you news that's right:
Christmas was killed at Naseby fight,
Charity was slain at that same time,
Jack Tell-Troth, too, a friend of mine."
- Anonymous 17th Century, "The World Is Turned Upside Down"

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Develop HTML-based Help with Macromedia Dreamweaver! (STC Discount.)
**NEW DATE/LOCATION!** January 16-17, 2001, New York, NY.
http://www.weisner.com/training/dreamweaver_help.htm or 800-646-9989.

Take XML and Tech Writing courses online!  Our instructor-led courses
(4-6 hrs/wk) give you "hands on" experience at your convenience. STC members
get 20% off!  http://www.online-learning.com/index.html.
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.