Re: Grammar

If I may add my 2 cents:
1. D.'s thoughts resonated with me. Also, we can more deeply (and fully)
appreciate a piece of writing, art or literature when we know the precedent
that the writer/artist is transcending.
2. "Transcending precedent?" We should keep in mind where rules of
grammar and spelling come from. They are not laws of physics that have
always been and will remain, rules that we can only observe. These "rules"
are only a record of what has been agreed upon as the norm. Yes, the
precedent. They will continue to evolve as language does. Education can
help it evolve intelligently.

                                                                                                                      
                    "D."
                    <dromanski@adelphia.n To: bananafish@roughdraft.org
                    et> cc:
                    Sent by: Subject: Re: Grammar
                    owner-bananafish@roug
                    hdraft.org
                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                      
                    09/10/02 10:50 AM
                    Please respond to
                    bananafish
                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                      

   I have to come out of the lurker baseboards to join this discussion
about grammar and language. There are, obviously, two camps here--the
Adherents and Defenestrators--in the grammar trenches. A recap shows that
the Adherents follow every rule closely and, often enough, correct those
who show a lack of knowledge of said rules; the Defenestrators are those
who, naturally, see the rules of grammar as only for those fussy types who
insist on correct usage and choose not to worry about them in their own
communicative attempts via the written word.
   A couple of thoughts have run madly through my brain as this discussion
has raged: 1) I had an American Lit professor who, in a contained, but
agitated manner, commented on the poor writing quality of essays handed in
for one assignment by saying that when you write, you put your credibility
on the line every time. By neglecting rules of spelling and grammar, you
only degrade your credibility in the eyes of your audience, was the essence
of his lecture that morning. This particular admonition by him has never
left me, and, moreover, has become a quiet voice of reminder in my head
every time I write for an audience beyond a casual friend or family member.
2) With regard to those I admire in the usual creative fields--Literature,
Music, or Art--I have found that I admire those artists who, more than
likely, knew the typical rules, but either broke them outright in their
attempts, or broke them when the purpose suited their momentary needs. Who
would you rather have? Someone who knows the rules and makes informed
decisions as to whether to follow them or not in a given situation? Or
someone who obviously doesn't know or care to know the rules and runs amok
all the time, flouting them all the while anyway?
   Questions such as "do we always have to follow the rules?" and "isn't
strict rule following stifling to creativity?" or are, to me, a bit silly
in all of this. Why can't someone who knows the rules of grammar, and is
ordinarily very mindful of them, be creative by knowing when and where
effective breakage can be done? I'm sure there are several avant-garde
writers (artists, musicians, too) who know the rules as well as any
grammarian, but use the rules and break them to their advantage constantly.
 Also, what is wrong with taking a few minutes out of your day to learn a
grammatical rule (the uses of the semi-colon here) so that if you run into
a situation where one is to be used, you can make a better choice as to
whether or not to use it? Teachers, editors, and the general public,
naturally, run the gamut from the strictest of Adherents to the most blase
of Defenestrators. No one single person is likely to agree with your point
of view at a given moment, hence the varied and intense reactions within
this discussion. To me the essence of creativity isn't about whether you
know or break the rules, rather it's about the choices made during the
creation itself and what you bring to the work. The rules of grammar can
guide or weigh you down--that is YOUR choice. Grammar has its place and
its purposes, remember that, as my professor might have said.

Feel free to pick this apart (grin)

D.

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH

The information contained in this electronic message is intended only for
the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may
contain
information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure
under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are informed that any dissemination, copying or disclosure
of
the material contained herein, in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this transmission in error, please notify STV and
purge
this message.

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Tue Sep 10 11:31:43 2002