Michael Senteney ENG3080J Tu Th Matthew Vetter 4 June 2013 Proper Grammar being Primary Focus in Writing Grammar is often

taught to students from the time they first learn how to read and write as the most important factor to consider when writing any form of writing. Many problems arise from this assumption including the hindering of creativity, oppression, and the misconception that English is a set-in-stone language. Creativity, in a way, shapes innovation by raising ideas that become innovative ideas that shape the future. By being innovative, changes can occur. Creativity is the most important element of inspiration for writers. In writing, the most important motivation is creativity. Every source used in this article does reinforce that idea, even though they might not directly state it. Katherine Brandt explains how grammar is a building block for all the creative writings to come and can expand creativity. Bryson extends Brandts argument by claiming that it is futile to prohibit the advancement of the English language. Grabar talks about how grammar is a form of oppression and restricts selfexpression; self-expression is, to me, another way of stating creativity. Kantz, although arguing on a different topic, stresses the importance of nurturing creativity. Although these authors have conflicting views about the importance of grammar, their best interests still lie with promoting creativity.

Grammar is constantly changing within every language. Since it is useless to prevent these changes, it is unnecessary to focus solely on grammar when critiquing. Creativity is the most important drive when writing because it allows for people to freely express their opinions. To focus mainly on grammar would be to hinder creativity which is oppressive and prohibit the necessary changes that lead to the future. Grammar rules were developed back when not all races and genders were regarded as equals. Therefore, it is useless to adhere to the old grammar ideals when they are still being improved. Sometimes proper grammar can lead to misunderstandings. Focusing on grammar is an important factor when teaching students the proper ways of forming sentence structures. Needless to say learning proper grammar is also important when forming proper sentence structures and also to cultivate our thinking and help us express our opinions in a unified way. However, focusing solely on grammar when grading or critiquing is unnecessary and oppressive because it misses the topic of the articles completely. When someone writes an article, their purpose is to express their opinions on a particular topic, even when writing papers for assignments. If critiques are to deny commenting or constantly bring up the lack of proper grammar in an article, they would not only be missing the point of the paper and its knowledge but also hindering the authors creativity. Creativity may not seem important or have any relevance in what makes a good article but it does allow for change and innovation. In every industry, whether it would be in transportation or communication, innovation and creativity has changed the standards. For example, the invention of the wheel, which happened around 4000 BC, led to the inventions of wagons and automobiles; as time passed, the automobiles have also transformed. Also, communication devices have changed from wired telephones to wireless touchscreen phones. As those changes happened, the

old standards also transitioned into new ones. These changes could not have happened without creativity and innovation. The same idea applies to grammar. The English language is constantly changing with the addition of new words and grammar is also changing in order to adapt to the norms. Missing the topic and criticizing an article on its grammar hinders creativity because the ideas of the article are not spread and, therefore, the knowledge of the article cannot spread, leaving only past knowledge. Hindering creativity can mean the interruption of the progression of the English language. As Bryson claims in his article Good English and Bad, it (advancement of the English language) is a natural process that has been going on for centuries. To interfere with that process is arguably both arrogant and futile, since clearly the weight of usage will push new meaning into currency no matter how many authorities hurl themselves into the path of change (Bryson 7). If interfering with creativity is futile, then critiques should instead focus on the topics and whether if the writers arguments make sense and has meaning rather than focusing primarily on grammar. Focusing on grammar can, in some cases, allow for the advancement of creativity and innovation. In Teaching grammar doesn't stifle creativity; it enhances creative writing, Katherine Brandt claims that she pities he peers that think of grammar as unimportant and stresses that grammar has been my key to creativity because, with my basic knowledge of the language, I know how to coherently express my ideas so that others can appreciate them (Brandt 3). I agree with her because I think grammar does provide the building blocks for becoming great writers and should be focused on kids that do not have the rules down. However, when reading articles from those that are presumed to have the rules down, grammar should not be a concern for anyone. Also, by focusing on grammar, both from the writing and

critiquing view, changes can be made to the language if a certain style of phrase is repeated enough until it becomes a standard. However, a language can change slowly but the world cannot be held from creative ideas that may lead to futuristic innovations. Focusing on grammar can only lead to advancements in languages while the ideas from articles will lead to advancements in every sector imaginable. If an article is understandable, the reader should focus on retaining all its information rather than picking on the grammar. No one should be afraid to write simply because they are afraid the audience will criticize their grammar. The importance of an article is its content, not the use of proper grammar. I believe that since the English language is constantly changing, grammar should become less of a factor when determining how good an articles arguments are. An important idea to remember when critiquing is, as Mary Grabar mentions in her article Writing Teachers: Still Crazy After All These Years, We are bigger than comp/rhetoric. . . . We do language Because we do critical analysis (Grabar 1). The idea when reading an article should be to learn from its ideas and broaden the readers thinking. However, grammar should be focused when the writer has not yet developed creative thinking. In this case, creative thinking is to think about topics from every point of view and to understand every part of the argument of the topic. In Margaret Kantzs article Helping Students Use Textual Sources Persuasively, she states that if we teach them to set reading and writing goals for themselves that will allow them to think constructively, we will be doing the most exciting work that teachers can do, nurturing creativity (Kantz 81). Even though Kantz argues on a different subject than mine, she still stresses the importance of nurturing creativity. When the writer has developed creative thinking, critiques (even professors) should assess and/or grade the article based on its content

and how well the topic was discussed and analyzed.

