Chapter 2: The Realizening
I think I have some interesting realizations to share after reading Chapters One and Two of Kolln.
The first realization I have is the paradox of how cool and how frustrating I find all of this term-mongering. For instance, I have often wondered what exactly it is called when you identify a noun by "pointing" to it. I now know that this is called a demonstrative pronoun, like that sugar bowl or those houses with the smoke billowing out the windows. However, I can see that there will be lots and lots of these definitions, and if "grammar" is any example, many of these words will have many distinct definitions. To keep them all straight then, I think, will be difficult and confusing. Thus, this is the paradox I have discovered in ChapterTwo.
The second realization I had while reading Chapters One and Two was that my own previous thoughts on grammar were echoed by the book. The thought kept occurring to me, "That's what I thought" or "That's the same argument I used" when, for instance, I would argue for why one sentence was correct and the other was not. This is comforting to me. I only hope I don't find that I have argued for something the wrong way and constructed some sort of parallel grammar where, say, nouns don't necessarily need predicates to form a clause, but that makes perfect sense to me, thus ruining my future career as a grammarian.
Those are my two realizations. I do hope they have been worth your time.
posted by Anonymous @ 11:27 PM
7 comments
7 Comments:
That's odd you mention that. I had those exact realizations!
For me, I also thought that when they talked about the history of the letter Q that there was so much they left out, including but not limited to, the enslavement of an entire generation before they came up with a consensus on how to pronounce it.
I was a bit overwhelmed by all the terms at first, too, especially since some of them had definitions which differed from ones I had previously learned. I try to think of the terms less in the way of definitions and more in terms of how whatever is being defined is going to function in a sentence. That way, even if I forget exactly what it is, I can still catch mistakes or explain how a particular element of grammar works.
There are definitely many definitions on this book and the can be overwhelming. I personally am still trying to determine a way to keep all definitions separate.
Also, much of grammar is common sense when you really think about what the writer is trying to say.
Yeah, I was definitely bogged down by the influx of terms (but more so their definitions). Like Marjorie, I find it easier to remember a term by how it functions rather than it's definition.
I agree with your comment about definitions. My fiance asks me to proof his writing all of the time before he shows it to his graduate advisor, and knowing some of these grammar definitions makes it easier to explain why he should revise something in his paper.
I have to agree that all of the definitions are somewhat intimidating. Especially since they've changed from what I learned in elementary school. Of course, most of the definitions I learned were for parts of speech that were used in MadLibs.
I actually found the multiple terms interesting and not really that confusing. What I found to be a bore was trying to learn new definition for old grammatical terms (exempla gratia, noun, verb). They make sence, though, and I have kept them as a secondary definition.
Post a Comment
<< Home