Lecture 7: Subject-Verb & Pronoun-Antecedent Agreement

Definition:

Subject–verb agreement is “the matching of the number and person of the subject to the form of the verb. When the subject is third-person singular and the verb is in the present tense, the verb takes the –s inflection, as in: The dog barks all night. He bothers the neighbours.

With other subjects and in other tenses, verbs (with the exception of be) do not change to match the number or person of the subject: I sleep, we sleep, he slept, they slept.”

Basic Principle:

Singular subjects need singular verbs; plural subjects need plural verbs.

My brother is a nutritionist.
My sisters are mathematicians.



For more review, have a look at this grammar site and the OWL reference sheet.


1. When the subject of a sentence is composed of two or more nouns or pronouns connected by and, use a plural verb.

She and her friends are at the fair.

2. When two or more singular nouns or pronouns are connected by or or nor, use a singular verb.

The book or the pen is in the drawer.

3. When a compound subject contains both a singular and a plural noun or pronoun joined by or or nor, the verb should agree with the part of the subject that is nearer the verb.

The boy or his friends run every day.

His friends or the boy runs every day.

Pronoun and Antecedent
Pronoun = word that is substituted for a noun or noun equivalent. 
The critique of Plato's Republic was written from a contemporary point of view. It was an in-depth analysis of Plato's opinions about possible governmental forms.
Antecedent = word, phrase, or clause that has the characteristics of a noun (person, place or thing) and is referred to by a pronoun)
The critique of Plato's Republic was written from a contemporary point of view. It was an in-depth analysis of Plato's opinions about possible governmental forms.

Examples:
Mary saw John and spoke to him.(John is the antecedent.  Him is the pronoun.)
1. The members of the choir lost its/their voices two days before the spring concert.
2. Minne, Sandra Bullock's cat, was hit by a car last week and broke their/its leg.
3. The union workers went on strike to get a raise in its/their wages.

Review Pronoun-Antecedent Agreement:
http://aliscot.com/bigdog/agrpa_exercise.htm

When completed, craft 4 grammatically correct sentences using any of these pronouns and antecedents:

Auditor, janitor, lawyer, professor, his, her, she, their, family, basketball league, kitten, they, dinosaur, it, themselves, them, him

Add your sentences in a comment to Lecture 7 (this one).


We will conclude the lesson with an activity based on our readings of the two txt spk essays.

The following quotation is from SALI A. TAGLIAMONTE and DEREK DENIS's article: "LINGUISTIC RUIN? LOL! INSTANT MESSAGING AND TEEN LANGUAGE," American Speech, 83.1, Spring 2008 doi 10.1215/00031283-2008-001. You can access it here with your MacEwan id.

In formal written language, colloquial variants are illegitimate, prohibited by “language police” of all persuasions (teachers, editors, etc.). Indeed, anecdotal reports suggest that teachers are increasingly penalizing students for the use of abbreviations in written assignments. In teenage conversations, however, formal variants are equally undesirable. IM appears to be a venue in which teenagers are free to use all these features together. This linguistic fusion is endemic to the register itself. Individuals pick and choose from all the available variants that their linguistic system has to offer and draw from the entire stylistic repertoire of the language that exists at a given point in time. If the teenagers did not already possess skilled command of their linguistic system, this would be impossible. The character and nature of IM we have uncovered here reveals fluid mastery of the sociolinguistic resources in their speech community. We conclude that IM, and perhaps computer-mediated communication more generally, is not the ruin of this generation at all, but an expansive new linguistic renaissance.

Essay Assignment: Due 23 November

PROW 100 – Essay Assignment

DUE: 23 November 2009

Click the "read more" link to find out further details about the assignment.

Critical Reading - Jessica Lloyd

At first glance, I was worried I was going to have a very dry few minutes ahead of me as I drag my eyes from word to un-biased word. However, I was pleasantly surprised to find myself up to my ears in helpful examples and, dare I say it, personality. Bias-Free Language: Some Guidelines by Rosalie Maggio clarifies how our culture has been affected by language and follows up with definitions of classic biases. In a contrasting approach, we are introduced to Michiko Kakutani, author of the article The Word Police. In his article, Kakutani ultimately disagrees with pussyfooting around unorthodox terms and censoring social norms in order to save face. He brings our attention to Little Miss Coppertone, who is now in need of a gender equal; all hail Little Mr. Coppertone.

