- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Correct grammar be like racist
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:15 am to Zach
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:15 am to Zach
One of the things that happens if someone is looking for information that confirms his/her biases is that they often misread or overlook the words in front of them. That's what's going on here. Here is a link to the letter.
LINK
I'm sure there's a lot of things you may dislike about what's written. And everyone gets an opinion, so I won't even push back on any of them. But she's doing the precise opposite of what you seem to be accusing her of doing. She's saying that her department, as compared to other English departments, will be putting MORE emphasis on the use of standard grammar in creative writing.
This is like Ebonics all over again. People get super mad based on their own misunderstandings...
LINK
I'm sure there's a lot of things you may dislike about what's written. And everyone gets an opinion, so I won't even push back on any of them. But she's doing the precise opposite of what you seem to be accusing her of doing. She's saying that her department, as compared to other English departments, will be putting MORE emphasis on the use of standard grammar in creative writing.
This is like Ebonics all over again. People get super mad based on their own misunderstandings...
2
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:16 am to ShortyRob
quote:
Remember when it was considered bad that the system gave blacks a lesser education? Now they want to codify it?
She's literally doing the opposite. Like, the precise opposite.
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:22 am to Zach
Why would any parent want their child to go learn a bunch of BS thats going to hurt their chances at getting a real job? Lets have these kids get facial tattoos while were at it.......
This post was edited on 7/26/20 at 11:22 am
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:25 am to Zach
quote:
“decolonize the writing center”
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:33 am to Zach
I used to teach English/rules of grammar to small groups (from age 12 to 18+). Most participants were at least middle-class, but not culturally homogenous and not usually all that motivated to learn grammar. One of the first things I always told them was that I understood that it wasn’t necessary or even desirable to use the King’s English 24/7, and that however they chose to speak or write among family or friends was their business — but in my course they were expected to become every bit as fluent in formal English as they were in casual communication. I always emphasized that expanding their language skills was a way of expanding their opportunities, because being able to communicate well in a variety of settings made them more employable and would lead to a greater sense of competence and self-confidence. The more language skills they had, the more choices they had, iow.
It was rare that anyone who participated scored lower than an 85-88 on any of the assessments, which were actually quite difficult. Most were 90+. At certain points I’d let them just sort of freestyle and list everything they had learned since the last evaluation, and the answers were quite often amazing. Many of them retained more than I would have imagined, and they were so PROUD of that. Still fundamentally themselves, clearly, yet someone they saw as an “enhanced” version of themselves.
Anyone who would advocate taking that away from them under the guise of “decolonizing” or “becoming anti-racist” is an illogical, ignorant piece of oppressive crap who probably never would have had a platform to say such a thing if they had been the product of a similar system of education.
It was rare that anyone who participated scored lower than an 85-88 on any of the assessments, which were actually quite difficult. Most were 90+. At certain points I’d let them just sort of freestyle and list everything they had learned since the last evaluation, and the answers were quite often amazing. Many of them retained more than I would have imagined, and they were so PROUD of that. Still fundamentally themselves, clearly, yet someone they saw as an “enhanced” version of themselves.
Anyone who would advocate taking that away from them under the guise of “decolonizing” or “becoming anti-racist” is an illogical, ignorant piece of oppressive crap who probably never would have had a platform to say such a thing if they had been the product of a similar system of education.
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:33 am to Bulldogblitz
quote:
This was their argument for trying to teach ebonics 20+ years ago.
This is a lot like Ebonics but not in the way you may be intending. What's going on here, at least in this thread, is that we have a bunch of people who are exhibiting an acute deficiency in reading comprehension that has given them a misunderstanding of what his actually being proposed and because of their misunderstanding they've worked themselves into a lather.
It's like Ebonics, because it involves the similar misunderstanding and subsequently a similar frothing anger. It's fascinating really.
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:36 am to thetempleowl
quote:
word which is simply the opposite of some other word? A word contains its opposite in itself. Take ‘good’, for instance. If you have a word like ‘good’, what need is there for a word like ‘bad’? ‘Ungood’ will do just as well—better, because it’s an exact opposite, which the other is not. Or again, if you want a stronger version of ‘good’, what sense is there in having a whole string of vague useless words like ‘excellent’ and ‘splendid’ and all the rest of them? ‘Plusgood’ covers the meaning, or ‘doubleplusgood’ if you want something stronger still"
quote:
Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thought-crime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten. . . . The process will still be continuing long after you and I are dead. Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller. Even now, of course, there's no reason or excuse for commiting thought-crime. It's merely a question of self-discipline, reality-control. But in the end there won't be any need even for that. . . . Has it ever occcured to you, Winston, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now?
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:36 am to Zach
you mispelled racis.
