The publication of The Grammar Book, Second Edition was directed by the members of the. Newbury House ESL/EFL team at Heinle & Heinle: Erik Gundersen. The Grammar Book An ESLEFL Teacher's Course, Second Edition[A4].pdf - Ebook download as PDF File .pdf) or read book online. In this highly acclaimed. PDF Drive is your search engine for PDF files. As of today we have 78,, eBooks for you to download for free. No annoying ads, no download limits, enjoy .
|Language:||English, Spanish, Arabic|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration needed]|
nucleus of the first edition of The Grammar Book: An ESL/EFL Teacher's Course. Now, some thirty years later, we have been given the opportunity to write a third. Experience our interactive, profoundly engaging digital publication!. The Grammar Book: An ESL/EFL Teacher's Course (2nd ed.).: Marianne Celce‐ Murcia and Diane Larsen‐Freeman. CARL ZHONGGANG GAO.
What is the structure after I wish? When do we say used to do and when do we say used to doing? When do we use the? What is the difference between like and as? These and many other points of English grammar are explained in the book and there are exercises on each point. Some advanced students who have problems with grammar will also find the book useful.
The book is not suitable for elementary learners. Each unit concentrates on a particular point of grammar. Some problems for example, the present perfect or the use of the are covered in more than one unit. Educated people in Rome were expected to be bilingual.
The emphasis on grammar—both Latin and Greek—increased as a result, and Quintilian reported that the secondary teacher should be prepared to address the parts of speech, declensions, conjugations, inflections, pronunciation, and syllables I. Quintilian was a strong advocate for correctness in language, and he argued that the study of grammar would enable students to produce error-free speech and writing.
Some women from wealthy families apparently did study with private tutors, however, and became quite well educated. When the Roman Empire collapsed around AD, the educational system that had been in place throughout the Mediterranean for a thousand years disappeared. Within two generations, near universal illiteracy replaced near universal literacy.
The significance of the Greco-Roman education system with respect to grammar was at least twofold. As the Empire expanded, it provided schools or modified curricula in existing schools to meet Roman standards.
Grammar instruction throughout Europe therefore had a coherent orientation that emphasized adherence to a literary norm. However, after the Empire collapsed, the fragmented European societies had a new Golden Age—the time of the Empire—and Latin was their bridge to a more civilized and sophisticated past. The Church emerged from the collapse of civilization not only as the most powerful social force in Europe but also as the sole repository of classical knowledge.
Soon it found itself in a difficult position. For at least years before the fall of the Empire, the Church had been a fierce opponent of education.
But rampant illiteracy was an obstacle to priesthood; a priest who could not read could not instruct parishioners in the lessons of the Bible. In this context, knowledge of Latin also became a source of power. Although the Venerable Bede translated portions of the Bible into English as early as the end of the 7th century, vernacular translations were rare and essentially uncirculated. Nearly all copies of the Bible existed only in Latin.
Thus, even as the Latin language was changing rapidly into Spanish, Italian, French, and Portuguese, the Church schools continued to use Latin as the basis of instruction and continued to teach Latin grammar.
When Latin ceased being a living language—that is, when it no longer had any native speakers—the only way to learn it was through mastering its complex grammar.
In the Middle Ages, then, we see a fundamental shift in the nature of education from the secular to the religious. The focus was not on providing universal education but rather on providing a religious education to a select few.
Moreover, the goal was not to develop more enlightened and productive citizens but rather to maintain a steady flow of literate priests. Even many kings were illiterate. Latin became the prestige language, much as Greek had been during the Empire, and educated people—that is, members of the priesthood—were expected to be bilingual, with Latin as their second language. Nevertheless, Church leaders saw no need to reinvent the wheel. The system of religious education that developed drew heavily on the Roman model.
The 8 CHAPTER 1 course of study continued to be divided into the elementary trivium and the more advanced quadrivium; the trivium, however, was altered to include a heavier emphasis on the study of literature. Rhetoric no longer dealt exclusively with the means of persuasion but now included the study of law.
More striking is that the trivium no longer was limited to elementary education; instead, it was expanded greatly, encompassing elementary, secondary, and college education.
