I have never really utilized ENG fish. My major is pre-professional. I am trying to become an editor, not a teacher. The article did seem very interesting though. The grammatical errors and things of that nature that were used to display how to use ENG fish were eye-opening. I believe that any further information that we use on ENG fish will be beneficial to my future studies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Pardon my intrusion into your class, but my google alerts sent me an email on this discussion. And I can't resist expressing a few points.
It seems to me that you may want to take another look at the Macrorie chapter as Engfish applies just as much to editors as it does teachers. You’re right that Macrorie is upset with English teachers, but he’s most upset because they teach writing just as many imagine editors act. Do you imagine editors should act like grammarians? Should editors (and teachers) correct and tell writers what to do with their words? What makes us think that’s learning to write? As a writer, have you found it most helpful to be told what to say or to find something worth saying yourself? Have you written something and then been told to edit for commas without any validation of what you said?
Did you write this post because you were forced to say something for this class but really had nothing to say? That’s Engfish (i.e. “bullshit” to use a crass word). And Macrorie is arguing that Engfish holds our language and people back from expressing meaning and truth. It poisons young people with bureaucracy, keeping people from realizing how “meaning” is the “basic skill” of good writing.
Hey, how does this teacher dare to call YOUR writing "bullshit"??? Of course your're FORCED to write for this class, but we are open-minded here.
His point about editors is interesting and can be discussed in class if you want to bring it up!
I've blocked external people from our blog now.
Post a Comment