On Teaching Language CHANGESRead this post about teaching sentencing with a non rules-based approach, one that emphasizes the changeability of language over time. Blogger PL Thomas emphasizes the "violations" or rule-breaking habits of our most prized authors (like Shakespeare!) and attempts to put all the grammar hand-wringers' concerns to rest.
He comments on a recent language change (that we will or have talked about in class): the case of the use of "they" as a gender-neutral and general singular pronoun. This is a real-life, current example of how language changes! Here is a news story about the AP guide changes. Read the post and consider in the comments his "convention awareness" approach.
8 Comments
Alyson Driscoll
4/3/2017 09:14:24 am
Baldwin takes an interesting yet enlightening approach to the teaching of language as he argues that language should be taught through an awareness of conventions instead of rigid rules. This approach emphasizes the the fact that language is both "situational and temporal" and his descriptive views shed light on the prescriptive nature of language. I think this is a wonderful way to view language, as students are not only learning the conventions but are recognizing that these very conventions are influenced by power relations. I think this quote from the post perfectly sums up some of the benefits of Baldwin's take on the teaching of language, "For our students to be aware, then, of both descriptive and prescriptive views of language, for those students to gain a recognition that language use is about purpose and choice, bound by situation and audience, is for them to become agents in how their own credibility and authority is viewed." The conventional approach has the ability to provide students with the knowledge they need to use language effectively and responsibly in the world all the while doing away with the rigidity of the standard rules approach.
Reply
Laikyn Hackett
4/3/2017 11:14:19 am
I connected with Baldwin's article simply because I like how he is introducing the idea that language is not a set-in-stone, rigid communication that we have developed permanent rules for. Oftentimes, like we have discussed in class, we look at people as 'dumb' or 'not worthy' of being in a professional environment because their style of language is not the traditional, accepted language that we are taught in schools. I appreciate that Baldwin takes note that even great authors that we look up to like Chaucer and Shakespeare became so unique because they weren't afraid to break away from the rigid boundaries we have set up for writing. When we really think about language and take away the rules that we have had embedded in our minds, we all have a slight difference in how we use and think of it. Does that make us wrong or imply that we are unfit to be writers? Of course not, if anything, it should push us to explore language and how others may tweak it. Baldwin's open approach to language makes me reflect as a writer and reminds me that as a future teacher, it is not a crime to let students sometimes stray away from traditional methods as long as they understand them and are able to produce both.
Reply
Kaila Morris
4/4/2017 08:25:10 am
Baldwin argues that we must help students become aware of language conventions, but without the rigid rule based view of language. I am in favor of this approach, because it does not approach students colloquial languages like they are altogether wrong or improper, but it is an additive approach. Baldwin's approach takes what students know about language and it makes them aware of the changes that "Standard English" makes. Baldwin emphasizes the fact that respected writers, such as Shakespeare and Chaucer used 'double negatives and comparatives/superlatives,' because they were not breaking grammar rules of their time. Baldwin states, "Two key points are worth examining more fully—conventions and awareness.Language does not function under rules (fixed and prescriptive) but under conventions that are both situational and temporal." To further his argument, Baldwin writes of how there has been a battle with the use of 'they' as a gender neutral pronoun, among traditional teachers of grammar and English against the contemporary society; but, the overall argument is for teachers to make students aware of conventions, so that they will know how to maneuver in their writing.
Reply
Emily Etheridge
4/9/2017 10:27:22 am
I understand the concept he is trying to persuade teachers to consider. Language changes over time. Some think that Shakespearean language is beautiful because it's unlike how we talk today others consider it to be grammatically incorrect because of the double negatives etc,. but the truth is that it was simply written in the language of its time period. Writing, like language, has developed over time. Any historian or linguists could diagram the changes and English teachers should accept it. Developing and sculpting languages can also be a way of creating a character through creative freedom. Look at any of the classics written by Mark Twain and see how he sculpts the language so that it fits the inelegance level of a country boy of that time period. Its historically accurate and better represents the time. That same concept should be taken into account now to accurately account for this time period for future uses. Literature, fiction and nonfiction, is one way to record history.
Reply
Jenna Sheeran
4/12/2017 05:07:25 am
Baldwin’s argument for teaching students how the rules of language are always changing is useful in several ways. Obviously it fosters an awareness of what language actually is (a human-driven tool), but it also opens the door to examining language in many other ways. For example, in this class we have briefly discussed how language is a tool of power. If those in power decide what kinds of language and conventions are acceptable, then those who do not use the same kinds of conventions are at a disadvantage. I think that teaching rules of grammar as decided by humans and subject to change fits within such a concept. If students can understand that conventions are malleable, but also that certain conventions are expected by certain groups, they can begin to see language as a useful tool. Knowing the expected conventions for certain audiences allows them to use language successfully in several arenas. Take the “they” debate. Perhaps writing for a staunch, old-school grammar Nazi would not be the best place to use “they” as a gender-neutral singular pronoun, even though it may be accepted elsewhere. Showing students that conventions are flexible and can be used to gain entrance into certain circles gives them the power of language.
Reply
Madeline Binney
4/13/2017 03:00:04 pm
In his post, PL Thomas discusses the adaptations of grammar and its conventions over time. As the laws of culture change, so do the “laws” of grammar. Practices that were once held above others have been completely forgotten and new practices have been created to replace them. When I think of grammar I often think of the Code in the “Pirates of the Caribbean”; in the first movie three different characters refer to them as general guidelines than absolute rules and they constantly break them though they are still remembered and revered. PL Thomas begins by talking about Chaucer and Shakespeare, two authors who are looked up to and have been for years. Both were innovators in their writing and Shakespeare even created new words when he saw fit. Being aware of the conventions allows students to know how they can write to best convey their ideas in certain situations, while being able to change the format to create an effect rather than breaking conventions due to a lack of awareness.
Reply
Matt Potts
4/17/2017 09:24:48 am
I loved the idea of teaching students to wrestle with language, because that's all we all really do. Obviously there are style conventions that we adhere to but why? I feel that this opens up student writing.to make it that much better. Its breaking down walls that students have a hard time with. While I think they should know common conventions, who am I to tell the next Shakespeare that he is wrong? I think that language is something beautiful in that it is malleable and unique culturally. In that sense you can never argue with an artist that knows what they are doing. We are just here to give them the tool and ideas to work with and from
Reply
Derrick Chariker
4/19/2017 03:33:22 pm
It is an interesting topic and one that is starting to become an topic not just in the social world but in the academic one as well. I do believe language changes overtime, the very words we speak everyday is evidence of that and I believe that these language changes must be taught in order for to have a lasting place in the future. But there is a problem, a lot of the older generation, especially in rural areas which are usually more socially conservative, who are in charge of important educational organizations may be resistant to change. Then even if you can get these changes implemented, you have to face the parents who can create real problems. The point of my rambling is the changes should be taught but if there is opposition it must be fought. Students have to realize that change is the way the world works.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
April 2017
Categories |
|
Dr.Hannah Rule | [email protected] | Humanities Office Building 203 | University of South Carolina |