What do you make of Mulroy's claim that "Questioning the value of basic grammar is like asking whether farmers should know the names of their crops and animals."
Mulroy is trying to point out that a person must have knowledge of basic grammar in order to communicate clearly and effectively. Not only that, but if a farmer doesn't know the names of his crops and animals, how will other farmers or consumers take him seriously? In the same manner, how will colleages be able to take a person seriously if that person doesn't know basic grammar? This is similiar to the business article we read in class. I think it was by Beason.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Thursday, November 13, 2008
I Think Some Crackhead Got Holt of da Wrong Stuff!
David Mulroy's "The Myth of the Bad Old Days" focuses on traditional vs. modern approaches to grammar instruction. It begins with commentary on ATEGs (Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar) opinion that the traditional ways of teaching grammar are irreversibly flawed. Mulroy also comments on ATEGs belief that the discovery of more modern ways to teach grammar are imperative. He then goes on to defend the traditonal means of grammar instruction. He points out two authors whos texts "embody traditonal school grammar" (88). After this fascinating information, Mulroy claims that Reed and Kellogg (the 2 authors who absolutely embrace old school grammar) are surprisingly similiar in their teaching methods to modern grammar instructors. After this, he goes into great detail about diagramming. This detail also includes illustrations.
I have to admit I was somewhat excited and surprised when Mulroy first started talking about tree diagramming. Why? It was awesome to read about something different for once. This excitement was short-lived however when I kept reading and found out there was only a small section dedicated to tree diagramming. I thought it interesting he actually presented a view different than that of his own. He also provided a LOT (or what seemed like a lot to me) of illustrations on how to properly draw Reed-Kellogg diagrams. Since we have already covered many ways to diagram sentences I found this section to be repetitive. Which could or could not be a good thing.
Aaaand Peace, Yo.
I have to admit I was somewhat excited and surprised when Mulroy first started talking about tree diagramming. Why? It was awesome to read about something different for once. This excitement was short-lived however when I kept reading and found out there was only a small section dedicated to tree diagramming. I thought it interesting he actually presented a view different than that of his own. He also provided a LOT (or what seemed like a lot to me) of illustrations on how to properly draw Reed-Kellogg diagrams. Since we have already covered many ways to diagram sentences I found this section to be repetitive. Which could or could not be a good thing.
Aaaand Peace, Yo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
