I am experimenting with the use of screencasts to support students with study skills and content on analysing English grammar. So far, I have made the following:
On aspects of theme https://screencast-o-matic.com/watch/cFehbwDXbm
Lexical cohesion https://screencast-o-matic.com/watch/cFnrb4o9kt
Passives https://screencast-o-matic.com/watch/cFVlbloloz
Using sources in assignments https://screencast-o-matic.com/watch/cFVX6oo6C5
The following clip provides a good explanation of process types although, of course, there is not really enough context for the types and explanation of ambiguous types. However, students on courses like E304 and E852 might find it useful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sOJy4nOwKo&feature=youtu.be
I came across the following article today.
I found it generally interesting but feel it misses opportunities to explore issues and ended up feeling slightly disappointed. The sub heading Grammar 1.0 was presumably making a parallel with web 1.0. I assumed there was going to be a discussion of Grammar 2.0. This then made me think about what Grammar 2.0 might be and whether this was an appropriate term for SFL. There seem to be parallels in terms of the focus on the social and language being seen as something that is produced by people for their needs rather than being an idealised resource that users simply receive passively.
Does anyone have any thoughts on whether it is useful to think of Grammar 2.0?
I have just been reading a translation of an unusual book by Pessoa (1991) and was particularly intrigued by some thoughts on grammar towards the end of it. Many of them seem to relate interestingly to concepts covered in E303 and E301.
The first is "grammar is a tool not a law" (page 231). This seems to relate to the ideas of SFL where there is such an emphasis on the functions that language serves.
There is then a long paragraph where he suggests that "someone who understands what is involved in speaking often needs to make a transitive verb intransitive and vice versa" and that "If I wanted to talk about my existence as an entity that both directs and forms itself.....I would have to inventa transitive form and say grammatically supreme 'I exist me'" (page 231). This quote is interesting as "I exist me" seems similar to the kinds of structures used in spoken English (Carter 2004). Pessoa also seems to be explicitly linking grammatical deviance to creative and literary texts.
There is then another call for appropriate deviance "Only those who are unable to think what they feel obey grammatical rules. Someone who knows how to express themselves can use those rules as he pleases. There's a story they tell of Sigismund, King of Rome, who, having made a grammatical mistake in a public speech , said to the person who pointed this out "I am King of Rome and therefore above grammar" (page 231-232).
These points resonated with many of my thoughts recently. For example, I was thinking of this as I heard David Cameron recently say "I are...." I have not seem this referred to in the press and I slightly wonder whether he was using the mistake/deviance as a tool for expressing (perhaps manufactured) anger about the recent EU bill.
Carter R (2004) Language and creativity: The art of common talk London: Routledge
Pessoa F (translated 1991) The Book of Disquiet London: Serpent's Tail.
I have increasingly become aware of Michael Rosen's blog and it is a good read that is of relevance to the E303 and E852 courses. The following posting should be of interest to students on both courses:
http://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.com/2012/01/grammar-rules-descriptions-and-systems.html
I would be interested in any comments.
I led a couple of sessions here for the e303 course. I decided it would be useful to apply some of the contents of the course to the study of literary texts and to critical reading.
The handout for the literature session is given below with some teacher notes in italics.
********************
The language of literature
Discuss the following questions in groups.
Is there anything distinctive about the language of literary texts?
If so, what is it? If not, what helps you to decide whether a text is literary?
The main feature is that they are deviant in some way.