Completion of the trivium entitled students to a bachelor of arts degree. The quadrivium still included arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy, but geography and natural history, as well as astrology, were added to the curriculum. Music study, on the other hand, was reduced almost completely to signing and composing hymns. When students finished the quadrivium, they were awarded a master of arts degree.
Throughout the Middle Ages, the study of grammar maintained its important place in education. It is easy to understand why.
When a language has no native speakers, nuances of expression and structure are easily lost and difficult if not impossible to retrieve. Consequently, students and teachers during the Middle Ages had to rely on the Latin grammars produced by Donatus and Priscian to understand the form and function of the language. Written in the 4th and 6th centuries, respectively, these grammars were comprehensive and authoritative but difficult to understand because they were written for native speakers of Latin and were not intended to teach Latin as a second language.
Consequently, teachers and students alike faced a dual challenge: mastering Latin grammar and also trying to understand exactly what Donatus and Priscian meant.
Scholars during this period did not write new grammar books—rather they wrote glosses, or explanatory commentaries, on Donatus and Priscian in an effort to understand the nuances of the language R.
Hunt, These commentaries usually referred to classical literary texts to illustrate difficult points. The approach to instruction was similar in many respects to the grammar-translation method still used today in some schools to teach foreign languages. Students would study Latin grammar and vocabulary and then apply their knowledge to translating and in some cases explaining the text of an ancient author, such as Cicero. By the end of the 13th century, the curriculum began to change. Throughout the Greek and Roman periods and during the early Middle Ages, grammar and logic were distinct areas of study.
Logic and grammar often were studied and taught together as language scholars connected the two areas in an attempt to approach language with the orderliness found in logic.
For many years, Latin was viewed as the logically normal form of speech, but the growing influence of mathematics led to more formal logical structures that increasingly became the norm by which to measure language.
Scholars began comparing the natural language of speech to the artificial languages of math and logic and asserted that natural language should conform accordingly. The appeal of order may have been the result of fundamental changes in the way Europeans viewed the world. Before AD, people viewed reality in qualitative terms. For example, the cardinal directions were not viewed merely as points on a map—they had a more profound signification. As Crosby noted: South signified warmth and was associated with charity and the Passion of Jesus.
East, toward the location of the terrestrial paradise, Eden, was especially potent, and that is why churches were oriented east-west with the business end, the altar, at the east.
World maps were drawn with east at the top. We know that during this same period scholars produced a variety of general grammars that were different from their predecessors in that they attempted to show how linguistic structure was based on logical principles. Grammar study, therefore, was believed to improve the quality of mind.
The Renaissance, however, with its celebration of the human as well as the divine, gave rise to a sense of individualism that had been absent in Medieval society. Perhaps more important for societies and civilization was the significant increase in commerce, which grew almost without interruption after the early s.
By creating a middle class, which had not existed since the fall of the Roman Empire, commerce altered the very structure of Medieval society. For example, the law of primogeniture required transfer of property from parents to their firstborn sons.
As a result, large numbers of young men who were not firstborn had for centuries turned to the Church and priestly orders for their livelihood.
Commerce offered opportunities where none had previously existed: These second sons could look forward to a future in business. Thus, the middle class recognized that literacy had value that extended beyond commerce, and private secular schools, often sponsored by wealthy burghers, were opened throughout Europe and North America to meet the needs of family and enterprise.
For 1, years, the Church had insisted that priests were spiritual mediators who alone could explain the Bible. Most people were illiterate and knew no Latin, so this role went unchallenged.
Martin Luther — and John Calvin — preached that spiritual mediation was unnecessary and that faith and biblical knowledge should be in the hands of the individual believer, not the priesthood or the religious hierarchy. Such a personal relationship with God was not possible, however, as long as the Bible existed only in Latin, so Luther translated the Bible into German to give the common people access to all priestly authority: the Word of God.
The invention of the printing press in ensured this access. The printing press altered this situation completely. Eisenstein reported that by there were 1, printing shops in Europe, an estimated 35, titles, and 20 million books in print. The first English grammar book, explaining Latin grammar, was published in Germany took the lead, establishing compulsory education in John Locke 4 Illiteracy was still a problem, however.
The Biblia vulgare proved so popular that it went into six editions in 15 years, no doubt in part because the pictures helped people learn how to read through matching words and pictures.
