Clauses and Commas Make a Comeback

[CajunCenturion]

From The Washington Post
Clauses and Commas Make a Comeback

--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[sleipnir214]

I see this as a hopeful sign for education in the U.S.



Want the best answers? Ask the best questions! TANSTAAFL!

 

[Grenage]

What a great idea, something that schools in the UK should definitely implement. I would certainly have benefited!


Carlsberg don't run I.T departments, but if they did they'd probably be more fun.

 

[Lunatic]

Where did they go? Strange, it seems like this was the way I was taught in rural Oregon (although far less intensively)... but we were so far behind maybe our teaching staff never got the memo...

Personally, I say the APA, Psycho Association (are those the same org... I don't remember the different groups, just that I didn't care for having 5 or 6 to juggle depending on the boss/teacher/professor) and every other major group with 'standards' standardize themselves. I personally have gone from school to school, job to job, even class to class, and been told to include a comma before an 'and' or 'or' if there are three items connected (such as Bill, Jim, John, and Frank) while others I was told never to include the comma (such as Bill, Jim, John and Frank).

Even if you 'learn' grammer you have to re-learn portions of it depending on where you go to school or work.

***

Lindsay Vernon, a 16-year-old junior, took Greiner's class last year. She rates herself "one of, like, three" kids in her Advanced Placement English course who know high school-level grammar.

Sleipnir214 - there goes all hope

 

[Stella740pl]

Lunatic,

Where to begin...

I personally have gone from school to school, job to job, even class to class, and been told to include a comma before an 'and' or 'or' if there are three items connected (such as Bill, Jim, John, and Frank) while others I was told never to include the comma (such as Bill, Jim, John and Frank).

This is called "Oxford comma", and we discussed it a few times here; check thread1256-905658 and thread1256-996033, for example.

She rates herself "one of, like, three" kids in her Advanced Placement English course who know high school-level grammar.

Even though Lindsay Vernon used an unnecessary word, it was grammatically correctly surrounded by commas.

Even if you 'learn' grammer
Oops! Re-read the article, and this time, pay attention to the framed 'Mike "Grammar" Greiner's Seven Grammatical Sins'. Like this one, for example: 2. Grammer. If you'd like an A in English, spell grammar with 2 A's.

 

[Gooser]

Is the author of the article trying to undermine the grammarians by quoting "one of, like, three" of the kids who do know high-school level grammer? Is he poking fun at this girl? What a meanie.

--Gooser

 

[AnotherHiggins]

I applaud this effort.

Several years ago my roommate was working on his Masters in Composition and Rhetoric (he is now about to defend his dissertation for his PhD - yippee Shaun!). As Grad students tend to do, he was teaching some undergraduate English classes.

We would sit around and laugh/cry over beers at some of the papers turned in by otherwise seemingly intelligent college students.

While this isn't a grammar issue, he had one student write about "giving promps" to someone. Keep in mind; this was in a college paper. He meant to say, "props" (even that is (obviously) slang and doesn't belong in a graded paper), but wound up making up his own word. Perhaps he was thinking of "prompts"?

Sad, sad, sad.

[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue][/tt]
[tab][red]The plural of anecdote is not data[/red]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ181-2886 before posting.

 

[Lunatic]

Stella

Re: Oxford comma - I wasn't looking to start a debate on the issue, the problem I have is that different people want it different ways. Especially when I have professors in two different courses telling me I needed to include/remove it.

The point I was trying to make is how can we expect people to learn to properly use grammar when the rules are applied differently by who you are working for or which association you belong to?

Re: 'like' - The point here is centered on what is the point of teaching proper grammar when you speak like a California valley girl? It, like, seems, like, kind of, like, similar to, like, wearing, like, clean underwear, like, on your way to, like, being, like, executed.

Re: I have a spelling problem - not a grammar problem (though I likely have that as well). I'm pretty famous among my friends and family for my inability to spell accurately given everything else I'm pretty good at. I've already been chastised on this board for adding a smell to this board with my scentences ;p

I won't claim to have a firm grip of grammar or spelling as I'm much closer to being a graduate of the Ralphy 'Me fail English, thats unpossible' school of English than an ever actually earning a degree in English.

 

[Gooser]

I think the decline of grammar is just part of a bigger movement where people have this idea that it's bad to tell their kids they are wrong.

If you're wrong, you're wrong. If your are talking about not there, it's here, not hear. It seems many are leaning towards 'letting it slide' so as not to discourage the child. I don't belive this to be helpful.

