Moving From Oral to Written

 

 

     As Krauthammer’s article, “Spoken Language interference Pattern in Written English” notes, writing follows very different rules than speech. Even a competent native speaker has difficulty making the distinction between the different rules. Seemingly the most interesting about the translation of speech to written language is that students often make mistakes when writing, because when speaking these rules do not seem to apply. Of course, it is different when writing an e-mail off to a friend. Writing considered informal might be more forgiving of the “traps” students find themselves in, than academic prose. Many instructors prefer certain choices, like contractions, should not show up in this sort of academic prose.

     What might seem a little scary for scholars of the English Language is the impact that speech communication can make on the evolving trends becoming more acceptable in written form. Many people (possibly me included, not really sure where I stand) believe that we need to protect the integrity of our language. Arguments against slang, text speak, and all other evils are infiltrating our language. What does this mean? In the context of this inquiry it means that there are a lot of people/instructors who are passionate about maintaining the rules of written communication, especially in an academic format. This passion can easily get in the way of student learning and get emphasized more than it probably should.

    
     One cringe worthy pet-peeve of instructors happens to deal with confusing spelling issues. These things are easily explained characteristics of oral language. Yet, students who cannot make these distinctions are belittled with assumptions about their educational background. It might be possible that students are intimated by the process of moving from informal oral language to written academic language. With so many landmines to steer clear from, it is easy to see why students might have some difficulties.

     Error maintains such a negative connotation. With speech, students can make simple mistakes, usually without fear of rebuke. With writing, student error lingers on the page.

     Even the set-up for written language requires more care than the typical speech literacy. While students use oral language much more frequently, they are rarely called on to give a well-researched/framed oral assignment. True, students have been assigned speeches and debates, but written communication is different: takes time, there are some revisions that happen in mid-write. Basically, care and attention is placed on writing, causing the written form to have more ‘weight’ attached to it, causing more unrest, causing more formalized rules to distinguish the (educated) have’s and have not’s.

  
    Why do students have trouble moving forms? It seems to me that they have so much stacked against them, I am honestly surprised “I” made it this far.

“Hiding Under the Floorboards, I Have Finally Found You”

When first thinking about grammar rants, I heard myself correcting my students, friends and family. While not one to go on a rant, I felt like I knew certain grammar rules that I wanted to “teach” others to learn. Looking back on it, this over-correction was incredibly condescending to my friends and family (I am leaving out my students because I had the role of teacher and much of my corrections were made in a non-threatening context). I am certainly no grammar Einstein, and as my previous post suggests, I am actually very self-conscious of my own writing.

I found my search for a grammar rant an interesting activity. However, it was through these searches that I began to see some clever reactions to these rants, which turned out to be more thought-provoking than some of the crass expletives I found on-line. So, when I ran across the YouTube video “Grammar Nazis” parodying the idea of grammar rants, I was intrigued. Created by the individuals at College Humor, the video is a depiction of a Nazi looking for a Jew through the questioning of another man who has difficulty with (ironically) the English Language.

Before getting into the grammar rules this particular video breaks down, I want to acknowledge the many ironies presented in the film. Obviously, by using a story of a Nazi who is constantly correcting the grammar of the other individual, we see the creators poking fun of the irritating individual (namely me) who is correcting others. The negative connotation of “Grammar” Nazi as a cultural idiom is already incredibly offensive. Yet, it is the final grammar discretion made by the Nazi that ultimately leads to the resolution.  The Nazi commits suicide, because he uses a dangling participle. Out of all the errors made, it is the Nazi’s error that would seem to cause the most misunderstanding.

The different grammar rules that this particular video pokes at involves: double negatives, incorrect pronoun usage, ending a sentence with a preposition, run-on sentences, subject-verb agreement, who vs. whom, comma uses in a list, and the violent finality of the Nazi using a dangling participle.

Some of these mistakes are common auditory mistakes representing a “social class of language misuse”. At least, when I think about the study on grammar rants, it is the inequity of access to education combined (possibly) with different literacy backgrounds that leads me to this conclusion. Double negatives, situations of pronoun misuse (using me and her, instead of her and I ‘went…’), subject-verb agreement, and the uses of “who” vs. “whom”, are all common mistakes that do not greatly impact meaning. For the most part, we have all heard these common mistakes frequently enough that I know I make them myself.