Grammar study was believed helpful in both regards, an idea with roots in ancient Greece, as already noted. Grammar study was seen as the foundation for literacy, and literacy allowed students to read literature rich in moral lessons. During the 18th century, the spread of education and industrialization created greater socioeconomic mobility, which in turn led to a mingling of people from different backgrounds that had not been possible for more than 1, years.
Increasing numbers of people from the growing middle class started having regular contact with the upper class. Although in England both upper-class and middle-class people spoke the same language, there were noticeable differences in pronunciation, structure, and vocabulary—what we term dialect—much like the differences we notice in the United States between speakers from different parts of the country.
Because the upper-class dialects identified one with prestige and success, mastering the upper-class speech patterns became very desirable, and notions of grammar became more normative than ever. Not surprisingly, Lowth based his discussion of English grammar on Latin. What distinguished his book, however, was that he moved beyond the view that grammar study disciplined the mind; he sought to provide a guide to those who wanted to use correct English.
It was Lowth who first claimed that infinitives in English cannot be split and that sentences cannot end with a preposition.
The italics identify the part of the sentence that is supposedly problematic. The phrase to go is an infinitive verb phrase and is separated by the word boldly.
In Latin, however, infinitive verb phrases are single words, not two words. We can use Spanish to illustrate this principle because Spanish is a Latin-based language. In Spanish, the infinitive verb phrase to speak is hablar, one word.
It is not possible to split the infinitive, and any attempt to do so would be both impossible and ridiculous. But because English forms the infinitive verb phrase using two words, it is possible to split the infinitive, and, indeed, speakers and writers do so all the time. In claiming that the infinitive in English should not be split, Lowth and his often witless adherents were trying to force English to fit the structure and grammar of Latin.
Language scholars during this time suffered from a fundamental confusion that had its roots in the notion of linguistic decay first formulated by the Greeks. They noted that well-educated people wrote and spoke good Latin; those who were not so well educated, on the other hand, made mistakes. These scholars did not recognize that reproducing a dead language is an academic exercise, and they applied their observation to modern languages.
In this view, those without education and culture corrupt the language with their deviations from the prescribed norm. Accordingly, the discourse forms of books and upper-class conversation represented an older and purer level of language from which the speech of the common people had degenerated.
Although industrialization is often cited as the most significant social change during this century, equally important was the population explosion in Europe and the United States that industrialization set off. As Greenword, Seshadri, and Vandenbroucke indicated, industrialization had the greatest influence on poor farmers.
The material improvement was modest, but it was enough to trigger a population explosion. Greenword et al. Census data reflect the extent of the baby boom. England experienced similar growth. Aldrich reported that the population of England and Wales doubled between and Understandably, concern in England and America over the proper education of the multiplying poor escalated in the first half of the century. Civic and corporate leaders saw the need to instill moral and social values in the young to maintain stability and a reliable workforce.
But the baby boom children were from families who could not pay private school tuition, and even if they had been able, there simply were not enough schools for everyone. In an effort to meet the sudden need for mass schooling, communities everywhere transformed their Sunday schools to include the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic. These schools comfortingly ensured that rowdy poor children received lessons steeped in morality and civic virtue.
They provided the added benefit of keeping these youngsters busy all day every Sunday—the only day that most were not at work. This approach could not serve over the long term, however, and politicians began exploring options. Although Massachusetts had decreed in that any settlement of 50 families must have a grammar school and all states had encouraged universal education, Massachusetts did not implement compulsory education laws until Most of the other states soon followed suit, and by the end of the 19th century, America essentially had nationwide compulsory education.
Mass education led to a reconceptualization of how grammar was taught. Elementary schools retained the first function, linking grammar and reading to provide students access to important moral lessons. Even more popular were the McGuffey readers, first published in These books were used throughout the United States until World War I and were noted for their moral lessons. As Cmiel noted, the ability to speak correctly became a matter of class distinction, in part as a result of the Civil War and the demonization of Southern dialects.