--Gooser

 

[Stella740pl]

anotherhiggins,

I applaud this effort.
So am I. But how long will it be until it is a requirement in all states? I don't hold my breath. And how long will it stay around until another idiot again will say that no one needs the grammar?

Lunatic,

I wasn't looking to start a debate on the issue, the problem I have is that different people want it different ways.
I understand. Just wanted to point it out.

Especially when I have professors in two different courses telling me I needed to include/remove it.
Well, while you are in school, you might as well do what each of the professors want you to do (even though you may once in a while mention that you didn't make a mistake, you just applied what you were previously taught).

When you are not in school any more, you may as well form an opinion of your own on all contradictory grammar/punctuation topics (not on those that set in stone), like Oxford comma, placing punctuation logically vs. only inside the quotation marks, passive voice, splitting infinitives, hanging prepositions, and so on. Find an article or two from a generally trusted source, to use as proofs of your opinion where required, and keep it close. That's what I do.

The point here is centered on what is the point of teaching proper grammar when you speak like a California valley girl?
Well, proper grammar and teenage speak are different animals. It's hard to change the way you speak, especially if you are hanging out among other teenagers, and speak this way for long enough. Unlike writing, where you can stop and a review what you've just written, in the oral speech you cannot that easily avoid an annoying word that just jumps out of your mouth without you even realizing - and you cannot cross it out once you said it. To correct the speech, knowing grammar may often be not enough. After all, Professor Higgins not only taught Eliza Doolittle grammar, he worked very hard on her speech. Many of those kids will speak better with time, when they change the setting, friends, etc. Some won't.

It, like, seems, like, kind of, like, similar to, like, wearing, like, clean underwear, like, on your way to, like, being, like, executed.
I can see nothing wrong or strange with wearing clean underwear on your way to being executed.

I have a spelling problem - not a grammar problem (though I likely have that as well).
So, you think, it is much different from knowing grammar and not being able to speak, like, properly? ;-)

 

[Lunatic]

When you are not in school any more, you may as well form an opinion of your own on all contradictory grammar/punctuation topics (not on those that set in stone), like Oxford comma, placing punctuation logically vs. only inside the quotation marks, passive voice, splitting infinitives, hanging prepositions, and so on. Find an article or two from a generally trusted source, to use as proofs of your opinion where required, and keep it close. That's what I do.

This brings me back to the "What is the point". I'm not against teaching proper grammar, however the question still remains, what is the purpose of learning proper grammar if you have to essentially decide which of the confliciting variations you want to use once you are out of school? Essentially, which variation is 'proper'?

It seems to me that the cart is before the horse on this one. If we can't decide which varient to use, how can we guarentee that progress will be made? Okay, well I will concede that if you learn a variant at all then that is better than 'promp'-ing people. However you have still artificially limited the value of any education by not resolving which variations will be used in the real world.

I just don't get the logic of it...

****
[marginally off topic]

Lunatic - It, like, seems, like, kind of, like, similar to, like, wearing, like, clean underwear, like, on your way to, like, being, like, executed.
Stella740pl I can see nothing wrong or strange with wearing clean underwear on your way to being executed.

There is nothing wrong, however what is the point? If you mangle the language, does it matter if you mangle it in a grammatically correct manner?
[/marginally off topic]

 

[CajunCenturion]

I think the point is that it is a step in the right direction.

Sure, there are situations where you cannot decide which variant do use, but there are other situations where that decision is yours. When you get into those situations where you can make the choice, having knowledge of a proper standard enables you to impart that wisdom, establish that standard, and help further the progress.

Hopefully, this education effort will catch on and spread so that the younger generation will be equipped to help establish more consistent standards when they get into decision making positions.

--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[jebenson]

Add to the recent posts that the differences among the variants are usually quite minor, such as whether or not to place a comma before 'and', whether to place punctuation inside or outside quotes and so forth. The great majority of the 'variants' are the same on most points, so learning one of them makes one better equipped to deal correctly with grammar of any variant.

I used to rock and roll every night and party every day. Then it was every other day. Now I'm lucky if I can find 30 minutes a week in which to get funky. - Homer Simpson

Arrrr, mateys! Ye needs ta be preparin' yerselves fer Talk Like a Pirate Day! Ye has a choice: talk like a pira

 

[columb]

Way back in the sixties I was taught, as a general rule, that you should learn the rules, and then learn how to break them. Nobody would doubt the seamanship of a senior naval captain who called the front of his ship 'the sharp end', they would assume he was making some sort of point, presumably humourous. On the other hand a junior recruit needs to learn to call it the bows.

