>
> In class the Prof. listed a bunch
>I never heard of, stuff like Jarens (he didn't
>write them on the board and this was back in
>September). I never even heard this word before,
>but chances are I use Jarens and use them
>correctly. Because after years of writing and
>reading I know what makes up a sentence and a
>paragraph. Once you learn how to use it you
>don't have to remember what they are called.
>
> I used to bash my brains out on a yearly bases.
>Each english class I had would start with a go
>over of gammer and I would have to learn what
>all those things mean again. Then we would move
>on to actually reading stuff and writting and my
>grades would shoot up. I *knew* how to write a
>sentince, I just had trouble remembering the
>deffinitions to words that I only used about
>once a year.
>
> What is more important in Whole Langugae is the
>ability to write compleate sentances, constructe
>essays and letters. In other words the use of
>Language is paramount over the mechanics of
>language. I think I'm rather good at the use of
>language, even if I have to look up what an
>adjective is each time I play Mad-Libs.

My friend, you do yourself and your entire argument a disservice by your atrocious grammar and spelling in this very post. The simple fact of the matter is that spelling and using grammar no better than the average fourth-grader makes you look like an idiot, disirregardless of whether you actually *are* an idiot or not.

There isn't a single more disingenuous argument than saying "I use language well, I don't need to know the rules." The person making the statement is invariably breaking the rules and *not* using the language well even has s/he makes the statement, much as you do above. You want to know how I know? I've done it myself. For years I used the very same argument. I was wrong in using it and so are you.

The fact is, you don't *have* to be a grammar Nazi or a walking dictionary to be a good writer or communicator. But you have to have an essential toolkit. And that toolkit has to contain parts of speech and punctuation and the essential rules of grammar. And you don't have that. Observe:

"But I do think you are missing my point, Whole
Language does teach the parts of gammer, but not
as in depth as they used to and they don't harp
on it as much."

I, personally, am not a grammar Nazi. I can't tell you what a gerund is or diagram a sentence properly. I've probably made a bunch of small errors myself in this post already; I'm sure I'll make some more before I'm done. But I know enough to know really bad usage when I see it. And I see it in your very first sentence here. It's a run-on sentence, something most people learn to avoid by the third grade or so. To fix it, the first comma should be either a period or a semi-colon. It looks to me like you're either just guessing how it should go, or punctuating it to sound like you might say it out loud. Both are bad. Both make *you* look bad. Both completely destroy your argument that you don't need to know "gammer" in order to write well.

It wholly and completely depresses me to see a person who professes to have a love for writing and literature who has no respect for words and their usage. It depresses me further to remember that I *used* to be just like you. I used to think that I knew enough about grammar through all the reading I had done, and that that would be sufficient for me as a writer. I was wrong. You *can* develop an innate knowledge of how grammar works, to the point where you can feel when something is wrong without really knowing what it is. But you'll never know how to FIX it without knowing at least the basics of grammar. (Or, in my case, knowing someone who *does*. I send almost all of the stories I write off to Sam for proofreading. This serves two purposes: One, Sam can tell me if the story sucks or not. Two, Sam *is* sort of a grammar Nazi, and he can tell me when I've dangled my participles or split my infinitives. I try my best to learn the rules when he reminds me of them, but some of them continue to elude me--I'm sure if Sam were to go over this post, he'd point out tons of the little mistakes I constantly make in my writing. But the point is, I *care* enough about "the little things" and the occasional BIG THING to want someone like Sam to check over the things that I write.)

As Brunnen_G said, I hope this doesn't sound mean-spirited, and I don't mean this as simply a personal attack. But the simple fact is, Speedball, you *don't* use language well, at least not in the writing you've shown here in the forum. And you make yourself look really bad when you claim that you do in a post littered with terrible misspellings and horrible usage mistakes.

This is meant to be constructive criticism. Please don't hate me.

-- Dave