Re: Grammar Books

["Higgins, Lisa" <LHiggins -at- CARRIERACCESS -dot- COM>]

I honestly don't understand why this is such an emotional issue. Every time
it comes up, people get attacked personally. That's inappropriate and
uncalled for.

There's a big misunderstanding in these arguments around the use of the word
'grammar.' Language is not language without grammar. The real issue is that
of usage. Grammar is internal to language, and usage is external. Everyone
knows grammar. Different people employ different usages, and the argument
here is over Standard American English usage and its value.

I am a descriptivist. I do, however, see some value to certain conventions
of SAE. What I _don't_ get is the wholesale acceptance of every specious
standard that comes along. I think that we, as writers, should be
professionals. If we can't write like it's second nature, if we don't have
the common sense to use simple logic rather than a bunch of arbitrary rules
in our work, frankly, I don't think we do have much value as writers. We all
know if we have an ambiguous sentence, right? What difference does it make
if the culprit is a dangling modifier or something else? You don't need
rules to do this stuff. You need common sense and a strong intuitive feel
for the logical structure of language.

We go back and forth on this all the time, but I have yet to see a coherent
explanation of the value of some of the silly rules English teachers cling
to so jealously. Why exactly is it not OK to split an infinitive? Why can't
I end a sentence in a preposition? Our business is to communicate clearly
and effectively. It is absolutely not to 'defend' our language from those
who rightfully own it. Language evolves and changes and becomes better
suited to its task in the process. We should be really happy about that.

Lisa.

> [Lots of irrelevant flames deleted.]

 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=