Standard Written English..well, my interpretation anyway

Standard written English should DEFINITELY be taught in school. Understanding and correctly using standard written English makes it is easier for the student to communicate their ideas to others during their lifetime and also makes it easier for other people to understand them. Miscommunication causes lost job oppotunities, injuries, fatalities, useless arguments, and the list keeps going. I feel that our country's current economic crisis could have been prevented if there was better communication, which can be achieved through teaching people standard written English.

S.W.E. should be taught at an early age in grade school as its own class, but only at first. Around third or fourth grade when students are asked to do more creative writing, S.W.E. should be enforced in their written work. S.W.E. should be applied enough to make sure that their writing is clear and understandable, but the teaacher should not be so picky as to discourage the student. For example, the outdated rule that prepositions can't be at the end of a sentence should NEVER be enforced since it is a silly useless rule. Proper verb tenses, good punctuation, etc., should be the rules that are applied to the student's work and should be mentioned to the student respectfully when they are misused.

I think that pretty much sums it up. S.W.E. shouldn't be that difficult to agree on how it should be taught and applied. So, why does it seem like grammarians are sucking the life out of the issue?

Bill O'Reiley

Has anyone read Bill O'Reilley's newest book release A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity? I can't wait to read it. I was wondernig if any of you have and if you have any thoughts on the subject.

I love politics!

Mulroy, Pinker, and concepts I guess I don’t understand...

First, I want to begin with a little side note here. I've been sick. Really sick, because of some anitbiotics I've been on. I was sick all last week and I will be all this week since I have to take them for a full two weeks. So this is an apology to everyone in my grammar class. If I haven't commented on your blog yet, I will soon. I promise! I just haven't felt like doing anything because I've been so nauseated. But, moving on...

I read The Scandal of Prescriptivism, David Mulroy's response to Steven Pinker. Honestly, I don't know if I understood it. Mulroy's response was a little unclear to me. For example, the last line reads, "He [Pinker] is a brilliant linguist and author, but for teaching my children English, I'll take the schoolmarm," and I could not tell if Mulroy was saying he prefers the 'schoolmarm' because she secretly teachers her own children prescriptive standard English, or that he would choose the schoolmarm because she teaches more descriptive English in her classroom. His borderline sarcasm makes it difficult for me to decipher his true meaning.Also, I thought Mulroy was a prescriptive snoot but in this passage he speaks of elite Prescriptivists with what I interpreted as contempt or disdain as he blames them for the decreasing speed of the English language's evolution.Can someone, anyone, please help me get what this guy is talking about?