The same applies to grammar. I'm no grammar Nazi, I believe there is room for many points of view, but only those who understand the rules of grammar can understand the debate. Only those who understand what a comma does can understand the need, or lack of it, for the Oxford comma.

I tend to be wary of the 'it's all going to rack and ruin' point of view; it's a disease common in middle aged men. However, I do feel that the emphasis on self expression over the mechanics of our language is leaving us poorer.

Ceci n'est pas une signature
Columb Healy

 

[Welshbird]

This brings me back to the "What is the point". I'm not against teaching proper grammar, however the question still remains, what is the purpose of learning proper grammar if you have to essentially decide which of the confliciting variations you want to use once you are out of school? Essentially, which variation is 'proper'?

I have to ask - do with think this would be less of an issue if we had all learnt 'proper grammer'? One would hope this would lead to less variation in 'properness'

Fee

The question should be [red]Is it worth trying to do?[/red] not [blue] Can it be done?[/blue]

 

[2ffat]

Especially when I have professors in two different courses telling me I needed to include/remove it.

I'll do you one better. My first year of college, I had one English prof who had us do commas a certain way. When our tests were graded, another prof had graded them and wanted them done another way. We all flunked the test!


James P. Cottingham
-----------------------------------------
^{I'm number 1,229!
I'm number 1,229!}

 

[Lunatic]

Willif

See 2ffat's post right after yours. That is exactly what everyone seems to be missing, you're all looking after the end result. I'm looking at the beginning of the process. How you can you expect people to learn a system and properly use it when no one agrees on the rules? The system artificially limits the proficiency the general population can reach and therefore the question remains valid - It is a good idea to learn grammar, but when you have to pick and choose which way to use in the future, does it really matter if you learned it properly? Who outside of the members of this forum will consistently be able to identify the mistakes?

For a second, step away from this 'learning' bit on the tail-end. There's not problem there. The problem is at the very beginning. The flaw is that all those 'ship captains' that understand the language call the point of the ship a 'sharpie', 'sharp point', 'tip' or whatever else they would call it and despite the fact it shouldn't, those variations trickle down reduce the effectiveness of the communication system.

Before you ever get the point of teaching anyone anything, make all those ship captains agree to a standard. Otherwise you'll just be teaching an inconsistent system to all those young, impressionable officers and compounding the problem with every generation.

What I find fairly humorous is a forum of programmers seems to be arguing for maintaining an inconsistent and ambiguous system. Aren't you supposed to argue for a rigid set of rules? (-:

To try to make it perfectly clear, I'm not arguing against more emphasis on grammar, I'm arguing that the current system of institutionalized inconsistencies becomes a greater problem with every generation and limits the level of comprehension most people can obtain.

 

[Welshbird]

Shall I 'bung a spanner in the works' then?

I haven't ever had issues with there being more than one 'correct' way of using grammer. In the UK...

Maybe it's an American issue...

[ducks under desk with tin hat and flak jacket]

Fee

The question should be [red]Is it worth trying to do?[/red] not [blue] Can it be done?[/blue]

 

[Stella740pl]

Lunatic,

What I find fairly humorous is a forum of programmers seems to be arguing for maintaining an inconsistent and ambiguous system. Aren't you supposed to argue for a rigid set of rules? (-:

No. Not really. You can always find some excessive tools that you can choose from in the modern high-level languages, but you don't argue that we should reduce them to only one choice and teach everyone to use only that, right? Some are more suitable under circumstances than the others, some would give you shorter/more readable program, and some faster performance, and sometimes the only difference is your personal style, and the choice is yours (of course, within the accepted standards). Would you really want to make everyone do the same thing and to outright prohibit some parts of the programming languages, because, with some effort, you can always do what you need with the rest?

On the other hand, you can compare a language with the science - both are live, constantly developing systems. Sometimes there is no right way in the science, only theories/hypotheses, and it is often up to the professor (or a school) which one he/she/it believes in and chooses to teach. Sometimes the science develops after you have already learned something, and the views on that change. What can you do about that? If something is proven, then it is the new right way, if it is just another new theory, you decide (IF you have enough knowledge to make a choice), which one you believe in).

A doctor may develop his/her own new therapy - but only
after learning the whole wealth of already existing ones and practicing at least some of them for a while; not right after high school. Of course, he may continue to use one of already existing ones for his/her whole life, even though another one (that he she also learned in another class or at work) sometimes may fit a patient's needs better. But at least the doctor that learned several different ways to cure some particular ailments can always explain, WHY he/she prefers one way or another.

Does it make sense to you?

Well, it does for me. ;-)