What do you view as purpose or goal of a grammar?

Post Reply
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

What do you view as purpose or goal of a grammar?

Post by cwconrad »

MAubrey wrote:Perhaps we should start a new thread here in the linguistics/grammar subforum that asks that as a question:

What do you view as purpose or goal of a grammar?

That might be useful for all of us in understanding what expectations each of us bring to the task of grammar.
It might also be a matter of a range of expectations as broad as of the people who hold them ("quot sententiae, tot homines"). But I'll bite. What I offer is just something for starters.

I conceive of "a grammar" as a compiled volume offering a systematic account of a particular language's structures and how the particular language functions.to convey meaning.

I think that a grammar of ancient Greek (since that's what we're talking about, and I'd just as soon not attempt to go beyond ancient Greek in this discussion) should offer an intelligible account of the language's structures, its morphology and syntax as well as its idiomatic expressions and characteristic patterns of ordering elements in sequence. Insofar as possible, its terminology should be clear and readily intelligible. I don't think of a grammar as a textbook but rather as a reference work to be consulted when we confront an expression in our reading of texts or listening to utterances in Greek that puzzles us for any reason.

I suspect that any particular grammar of ancient Greek will reflect the limits of the author's/compiler's experience and competence in the language. I suspect that, in Aristotelian terms, it will reflect accumulated ἐμπειρία rather than τέχνη in any really meaningful sense of τέχνη.

So much for starters.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: What do you view as purpose or goal of a grammar?

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Rather than give you my "loose and verbose" that everybody is used to by now, let me give the terse executive summary.

What do I think grammar is?
Grammar is language-specific set of rough and flexible guidelines upon which the parts of a language are put together to form a "1+1>2" whole.

What are my basic tests in deciding whether someone is talking through their nose about grammar?
Could a 5 - 7 year old produce / understand it? Would a teenager say, "Yeah, right!"

Do I think that knowing the grammar of a language is the same as knowing a language?
No. No more than one can drive from the back seat.

What do I see as the relationship/difference between grammar, language and linguistics?
Language is what we produce and what we understand without thinking too much about it,
Grammar is useful where people don't understand the language or persistantly make a mistake,
Linguistics is for people who don't know language and consequently need help to understand grammar.

Why am I posting about "grammar" and not "a grammar" as MAubrey suggested?
Plato's theory of forms.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Jonathan Robie
Posts: 4244
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: What do you view as purpose or goal of a grammar?

Post by Jonathan Robie »

So if I get what you are saying, you do believe people need to learn the rules of grammar, perhaps not the metalanguage that governs these rules, and the real test is whether you can produce sentences in the language, orally or in writing?
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: What do you view as purpose or goal of a grammar?

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Jonathan Robie wrote:So if I get what you are saying, you do believe people need to learn the rules of grammar, perhaps not the metalanguage that governs these rules, and the real test is whether you can produce sentences in the language, orally or in writing?
You're asking me, right?

Of course people should produce language, it is language. Do you have a better suggestion for what to do with it once you learn it? Can you imagine training a student of (another) language to be mute and unexpressive?

We usually speak our languages from a great body of examples that we have in mind, so listening and reading are an essential part of learning as we acquire a feel for a language (and also memorisation of example sentences).

I don't think language acquisition is such a big thing as to be "need to learn rules". Most language is acquired very simply without understanding it. Rhetoric needs to be learnt. Language comes easily I think if given the right learning context and opportunities. Metalanguage and grammar are great skills to discuss your language with others, and could be learnt at upper intermediate level, perhaps.

For adult learners especially, rules can be programmed / hardwired pretty easily without the need for great long explanations in the person's native language.

I'm primarily an EFL teacher now. I think most of the things I do with my students for English can work for Greek too.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
RandallButh
Posts: 1105
Joined: May 13th, 2011, 4:01 am

Re: What do you view as purpose or goal of a grammar?

Post by RandallButh »

There is an unstated, prevalent conception about ancient Greek that is generating the discusision between Stephen and Jonathan. For ancient languages many students and teachers consider a "grammar" to be a textbook for teaching/learning Greek. This thread, on the other hand, is asking about the purpose and goal of a grammar.

There are two separate questions:
1. How does one codify and write-up a particular language system? (aka. a grammar)
2. How does on teach/learn a language?

This thread deals with question 1 and Carl's opening description did not list 'teaching a language', correctly in my opinion.

A practical grammar will try to list and catagorize the existing structures in a language and to give a description of their functions to varying degrees of detail. The audience may influence the levels of details, area of focus, as well as the kinds of metalanguage and terminology. Some linguists, on the other hand, are asking how the stuctures provide evidence about the way in which human language works, how do the internal nuts and bolts actually work, or how did they get into the shapa/function that thay are, how do they fit or build a model of a language? These questions lead into what might be called 'theoretical grammar'. However theoretical grammatical studies rarely produce anything approaching completeness for a particular language and typically spend time comparing and contrasting features with other languages somewhere on the planet.
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: What do you view as purpose or goal of a grammar?

Post by Stephen Hughes »

cwconrad wrote:I suspect that any particular grammar of ancient Greek will reflect the limits of the author's/compiler's experience and competence in the language. I suspect that, in Aristotelian terms, it will reflect accumulated ἐμπειρία rather than τέχνη in any really meaningful sense of τέχνη.
That could be possible if one were to write it from scratch. I think that in most cases grammars built upon each other.
RandallButh wrote:Carl's opening description did not list 'teaching a language'
cwconrad wrote:I don't think of a grammar as a textbook but rather as a reference work to be consulted when we confront an expression in our reading of texts or listening to utterances in Greek that puzzles us for any reason.
I don't seem much difference between a teaching grammar and a descriptive grammar. I think that after the first couple of years f experience with the language a descriptive reference grammar is easier to learn the language from than a teaching grammar / textbook. Smyth would be a better read then JACT or other. Teaching grammars using whatever methods present all sorts of "teaching" cushioning to the presentation of material, but they are grammars never-the-less. Carl's comments about encountering puzzling expression or utterance sort of assumes that the student (used for humility aka scholar) can actually read more or less fluently. An experience reader can better themselves - hone their skill - from a reference grammar.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Paul-Nitz
Posts: 497
Joined: June 1st, 2011, 4:19 am
Location: Sussex, Wisconsin

Re: What do you view as purpose or goal of a grammar?

Post by Paul-Nitz »

In my old school, we always avoided this confusion by calling the one a primer and the other a grammar. My dear teacher insisted that we pronounce primer properly, with a short "i."

I've been reading Juan Coderch's new intermediate reference grammar and love it. He is the man who maintains Akropolis, the website of weekly news written in Attic.
Paul D. Nitz - Lilongwe Malawi
Post Reply

Return to “Syntax and Grammar”