Of course we need to teach Standard Written English in schools. It should be important for every person who is so kindly forced to tread through the swamps of hell known as grade school to at least understand how to effectively communicate and be understood. I'd also be a little pissed if I had lived through junior high and high school just to graduate and be no wiser to the things essential in continuing my education, communicating with my peers, and generally living life while being understood. At the very least, all the little kiddies need to learn how to communicate to a wider audience just to up their chances on obtaining a mate and producing spawn.
We've learned, in this grammar course alone, that Standard Written English helps us communicate in a current and understandable way, that also allows our thoughts and ideas to be understood for years to come. Learning how to write in the socially and culturally accepted language, regardless of what that language is, should innately better someone. Just like with my thoughts before studying the opinions of the battle-hardened scholars interested in grammar, I still believe that being understood is the meaning of language. However, instead of accepting our naturally picked up sense of language to get us by, I now see the importance of learning the widely accepted "accurate" form of the language.
From what we have learned so far, I would assume that the best teaching method to assign to teaching SWE would be starting out with the fundamentals. To begin, the student should understand a common array of words and their meanings. They should also have the knowledge of grammar picked up from those surrounding them. From that, you could build up their knowledge of grammar, in order to aid them in understanding everything they will be learning about the language. After they have a good solid foundation, then it would be best to start in on effectively expressing your own ideas and interpreting other individual's ideas as well.
It almost seems like common sense that you must know how a language works before you can do any sort of expressing with it.
But, I do believe that I wasn't taught enough about grammar at an earlier age. This has probably been a detriment to me, and anyone else in the same boat.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Have I misunderstood you or did you say you need SWE to communicate with your peers, to live life while being understood, to obtain a mate and produce spawn?
What were you referring to when you mentioned "the culturally and socially accepted language?" I ask because it seems to me that while in some situations and contexts, SWE is socially and culturally accepted, in others it may be considered uppity, anal, professorial, off-putting, uptight or foreign. I guess the question is accepted by whom?
Do you have to know how a language works before you can use it to express yourself? Is it fair to make an analogy to a computer and ask how much computer science you need to know in order to operate a word processor and surf the internet?
Steve #1
You understood me. The way I see it, SWE is our core language, and though it is written, it is only in representation of a spoken language. It is what English in the U.S. should be when spoken. Our different dialects spawn off from it with little/big variances and what not. But, in a sense, we are all speaking SWE when talking. I may have SWE mis-defined. But to me, I see it just as the root of the English language, both spoken and written, in its most-current "correct" form, and in the boundaries of our culture.
The produce spawn thing was a joke. Although knowing how to express yourself, I'm sure, aids in the attraction of the opposite sex, it is possible to sex it up without words, or without SWE. It would be rather animalistic and most likely rape though, and that's bad. That was also a joke.
Steve #2
I think this goes back to my weird idea of what SWE is. I'm sure in certain situations different dialects, or version of the root language, are more socially accepted. I guess I just include those different dialects as part of SWE - however incorrect and random they might be. I guess, then, I am not afraid to admit that some dialects are indeed incorrect. In regards to what is generally accepted as "right" there is no doubt that certain dialects are in the wrong. Also, since I'm stuck on people being understood both now AND by future generations (the future generations thing is a new idea to me, which we read recently), the different dialects spread out today may not be rememered in the future, or express to a wider population.
Steve #3
Probably not. You do, though, need to know how language works before you can express yourself most effectively. I could tell you to bring me an apple by pointing to the apple and saying, "APPLE MINE!" but not know what function those words are fulfilling. I would, however, need to know at least a little about the language, in that I would know what both words individually represent. I think I just talked myself into answering your first question with a yes. Yes, we have to know how a language works to express - but only as much as to be able to correctly label things and ideas.
The difference between your example of using a computer to surf the internet, without knowledge of programming, and using a language to express, without knowledge of the inner workings, is that a computer is its own thing, capable of functioning without our complete knowledge of what process is happening, or really, without a human being at all. Language resides primarily in our mind, and is a personal tool, requiring personal "programming". Like my example with the apple, one must know, at least, what the words represent - just like one must, at least, know how to operate a mouse and keyboard, as well as what the big "E" symbol represents on the desktop (Internet Explorer).
I'm not sure what I'm getting at here, but I think I've come to the conclusion that you most know SOME about both to use either. Maybe our inner workings are as hidden as the programming put into computer programs.
Brandon, I think your definition of SWE is off, at least in the eyes of most contemporary linguists. I believe most historians of the language agree that Standard English (and, by extension, SWE) is but one of several varieties of the English language that happened to rise to a position of high status for a variety of political, historical and geographical reasons. It is not the core, root or parent language from which other dialects have devolved and it is not more "correct" than other varieties of the language.
I submit that it is not only possible, but in many cases preferable, not to use SWE when you are seeking a mate with whom to spawn. It all depends on whether or not the mate with whom you wish to spawn considers SWE desirable. And many people do not, for some of the reasons I mentioned in an earlier post.
Some more questions to consider: Do you need to know what the ten sentence patterns are before you can express yourself with "exquisite precision"? Do you need to know what a subject complement is? Or an object complement? Do you need to know the name for the tense of the verb in the following sentence: "I had been there before"?
Steve,
That makes sense. But would it help us out to have a good root version of the English language that everyone agrees is the most effective way to communicate? I guess root is a bad word. It makes it sound like it was the Adam and Eve of English. I mean root as in core, I guess. The dialect we should all know if we want to communicate to the most people, most effectively.
Yeah, you are right there too. Unless you happened to be courting said person through email, and they happen to have a deep respect for the English language. I could se it working out, to stricly use SWE, there.
No, you don't need to know the ten sentence patterns. You don't need to know what a "subject compliment" is, but to effectively communicate, must know how to use one. In fact, what I just said, but assigned to the rest of your examples. We can use it without knowing what exactly it is. But, in a sense, we know what it is, just not the title of it. Well, we don't explicitly know what it is. We can just use it. But does not being able to produce something with your mind imply you know of it? I dunno.
I tried to keep it short this time.
I also feel like I didn't learn grammar as well as I should have when I was younger, but I somewhat blame my teachers. The methods they tried on my class didn't worl. It wasn't till half way through middle school that my cousin and I wisened up and created our own set of rules to follow. We ended up getting high A's on our English worksheets and essays from that time foward. However, the rest of the class continued to struggle because the teacher insisted they use the Shirley Method. I still don't know what the teacher was thinking. If a system or method of teaching is difficult for an entire class you'd think they'd be intelligent enough to realize that it's the method not the students that need correcting.
I had the same thing happen with my first algebra class. The teacher basically did a problem on the board and expected the class to know how to do it. And on top of that, pointed people out and made them feel stupid for not knowing.
I was behind in math ever since. Still am, but it doesn't matter as much anyways.
I agree with what you said about SWE. We are entering a place in our lives where it is becoming vital to communicate clearly and do our best to avoid confusion and confrontation.
Yep. Especially if you are an English major, if you can't bend SWE to your will, you are pretty much pantsing yourself. :D
Post a Comment