Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [dogme] Re: Official UK goverment back's Gwynne's grammar. Radio 4 interview with Gwynne.

Expand Messages
  • zosia grudzinska
    actually, agreed with all that said. on the other hand - just as with learning Latin in spite of obvious fact that no possible live communication ensues, but
    Message 1 of 6 , Jul 5, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      actually, agreed with all that said. on the other hand - just as with
      learning Latin in spite of obvious fact that no possible live
      communication ensues, but it is a tool for whipping brain into logical
      though formation:
      I remember from my schooldays sentence analysis (ML of course) and it was
      FUN! like function analysis in calculus later on. training brain to discern
      and notice patterns and deduce more meaning thereof, and learn precision.
      perhaps not for all - my classmates struggled. but if we "add a pinch" or
      "use in moderation"? always assuming good intentions - not as a tool for
      exclusion in the Foucoultian manner...?
      Zosia


      2013/7/5 Alan <manxman@...>

      > **
      >
      >
      > Hi
      >
      > Traditional Grammar to my mind, is just a way of marking and establishing
      > an exclusive club. i.e. If you understand it and can use it, then it's a
      > good way of excluding those who can't, or least ridiculing them.
      >
      > Many may believe that there is only ONE grammar but I would say that there
      > are MANY grammars, each of which may have developed for a different
      > purpose. You can even invent your own. Why not? Adherents of Chomsky, on
      > the other hand, believe that there is a fixed proto-Grammar at the heart of
      > all language. I (and others from the Functional Linguistics community) see
      > grammar purely as an ad-hoc paradigm to assist in talking ABOUT language.
      > i.e. You don't need it to learn and use language itself.
      >
      > As far as education is concerned, hammering disadvantaged and weak
      > learners with more and more trad grammar and phonetics will achieve very
      > little without any contextual framework that they understand.
      >
      > Alan
      > manxman.ch/moodle2
      >
      > --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Dennis Newson <djn@...> wrote:
      > >
      > > Personally, I'm speechless and gasping for breath.
      > >
      > > What do you think?
      > >
      > >
      > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01c98k1
      > > --
      > >
      > > --
      > > *
      > >
      > > *Dennis Newson*
      > > Formerly : University of Osnabrueck, GERMANY
      > > Committee member | IATEFL: YLTSIG,Network Coordinator Teens (*T*)
      > >
      > > Committee Member IATEFL GISIG
      > >
      > > Winner British Council ELT 05 Team Innovation Award
      > >
      > > Personal homepage <http://www.dennisnewson.de/>
      > >
      > > Skype: *Osnacantab*
      > > Second Life: *Osnacantab Nesterov*
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Mat
      Personally, I m speechless and gasping for breath. ... I think it s total madness. He s talking about primary and secondary school children in the U.K. As long
      Message 2 of 6 , Aug 10, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Personally, I'm speechless and gasping for breath.
        >
        > What do you think?

        I think it's total madness. He's talking about primary and secondary school children in the U.K. As long as they're native speakers their 'grammar' is perfect. They may be from a different speech community than Mr. Gwynne, and he and Mr. Gove (who I think is horrible) might well think what they say or write is incorrect. "We was late" for "we were late" might be an example (for certain communities in London the former is perfectly acceptable), but who are they to tell people what to say or how to say it?
        Language evolves and it always has done. To give native speakers a prescriptive grammar seems pointless and arcane. Texts, e-mails, blogs, tweets and kids have developed their own grammar. There are no rules. It just happens.
        Mr. Gove also, it seems, wants every child in the country to study the subjects he liked at school.
        He might well take a leaf out of TEFEL's book and make things a bit more learner centered.
        If the kids want to learn about grammar, that's a different matter. But I can't see why you would, unless you're a linguist, a language learner, or a TEFEL teacher!
        Also, I just did Mr. Gwynne's 'grammar quizz' on the Telegraph website

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationquestions/9987757/Good-grammar-test-can-you-pass.html

        I had a problem with question 1 and question 10. I think they're silly. Question 3 I think is about lexis. Question 12 seems to me to be a Latin, not a grammar question, and if anyone could explain question 11, I'd be most grateful!

        Mat.
        >

        --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Dennis Newson <djn@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        > http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01c98k1
        > --
        >
        > --
        > *
        >
        > *Dennis Newson*
        > Formerly : University of Osnabrueck, GERMANY
        > Committee member | IATEFL: YLTSIG,Network Coordinator Teens (*T*)
        >
        > Committee Member IATEFL GISIG
        >
        > Winner British Council ELT 05 Team Innovation Award
        >
        > Personal homepage <http://www.dennisnewson.de/>
        >
        > Skype: *Osnacantab*
        > Second Life: *Osnacantab Nesterov*
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.