It is intriguing to
me how much we use grammar and how little we think about it; I made it through
17 years of schooling without anyone ever explaining it to me. [
Two sentences that at closely related]. I never knew that there was a difference
between the grammar that we grow up with, full of slang and conjunctions, and
the proper grammar that we are taught in school. The same way Mrs. Delaney
taught in the Christensen article, I was taught that any deviation from proper
grammar was a flaw in both my grammar and that in some sense I was a lesser
person for speaking and writing the way that I was raised.
Goal C in the “Grammar Alive” textbook says this “Every
student will complete school with an understanding of, and appreciation for,
the natural variation that occurs across time, social situation, and social
situation” (Haussamen, 4). I grew up with a decent understanding of goal A and
B but I had no idea that goal C was even something that existed. The
Christensen article said this, “However, the biggest problem with Fred’s
writing was that he didn’t make mistakes. This piece demonstrates his
discomfort with writing. He wasn’t taking any risks…When more attention is paid
to the way something is written or said that to what is said, students’ words and
thoughts become devalued. Students learn to be silent, to give as few words as
possible for criticism” (Christensen, 101). I think that this is something all students
from around the globe can relate to on some level. From a young age “bad
grammar” is metaphorically beat out of us through bad grades and criticism of
our use of language. When you criticize someone for the way that they talk then
nine time out of ten the will clam up and stop talking. As teachers and future
teachers this should not be our goal, in fact it should be something we strive
to avoid. The Christensen article put it like this, “Students must be taught to
hold their own voices sacred, to ignore the teachers who have made them feel
that what they’ve said is wrong or bad or stupid. Students must be taught how
to listen to the knowledge they’ve stored up, but which they are seldom asked
to relate (Christensen, 101). The article goes on to talk about how when we are
forced to focus on the hard rules of proper English grammar we often don’t make
the point that we were trying to get across. In other words, effective communication
is a mixture between what we are raised with and the proper grammar that
everyone is taught.
Though similar in topic, “Grammar Alive” and the other
article were very different in approach. “Grammar alive focused on the goals
that as teachers we should set for students while the Christensen article focused
on why those articles are important. Both were informative and I would definitely
recommend either to any current or prospective teachers.
Will,
ReplyDeleteI'd like to just say that I really enjoyed this post, and I'm sad to hear that you grew up in the dark about the full extent of grammar. I'd also totally agree with you that your case is not unique and many students fall into the idea that grammar is simply a set of restraints. It's honestly a little tragic.
I think your use of the semicolon is spot on. You have two independent sentences that could easily stand apart from one another but because of their closely related nature you were able to bring them together with the use of the semicolon. Nicely done sir, I tip my hat to you.
Lastly, I need to talk about where else you could have used a semicolon. Honestly, I think using it only once was a good call. If you overuse it, I think its affect is diminished. That said in this example, "From a young age “bad grammar” is metaphorically beat out of us through bad grades and criticism of our use of language. When you criticize someone for the way that they talk then nine time out of ten the will clam up and stop talking." you could join the two sentences together because they are related. Just because you can though doesn't always mean you should.
Overall man, good job. I thought you had some good insights.