Now for my three particulars:

#1-Comma uses in a list- This particular rule only applies to writing and has the same sense of elitism connected to it. In the end, it all hinges upon the author’s knowledge of very particular formats.

#2- The Dangling Participle- This rule is easily the one apt to cause the most misunderstandings. However, in context most of us can easily discern the speaker or writer’s meaning. 

#3- Ending a Sentence with a Preposition- This rule is especially important for me. Like I previously stated, I had no formal training of grammar. So, it was not until an essay I had written in college, did I ever take it upon myself to figure out what a preposition was. My professor had written in the comments to never end a sentence with a preposition. I can tell you that I was dumb-struck. Not only did I have serious questions about using a preposition in general, but I did not understand why it was grammatically incorrect. Either way, I clung to that fact for all future writing assignments.

And then I found this video. Inspired by the combination of activities, I sought out the answer to “why don’t we end sentences with a preposition?” You know what I found out? There is no agreement in the grammar community about using this rule. There is even something called a “terminal preposition” which is found at the end of a sentence.

How ludicrous are these grammar rules? Without clarity and with frequent disagreement, my stance is: pretty darn ludicrous!


Check out the video here:
http://youtu.be/N4vf8N6GpdM

The History of Grammar

My relationship with grammar has always been problematic. Having no formal instruction of grammar myself, I tend to have self-confidence issues regarding my own writing. While it seems as though I have a natural grasp of basic conventions, having made it this far into my studies, I have to acknowledge that my own understanding of grammar must have hindered me on some level.

            Even with my own schooling lacking formal grammar instruction, I was tasked with the responsibility to teach grammar to middle school students for three years. As is common sense, I found myself having learned more about grammar when I was teaching grammar than even the fleeting moments when I was “taught” grammar.

            I mention that I was taught grammar, even after mentioning a lack of formal training, because what I did know about grammar is added to and revised through teacher-response comments on my essays. I found this process of learning difficult and led to an incredibly limited sense of my own understanding of grammar. Even now, my knowledge of grammar can be summed up to the level of an incredibly competent middle school student.

            I do not understand complex rules, and as such, fail to write in complex forms. While I can combine my sentences effectively and create writing considered ‘correct’, my writing lacks the sophistication and beauty that I covet. Of course, I can always go out on a limb and attempt creativity in my writing, the confidence to do so alludes me.

            So, when I begin to think about the value of grammar instruction, I have some reservations. First, I can see that grammar instruction is not imperative to success. I somehow managed to weave my way through the academic discourse without any formal instruction. Second, the research seems to suggest that conventions can get in the way of students’ creativity and personal joy of writing. Not only that, but an emphasis on conventions can counter-productively keep students from transferring their writing skills to other writing (genre, discipline, assignments, etc).

            However, by not learning grammar, I personally have always felt behind my peers who had a strong grasp of these rules. More knowledge of writing, like grammar, can help a student build confidence in the various writing tasks they are assigned. Just like knowledge of ‘rhetoric’ or ‘genre’ can enhance an awareness of each writing situation students face, knowledge of grammar can help students, especially in situations that students do not have a lot of information to go off.

            For instance, if a student is asked to do a writing task, like writing an analytical essay that evaluates the cultural issues in so-and-so Shakespeare play. A student may have had limited experience analyzing literature (as a genre) or with Shakespeare. They might have difficulty integrating the types of quotes the teacher might want to see or any other difficulty. However, with a strong grasp on writing clearly through the grammar conventions students have learned, the students may at least have enough confidence to write clearly enough for whatever they were able to accomplish with the task.

            I certainly do not believe that an emphasis in teaching grammar (especially labeling parts) is effective teaching of writing. However, there may be some place for it in our classes.

A Little Help

Two articles, “Talking in the Middle: Why Writers Need Writing Tutors” by Muriel Harris and, “Examining Our Lore: A Survey of Students’ and Tutors’ Satisfaction with Writing Center Conferences” by Thompson, et al. are scholarly attempts to discern the purposes of tutoring. While seeming, at first glance, to take very different stances about tutoring, I think we actually find that the empirical evidence provided by Thompson, in many ways supporting the ideas presented by Harris.