Look at the following extracts from the beginnings of literary texts to help you decide. What, if anything, do they have in common?
|
The Christening I am a sperm whale. I carry up to 2.5 tonnes of an oil-like balm in my huge coffin- shaped head. I have a brain the size of a basketball, and on that basis alone am entitled to my opinions. I am a sperm whale. When I breathe in, the fluid in my head cools to a dense wax and I nosedive into the depths. My song, available on compact disc is a comfort to divorcees, astrologists and those who have ‘pitched the quavering canvas tent of their thoughts on the rim of the dark crater’. ……
Armitage, S. (2010) Seeing Stars London : Faber and Faber. |
The field here is somewhat deviant. It might also be said that there is some deviance textually in the repetition of "I am..." I also thought "brain the size of a basketball" was an adaptation of "brain the size of a planet".
|
1 Found Objects It began the usual way, in the bathroom of the Lassimo Hotel. Sasha was adjusting her yellow eye shadow in the mirror when she noticed the bag on the floor beside the sink that must have belonged to the woman whose peeing she could faintly hear through the vaultlike door of a toilet stall. Inside the rim of the bag, barely visible, was a wallet made of green leather. Egan, J. (2010) A visit from the Good Squad London: Corsair. |
Again some of the subject matter (peeing) seemed deviant and there was also some textual deviance in the way that it refers to "the usual way" right at the beginning of the story before we know what usual way is.
|
I consider it my duty to forewarn the reader that the event described in this tale relates to a very distant time. Moreover, it is a complete invention. Mirgorod is now quite another place; the puddle in the middle of the town dried up ages ago, and the dignitaries, the judge, the clerk of the court and the mayor are all respected and well intentioned men. Gogol, N. (1834, translated Aplin H 2002) The Squabble London : Hesperus. |
This is a story that seems to be in a spoken mode in some ways and this is typical of Gogol's "skaz" technique. I also think there is textual deviance in the use of "Moreover" which contrasts with "a very distant time". So, it is not clear if the events are invented or just belong to a distant time. Also, the final sentence seems to throw both the distance and the invention into doubt.
Linguistic tools that could be useful
What are the linguistic concepts that you have learnt about so far on the course and how might they help you to analyse a literary text?
Some examples would include unusual marking of theme and rheme. A corpus would help a reader to recognise unusual combinations or expressions that typically belong to clashing registers (in the Longman Grammar sense of the word).
Which of the concepts, if any, might have revealed something about the texts above?
Corpus linguistics, the textual function.
Applying grammatical tools
What strikes you as you read the extract below?
The use of "I heard/I saw"
What I heard about Iraq in 2005Eliot WeinbergerIn 2005 I heard that Coalition forces were camped in the ruins of Babylon . I heard that bulldozers had dug trenches through the site and cleared areas for helicopter landing pads and parking lots, that thousands of sandbags had been filled with dirt and archaeological fragments, that a 2600-year-old brick pavement had been crushed by tanks, and that the moulded bricks of dragons had been gouged out from the Ishtar Gate by soldiers collecting souvenirs. I heard that the ruins of the Sumerian cities of Umma, Umm al-Akareb, Larsa and Tello were completely destroyed and were now landscapes of craters. I heard that the US was planning an embassy in Baghdad that would cost $1.5 billion, as expensive as the Freedom Tower at Ground Zero, the proposed tallest building in the world. I saw a headline in the Los Angeles Times that read: ‘After Levelling City, US Tries to Build Trust.’ I heard that military personnel were now carrying ‘talking point’ cards with phrases such as: ‘We are a values-based, people-focused team that strives to uphold the dignity and respect of all.’ I heard that 47 per cent of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein helped plan 9/11 and 44 per cent believed that the hijackers were Iraqi; 61 per cent thought that Saddam had been a serious threat to the US and 76 per cent said the Iraqis were now better off. I heard that Iraq was now ranked with Haiti and Senegal as one of the poorest nations on earth. I heard the United Nations Human Rights Commission report that acute malnutrition among Iraqi children had doubled since the war began. I heard that only 5 per cent of the money Congress had allocated for reconstruction had actually been spent. I heard that in Fallujah people were living in tents pitched on the ruins of their houses. I heard that this year’s budget included $105 billion for the War on Terror, which would bring the total to $300 billion. I heard that Halliburton was estimating that its bill for providing services to US troops in Iraq would exceed $10 billion. I heard that the family of an American soldier killed in Iraq receives $12,000. I heard that the White House had deleted the chapter on Iraq from the annual Economic Report of the President, on the grounds that it did not conform with an otherwise cheerful tone. Within a week in January I heard Condoleezza Rice say there were 120,000 Iraqi troops trained to take over the security of the country; I heard Senator Joseph Biden, Democrat from Delaware, say that the number was closer to 4000; I heard Donald Rumsfeld say: ‘The fact of the matter is that there are 130,200 who have been trained and equipped. That’s a fact. The idea that that number’s wrong is just not correct. The number is right.’ Weinberger E (2006) “What I heard about Iraq in 2005” London Review of Books Volume 28, number 1: 7-1 |
Compare it to the following version. What are the differences in terms of effect and which concept(s) from the course do you think could help explain the differences?