Soon, failure to follow the prescriptions for correct speaking was deemed not only an error in logic but also a sign of moral inferiority. The 18th century had seen grammar instruction alter its focus from the study of Latin to include prescriptive notions of what constituted correct English. Another change was related to the connection between grammar and rhetoric. Throughout much of Western history, grammar and rhetoric were distinct areas of instruction. Grammar was concentrated at the elementary level and was used to develop basic literacy, whereas rhetoric was for advanced students and provided facility in speaking.
The study of logic usually was part of the study of rhetoric, following Aristotle, who provided a lengthy discussion of logic as a method of argumentative proof in his Art of Rhetoric. Starting in the Middle Ages, grammar was studied at the advanced level, but primarily to further the understanding of Latin. However, rhetoric had been undergoing a transition since the 4th century, when St.
This shift accelerated during the Middle Ages. He argued that rhetoric should be subsumed under logic, rather than the reverse, and that rhetoric itself involved nothing more than style and delivery. Bartholomew ensured that his ideas were disseminated throughout Europe. The consequences of their influence become clear when we consider that invention in rhetoric had always provided the content of discourse.
If rhetoric has no content and no means of developing content, all that remains is style. In addition, the close connection between logic and grammar inevitably led to a perception that style—that is, rhetoric—was largely about the study of grammar.
Teaching rhetoric ceased being about public speaking and became all about teaching writing. Furthermore, as Crowley noted, the focus on style ended the centuries-long emphasis in rhetoric on generating knowledge—its epistemic function—and rhetoric became a vehicle for merely transmitting knowledge, what was already known.
Adams Sherman Hill developed the composition courses at Harvard in this context, after two thirds of the freshman class failed the writing exam that the school required for the first time as a way of separating the wheat from the chaff.
Although today we think of Harvard as being an elite institution with a history of educating the children of wealthy and influential parents, it was a different place in the 19th century. Many of its students certainly came from affluent families, but it also had a fair number of students of middling means.
Moreover, as Geiger , p.
Indeed, most professors saw their students as intellectual midgets with little knowledge of and even less appreciation for the liberal arts, so there was no expectation that they could actually produce anything worth reading. Teachers did not have to concern themselves with how to teach content or with how to help students generate content on their own.
Instead, the question that teachers had to answer was this: How do we teach style? The answer lay in pedagogical structures that already were in place—the study of literature and grammar. If literature represented an older and purer level of language, and if grammar provided a set of prescriptive rules for producing such language, writing instruction necessarily must focus on reading literature and studying grammar.
Reading literature would edify the spirit, making students better persons, and studying grammar would improve student writing, making it clear, concise, and error free. I will note, however, that the 19th century witnessed two important events related to the study of grammar: a the fossilization of the idea that grammar is a prescriptive set of rules for producing correct English, and b the establishment of the foundation for modern grammars, which are descriptive rather than prescriptive.
Chapter 4 relates this story in detail, but suffice it to say that scholars investigating the languages of American Indians discovered that Latin-based rules could not be made to fit 16 CHAPTER 1 what was being observed and recorded on reservations.
What followed was a major reassessment of grammar and the development of new grammars that provide insight not only into the structure of language but also into how people use language. But the new grammars also created a paradox. Today, language scholars use the new grammars and fully embrace their descriptive orientation. Language teachers, on the other hand, continue to use the prescriptive, Latinbased grammar of the 19th century, as though the world has stood still for more than a hundred years.
Because performance expectations are high, prospective teachers face several challenges before they enter the classroom. They must know English grammar exceptionally well. No uncomfortable desks or early morning exams! Best of all, many of them are available totally for free online. Each of them has its advantages and you can choose the most relevant ones depending on your learning needs.
How to Make the Most of a Grammar Book These tips below will guide you on how to make the best of any grammar book that you refer to.
Do the lessons chapter-wise. Most grammar books will deal with the simple and basic topics before moving on to the difficult ones. So following the sequence of lessons as outlined in the contents page might be a good idea.
Read the theory first. Try to form sentences using the examples given in the book. Most of the examples in these books will use common English vocabulary and phrases. So you can try and memorize their formats to use in your own communication. Look for answer keys to check your answers. An answer key will tell you the correct responses to each exercise so you can compare your work. Supplement with real-world English videos on FluentU.
If you want to watch it, the FluentU app has probably got it. Every video comes with interactive subtitles, which you can click for an instant, in-context definition of any word.