EDible News: Mercy Yulien, Contributor
Can we change our existing discourses of spoken and written English? As educators, we have been trusted with a responsibility that is often bigger than us. Our classrooms are communities that exist within the bigger world. This is how I envision this relationship: our little community interacts with other little communities within the bigger community that is the school; then all of these students and all of their teachers exit the school community and interact with their immediate environmental communities, their homes, the supermarkets, and the rest of the world through various social media outlets. All of these communities have a language schemata/ existing knowledge of language, through which language is communicated, thoughts are expressed, ideas, values, and various contextual interpretations are made; we then participate in a reciprocal interaction of meaning with each other.
In the context of a Global Classroom, as educators, we have the responsibility to teach language and its formal rules. It is no longer sufficient to label something as “correct” or “incorrect” we need to be able to explain and justify our choices. But which theory should we employ? Through which lenses do we see and employ language? Are what we call ‘proficiency expectations’ sufficient to quantify and qualify our language use? There are three main areas: the first is the Prescriptivist, then the Psycholinguistic, and ultimately the Sociolinguistic. Personally, I follow these in this exact order in my schemata of language because I need to first understand the rules, which govern the English language, and then I apply it to my own personal voice, which is also expressed in a social context. This may be because I am not a Native English Speaker and, when I was first introduced to the English Language (both written and spoken), it was through the formal rules, then personal application, and then the social context. Sometimes I think of myself as Virginia Woolf thought of herself, as writing always—even in her private diaries and journals—as writing for a reader who both critiqued and appreciated her work. There is always a listener or a reader judging our use of language, and as a result placing us in a social class. We need to have a deeper understanding of the rules of the English language, which are demanded of us every day; this is especially because we are educators. The bar is set high because we set the standards of others’ language use. We model our lessons inside the classroom, and we need to model language every day, to the point at which it becomes natural to us. This is why the study of English grammar at the University level is so important. As we get ready to teach and influence the minds of young people we need to feel that we have done our best to understand what we teach; and no matter our discipline – language is the primary vehicle through which we present knowledge, and the knowledge of others is presented to us.
Have you ever thought about the grammar of the language you teach, you speak, you interpret and make meaning out of, or how your existing knowledge evolved your schemata within your discipline? Are you able to justify your commas, semicolons, ellipses, articles, verb conjugations, your independent and dependent clauses, and all their variables? Do you know what an Octothorpe is without Googling it? We have to regress before we can progress; if you haven’t taken a good grammar course lately, I highly recommend that you do. If you can’t understand your own language well, I recommend you take a grammar course. Furthermore, I recommend Professor’ Kim Michasiw’s Grammar Course. I had the privilege to take it this fall – and it changed the way I look at and use language – for the better. He also agreed to an interview on this subject in which he added, “Correct English became a class marker during the Industrial Revolution in the 19th Century in England; instruction in correct grammatical expression became a way of aligning with the usage of the dominant class the speech patterns of those people that had risen economically but still had their class markers attached to them in how they spoke or wrote.” This suggests “correct” usage as marker of a dominant class, and grammar as nothing more than purging “ain’t” from your vernacular.
But it is much more. I would like to understand the study of Grammar as, in Prof. Michasiw’s words, “the study of how we put words in arrangements that make sense.” We need to know why and how “the subject of the Gerund is always in the possessive...how restrictive and non-restrictive clauses are introduced”. I call us all to stop treating Grammar Study “with benign neglect”. Have you ever completed a Reed-Kellogg Diagram of your favorite poem or long sentence? Prof. Michasiw produced complex and detailed diagram of Wallace’s Stevens “The Snow Man”, which I am eager to see, as he excitedly and proudly detailed that so much was revealed about the poem’s sixteen lines through the diagramming exercise that is not evident even in a careful reading. That is powerful. We have the potential to have that level of expertise and continuously take and use the abstract concepts of language to bring forth discoveries and new applications of the everyday written and spoken language. Although the grammar course has migrated from the English Dept. at York U into the Professional Writing Dept., I am recommending that the current course be split into two parts: Part A to introduce grammar for all disciplines and degrees, and Part B to serve those students who are more engaged with the study of grammar allowing them a dedicated space to investigate language, as well as, a study set forth on improving their written and spoken English. “There are people who are perfectly competent and never need a grammar course,” as Prof. Michasiw told me during our interview, but would not be able to justify or explain their habitually correct choice. Isn’t that a tad hypocritical of us to go into our classrooms, or the workplace, feeling confident in our word choices, expecting people to understand us and yet not be able to justify our choices if challenged?
The main criticism of this approach to writing was presented to me by Professor John Spencer in our interview, in which he excited me about an upcoming lecture of our course together, Writ1300, in which meta-level research will be presented in the study of grammar; yet also created a sense of dismay when Professor Spencer brought my attention to evidence that “the learning of formal grammar has no effect on improving sentence-level writing, it actually causes problems.” I leave it up to you to decide that for yourself upon immersion in the study of Grammar, preferably taught by Professor Michasiw, who shared, “the Professional Writing Program originated because of complaints by employers that many English graduates’ grasp of correct writing at the level of the sentence was too weak for them to be employable as writers”. Isn’t that interesting? “The Snow Man” poem becomes the perfect metaphor, we must listen to the sound of Grammar, as we speak it and as we write it – rules must be as innate to the writer as pen is to paper, as part of the whole that is the snow to the snowman. We need more voices to make the case for Grammar in our Education- at the University, in the classrooms in which we teach, and in the workplace.
I want to continue this conversation with you; please answer this poll via Twitter @mercy_yulien #GrammarGlobalClassroom ... Have you taken a grammar course in the past? If so, please let me know about your learning experience and how it shaped your world. If not, please let me know why you think a Grammar Course is or isn’t essential to a holistic education of spoken and written English.