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:37 am to DeepBlueSea
quote:
One of the first things I always told them was that I understood that it wasn’t necessary or even desirable to use the King’s English 24/7, and that however they chose to speak or write among family or friends was their business — but in my course they were expected to become every bit as fluent in formal English as they were in casual communication.
In other words, you are in alignment with Rutgers. Read the actual words of the letter.
quote:
Incorporating “critical grammar” into our pedagogy - This approach challenges the familiar dogma that writing instruction should limit emphasis on grammar/sentence-level issues so as to not put students from multilingual, non-standard "academic" English backgrounds at a disadvantage. Instead, it encourages students to develop a critical awareness of the variety of choices available to them w/ regard to micro-level issues in order to empower them and equip them to push against biases based on "written" accents.
You are saying the exact same thing they are saying.
quote:
Anyone who would advocate taking that away from them under the guise of “decolonizing” or “becoming anti-racist” is an illogical, ignorant piece of oppressive crap who probably never would have had a platform to say such a thing if they had been the product of a similar system of education.
No one is doing that.
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:41 am to longwayfromLA
I’ll cop to skimming the first time, so I missed this passage the first time. It suggests that your interpretation is correct:
“Incorporating “critical grammar” into our pedagogy. This approach challenges the familiar dogma that writing instruction should limit emphasis on grammar/sentence-level issues so as to not put students from multilingual, non-standard "academic" English backgrounds at a disadvantage. Instead, it encourages students to develop a critical awareness of the variety of choices available to them w/ regard to micro-level issues in order to empower them and equip them to push against biases based on "written" accents.”
If this is to be their guiding principle, then yes, I wholeheartedly agree. My concern would be how much any of the other initiatives they mentioned could interfere with or subvert that goal.
“Incorporating “critical grammar” into our pedagogy. This approach challenges the familiar dogma that writing instruction should limit emphasis on grammar/sentence-level issues so as to not put students from multilingual, non-standard "academic" English backgrounds at a disadvantage. Instead, it encourages students to develop a critical awareness of the variety of choices available to them w/ regard to micro-level issues in order to empower them and equip them to push against biases based on "written" accents.”
If this is to be their guiding principle, then yes, I wholeheartedly agree. My concern would be how much any of the other initiatives they mentioned could interfere with or subvert that goal.
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:45 am to longwayfromLA
I believe I was typing the reply above when you responded, so again, you are correct and I didn’t read thoroughly enough on the first go-round.
The only point I still take issue with is that “no one is doing that”. Unfortunately, my reflexive reaction was based on the fact that many, many people have been pushing to do precisely that.
The only point I still take issue with is that “no one is doing that”. Unfortunately, my reflexive reaction was based on the fact that many, many people have been pushing to do precisely that.
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:45 am to ShortyRob
quote:
Is it systemic racism if you intentionally via the education system ensure that blacks are less than employable because they speak and write poorly.
You know the answer to this question!
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:46 am to Zach
Is using do or does correctly too much to ask?
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:47 am to KiwiHead
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:48 am to longwayfromLA
quote:
She's saying that her department, as compared to other English departments, will be putting MORE emphasis on the use of standard grammar in creative writing. This is like Ebonics all over again. People get super mad based on their own misunderstandings...
Are you just banking on people not actually reading the letter?
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:48 am to Zach
Wait....., I thought Math was racist.
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:49 am to Zach
Does that mean we can’t be banned now for speaking in Ebonics?
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:50 am to Zach
“So non whites are inherently inferior so we must dumb down the expectations”
-liberal white supremacist
-liberal white supremacist
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:51 am to Zach
We also need to ban all words over 3 syllables.
Posted on 7/26/20 at 11:52 am to Zach
After reading the article, my take is that Rutgers wants to “decriminalize “ grammar as part of “de-colonization“ so as to seem “woke.”
So not lowering standards, but de-colonization.
So would the following question:
“I can go to the bathroom?” be deemed correct grammatically now?
Based on:
it would legitimize it.
ETA
What is the working definition of the emboldened term above?
So not lowering standards, but de-colonization.
So would the following question:
“I can go to the bathroom?” be deemed correct grammatically now?
Based on:
quote:
critical awareness of the variety of choices available to them w/ regard to micro-level issues in order to empower them and equip them to push against biases based on "written" accents.”
it would legitimize it.
ETA
quote:
Incorporating “critical grammar” into our pedagogy - This approach challenges the familiar dogma that writing instruction should limit emphasis on grammar/sentence-level issues so as to not put students from multilingual, non-standard "academic" English backgrounds at a disadvantage.
What is the working definition of the emboldened term above?
This post was edited on 7/26/20 at 12:01 pm
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News