An article cannot be primarily judged by

grammar because it hinders creativity and causes oppression. Proper grammar was taught only to those who were free whites back when slavery was still legal. It was used as a form of oppression. Even nowadays, the upper hierarchy pride themselves on proper grammar and behavior. In The Decline of Grammar, a quote by Anthony Kroch and Cathy Small claims "prescriptivism [that is, traditional grammar] is simply the ideology by which the guardians of the standard language impose their linguistic norms on people who have perfectly serviceable norms of their own" (The Decline of Grammar 3). The white community would allow themselves to advance in the social ladder by learning to read and write while the rest were left without any way of escaping the lower hierarchy. These rules were passed from generation to generation but they were not created with the consideration of all races and genders; for this reason, it seems that, like the quote above suggests, grammar rules are simply forced onto everyone. Grammar is not set-in-stone. The norms are always subject to interpretation and change. The grammar rules were created at a time when consideration for all races and genders were minimal but were modified as time passed. Even the upper class people do not speak in the same way as they had in the 1920s. However, if there are not rules to govern writing, it would be like living in a place without laws which would cause pandemonium. Again, critiques should read an article for its content and try to understand the authors arguments instead of focusing on grammar. While grammar can determine how educated a person is, it does not show how good of a writer that person is. In The Decline of Grammar the author claims that people have always

found it worthwhile to reflect on how best to behave, for the sake of at least individual enlightenment and improvement (The Decline of Grammar 2). In my understanding, writing is a way of expressing creativity. Even if there are guidelines to follow, how the article is written is still determined by the writer. While grammar is sought solely for self-enlightenment and selfimprovement, writing is not always. Instead, it can be used for the enlightenment and improvement of the reader. Everything a writer writes is already within the writers knowledge. A writer writes mainly because he/she wishes to express his/her creativity to others. There is also the problem of different dialects around the United States. Some students are not taught proper grammar because of where they are from. The African Americans from Brooklyn have their own street dialect. They grow up only understanding this dialect so that when they enroll in schools, they have to learn proper grammar as if they are learning a new language. They are not exposed to the same grammar conditions as someone who grew up in more privileged neighborhoods are. Coming from personal experience, I understand the struggles of learning a new language. I had to learn English grammar from scratch when I arrived in the United States more than ten years ago; however, I was fortunate enough to have a suitable environment to learn proper grammar. Grammar should be an even less important factor when critiquing articles when the writer has not been properly taught how to write to the normal standards. Often times, proper grammar can change the meaning of an article from the authors intentions. In the article BAD GRAMMAR, NOT RACISM, CAUSED RUCKUS, Frank Cerabino points out an example of this problem:

"For our annual Easter egg hunt ... ," the flier said in mentioning the hunt in Bryant Park. Then it went on to announce a second hunt the city was sponsoring at the Osborne Community Center, which is in a predominantly black part of the city. "The Osborne Community Center will also be holding their annual Easter egg hunt . . ." The problems here are the words "our" for the Bryant Park hunt and "their" for the Osborne hunt. (Cerabino 1) Focusing primarily on grammar would have shown that there is nothing wrong with the statement. However, focusing on the content of the article would show that there is a hint of racism in the statement. Whether it is intentional or unintentional is another story. This example shows that even proper grammar can lead to misconceptions about the purpose of the article and that the content is more important than the grammar. Grammar has been taught as the most important factor when writing. Many critiques critique articles using grammar as a major guideline. Many problems arise from the assumption that grammar is a major guideline, including the hindering of creativity, oppression, and the misconception that English is a set-in-stone language. Texts should be viewed mostly for its content. A reader should read an article thinking of it as a way to learn and critique the article based on how well the content was delivered and whether if all sides of the argument has been analyzed. A writer should focus mostly on delivering high quality content and arguing his/her point explicitly. A person should never be afraid to write simply because he/she is afraid of being critiqued based on their grammatical knowledge.

References Brandt, Katherine. "LTeaching Grammar Doesn't Stifle Creativity; It Enhances Creative Writing." Web log post. Betrayed - Why Public Education Is Falling. N.p., 30 June 2011. Web. 04 June 2013.

Cerabino, Frank. "Bad Grammar, Not Racism, Caused Ruckus." NewsBank America's News Magazines. Palm Beach Post, 6 Apr. 1997. Web. 04 June 2013.

"The Decline of Grammar." PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 04 June 2013.

Grabar, Mary. "Writing Teachers: Still Crazy After All These Years." (n.d.): n. pag. Mnding The Campus Reforming Our Universities. Manhattan Institue, 21 Apr. 2011. Web. 30 May 2013.

Kantz, Margaret. "Helping Students Use Textual Sources Persuasively." Writing about Writing: A College Reader. By Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2011. 67-85. Print.

Bryson, Bill. Good English and Bad. The Mother Tongue: English and How It Got That Way. New York: Avon, 1991. 134-146.