Thompson’s article uses finding from empirical evidence to show the different elements that may (or may not) have been directly related to a satisfaction with tutoring. With these findings, “Examining” ended up with conclusions determining that tutors should be more direct when developing the agendas for students. The overall tone of how “Examining” seems to view tutoring is top-down from the tutors guidance over the students.

Meanwhile, Harris takes a completely different tone in viewing tutoring. The article, “Talking” lists the responsibilities for tutors in more general terms. With “reducing stress” in students, helping students “overcome hurdles”, and to “provide more knowledge about writing” as the goals for tutors in the writing conference, I cannot help but see an entirely different attitude presented in “Talking”. If I were being honest about my reading of these materials, it would be hard for me to deny the huge appeal with Harris’ arguments. They touch a nerve in me that is directly connected to my passion and goals for teaching. So how do we reconcile the evidence presented in Thompson’s article with Harris’ goals?

First, I see some serious issues with the research done in Thompson’s article. To focus the findings of success in tutoring based on satisfaction is seriously flawed. Secondly, the findings seem to suggest a disconnect between Harris’ own assertions, and yet there was more “success” when “student ownership of their essays” was emphasized during the tutoring session. Also, the items described as most relevant to success was an environment that was described as “caring”, “comfortable”, one with “positive feedback”, and their answers questioned.

Clearly, both articles see the purpose of tutoring as more than a set of directions, but as a relationship with students that encourages and supports their individual needs. We need to see students as more than a set of writing issues, but as individuals who are writers. They come in with a set of their own skills and accomplishments, but they also have their own concerns. As a writing teacher, I know I have my own concerns with my own writing and I think what I get out most from both of these articles is that we can all use a little guidance, a little help.

One-on-One Reflections

Working with students has always been a goal of mine and small group settings or one-on-one experiences has facilitated such rewarding experiences in my life.  Besides tutoring my own middle school-level students after school for three years and helping elementary students with their homework for an after school program, last semester I worked at the ETC center with two different students. The different settings created very different results in my feelings as an “instructor”, “student”, and the combination of both. As my goals begin to shift towards teaching college, this last semester’s interactions with two students was incredibly helpful.

First, it was interesting to find that my two students had similar writing concerns. They both had trouble organizing and developing their ideas. They both had strong grammar/mechanical skills and their voices, when not muddled by disorganization, were authentic. However, my students significantly differed in their approach to these tutoring sessions. Student A was reserved, but invested in participating in tutoring. He seemed to want to make the best use of his time, even if he did lack confidence in his own writing ability. Student B was much more confident about himself, but less inclined to participate in the process. Showing up to tutoring late, Student B would almost never show up with writing assignments to go over.

Ironically, it was Student B who expressed the most positive feedback about the tutoring experience at the end of the semester. In comments he made to me, he found a lot of help with his writing. Meanwhile, Student A remained reserved and I do not know what my influence to his writing or life may have been. I do believe that in some way I helped both students, but unlike tutoring students I was currently teaching, I am not sure how far we extended that learning, although I was pleased with what I saw as progress in the writing of both my students. There was, however, an issue of resolution that is still something I struggle with. Without any other feedback, it can be hard to evaluate your own personal challenges and successes as the tutor.

The readings did help me to work through some of these feelings by highlighting and rationalizing some of the purposes of tutoring. I was happy to see that some of my own values were supported by the research. The Harris article, “Tutoring ESL Students: Issues and Options” provided a lot of tips to use with any tutoring situation, not just ESL concerns. Concentrating on only “one or two concerns”, explaining to students “what has been done well”, and prioritizing “global errors” were some guidelines I used in my own tutoring. Then, like Destandau’s article, “Promoting Generation 1.5 Learners’ Academic Literacy and Autonomy: Contributions from the Learning Center” I made it my practice to begin each session (after the hellos and rapport building) and end each session with asking students what questions or concerns they had.

Unfortunately, both the students I tutored last had difficulty directing the sessions. This made reading “Examining Our Lore: A Survey of Students’ and Tutors’ Satisfaction with Writing Center Conferences” by Thompson, et al. especially useful to read. I understand the difficulty we beginning tutors have with directing in the sessions. We want to use the information we learned from this program to guide us as educators with student-directed education. However, sometimes students need to feel comfortable with the process and with us, before we just completely let go of control. Not to say that I think we should disregard nondirective actions, but we need to be more reflective on time and place.