Subject: disc : grammar in uk schools

i was disturbed to find some traditional fallacies in geoffrey sampson 's discussion of the teaching of grammar in schools . though i no longer have a copy of prof . cameron 's original post , i do recall the essentials of it , and found that mr . sampson had passed over the valid point it was making in favour of a prescriptivist , " back to basics " defense of traditional grammatical education . prof . cameron is perfectly correct in ridiculing the inflexible , rote and prescriptive approach to grammar which is conventionally inflicted on students throughout the english speaking world . the issue of being able to use standard english ( or perhaps _ a _ standard english ) correctly is entirely separate from the reliance on traditional " rules " which are frequently unhelpful , and often grossly inaccurate . the rule regarding finishing sentences with prepositions , as one glaring example , is a total misunderstanding of both the history of english , and an unhelpful preoccupation for effective communication . > strikes me as akin to suggesting that teachers of > french should forget about teaching the past participle of " vivre " in > favour of getting their pupils to develop considered opinions about > the theories of derrida . though mr . sampson has used an interesting rhetorical image here , it is in fact a false analogy . teaching students to get a feel for the function of grammar and language is a far cry from teaching them gb theory or hpsg . an understanding of how sentences , clauses , verb tenses , adverbs , etc . actually function on a basic level is a very reasonable educational goal , and far more worthy then just creating a bunch of " do n't " 's and " never " 's and calling that grammatical education . > beyond that , though , teaching orthography and grammar at school level > has a much broader educational value . one of the lessons we all have > to learn is that nothing big and worthwhile is ever achieved in this > life without careful attention to endless tedious and often arbitrary > details . at the risk of making a gross national stereotype , i feel compelled to quote george bernard shaw : " the british believe that they are moral when they are merely uncomfortable . " this notion that education ( or work , for that matter ) must be unpleasant to produce results is a puritanical relic . in my personal experience , the very successful people tend to be precisely the ones who know how to delegate , slough off or avoid wasting time with " tedious and arbitrary details " . ( please read the preceding paragraph with the tongue planted in the general vicinity of the cheek . ) in a spirit of greater seriousness though , i would like to second prof . cameron 's call to educators to abandon prescriptive , rule-based approaches to grammar , and embrace a more general approach based on a comprehension of more fluid and meaningful principles . i believe that the result would be students with a better grasp of the form and function of language rather than a shallow and inflexible mastery of facile rules . - - - - marc hamann