I think the concept of theme and rheme is very useful for examining the differences.
Iraq in 2005In 2005 Coalition forces were camped in the ruins of Babylon. Bulldozers had dug trenches through the site and cleared areas for helicopter landing pads and parking lots, thousands of sandbags had been filled with dirt and archaeological fragments, a 2600-year-old brick pavement had been crushed by tanks, and the moulded bricks of dragons had been gouged out from the Ishtar Gate by soldiers collecting souvenirs. The ruins of the Sumerian cities of Umma, Umm al-Akareb, Larsa and Tello were completely destroyed and were now landscapes of craters. The US was planning an embassy in Baghdad that would cost $1.5 billion, as expensive as the Freedom Tower at Ground Zero, the proposed tallest building in the world. A headline in the Los Angeles Times read: ‘After Levelling City, US Tries to Build Trust.’ Military personnel were now carrying ‘talking point’ cards with phrases such as: ‘We are a values-based, people-focused team that strives to uphold the dignity and respect of all.’ 47 per cent of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein helped plan 9/11 and 44 per cent believed that the hijackers were Iraqi; 61 per cent thought that Saddam had been a serious threat to the US and 76 per cent said the Iraqis were now better off. Iraq was now ranked with Haiti and Senegal as one of the poorest nations on earth. The United Nations Human Rights Commission reported that acute malnutrition among Iraqi children had doubled since the war began. Only 5 per cent of the money Congress had allocated for reconstruction had actually been spent. In Fallujah people were living in tents pitched on the ruins of their houses. This year’s budget included $105 billion for the War on Terror, which would bring the total to $300 billion. Halliburton was estimating that its bill for providing services to US troops in Iraq would exceed $10 billion. The family of an American soldier killed in Iraq receives $12,000. The White House had deleted the chapter on Iraq from the annual Economic Report of the President, on the grounds that it did not conform with an otherwise cheerful tone. Within a week in January Condoleezza Rice said there were 120,000 Iraqi troops trained to take over the security of the country; Senator Joseph Biden, Democrat from Delaware, said that the number was closer to 4000; Donald Rumsfeld said: ‘The fact of the matter is that there are 130,200 who have been trained and equipped. That’s a fact. The idea that that number’s wrong is just not correct. The number is right.’ Weinberger E (2006) “What I heard about Iraq in 2005” London Review of Books Volume 28, number 1: 7-1 |
For those who are interested in language analysis of literary texts, Short's (1996) book is very good.
Short, M. (1996) Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays and Prose Harlow: Longman.
I have recently finished this novel and it is interesting that he seems to be quite quotable in materials about language - he is featured in the E303 materials and I have used extracts from "The Corrections" in my face to face materials and some distance learning materials I wrote a few years ago. I suspect this novel will also be used by materials writers.
In particular, one of the main characters writes an autobiography featured near the beginning and later at the end of the book. The title of this is "Mistakes were made" and this made me wonder why it was not "I made mistakes" or "The mistakes I made" in the first extract. However, in the second extract, it becomes clear that it was not just the writer of the autobiography who made mistakes.
This is just one example of issues in the novel where the forms are significant for the meaning of the whole novel.
This blog might contain posts that are only visible to logged-in users, or where only logged-in users can comment. If you have an account on the system, please log in for full access.