It seems as though any word containing the prefix or suffix of “man” or “men” need to be reassessed. For example, if we can no longer “man a ship” are we supposed to “woman/man/transgender a ship”? Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but it sounds ridiculous. Some schools have abandoned the word “freshmen” for “first-year student”. Although the term “freshwomen” eliminates the bias that only men are worthy of school, it still doesn't encapsulate the whole.

As writers we are artists in our own right, and it is argued by some of us artists that the use of unbiased language “spoils the fun”. Maggio is quick to dispel any fear and reassures us by saying, “If we have to search for the unbiased phrase it is not any more effort than we expend on proper grammar, spelling, and style.” Some people have panic attacks over “losing” words but Maggio argues by explaining how disrespectful words, although part of our history, will have no impact on the strength of our language or society if tossed to the curb. On the other hand, for some people the terms are not sung to the tune of disrespect, for they were brought up during a time where society deemed the words acceptable by ethical standards of the time. Unfortunately, laziness can keep change at bay, as some people are sick of having to “watch what they say”. Lastly, Maggio states, “The greatest objection to bias-free language is that it will lead us to absurdities.” She goes on to alter the song lyrics to He Ain’t Heavy, He’s My Brother from “biased” to “unbiased”. I have to agree, the unbiased version does sound absurd - not exactly something you can snap your fingers and tap your toes to. Still, she encourages the use of unbiased language and elaborates by saying, “One of the most rewarding – and, for many people, the most unexpected – side effects of breaking away from traditional, biased language is a dramatic improvement in writing style.” That’s good enough for me…

In closing, Maya Angelou refers to us all as “humankind”; whether we are Jewish or Catholic, French or Greek, gay or straight we are all classified as human. Kakutani recognizes her words as an, “official embrace of multiculturalism and a new politics of inclusion.”

Is Sesame Street Politically Incorrect?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_nPHggnK60

Critical Reading Collaboration: Kristen Harris and Murriel Mapa

The expectations that were developed prior to reading the text by Rosalie Maggio were based on the title, “Bias-Free Language: Some Guidelines.” This title gives the impression that it will be a piece on how to write more formally, straying away from the bias words that pollute today's vocabulary. Examples of the type of biased language Maggio hopes to diminish are found here. After reading the abstract provided, a clearer understanding of what context the author derives her view from was achieved. Maggio’s brief summary of the bias-free language guides that she made gave insight to her argument. Believing whole-heartily that society needs to carefully choose their words, Maggio begins her dispute.

Michiko Kakutani’s text, “The Word Police” first gave the impression that Maggio’s title did - the idea of being wiser when choosing words. With the use of the word “police” automatically giving the impression of enforcing something, Kakutani gave the notion that she was in favor of Maggio’s bias-free language theory. However, the abstract given before the piece suggested a different type of essay, one that opposed the ideas of Maggio.

Many people find it difficult or annoying to use bias-free language. A short overview of bias-free language can be found in this link. There are four excuses that Maggio dissects in her writing. One excuse that people put forth is the loss of fun their writing will have. Writers are very creative and thoughtful when it comes to their personal writing, and having to stifle this artistic advantage to use the words one pleases is definitely a defeat. Maggio defends the fact that writers take so much time looking for the “perfect” word in their pieces already, that a little extra effort would not hurt. One example of a bias-free term that isn't included in either essay is a flight attendant, opposed to steward and stewardess. Another is the word citizens, which can be used in place of the term mankind. The second excuse for ignoring unbiased language is the fear of losing words. In a world that is evolving every day, along with language, words aren't in short supply. “We are limited only by our imaginations,” according to Maggio. Another reason for not using bias-free words in our language is the frustration of having to watch what one says. Growing up in a society that teaches us manners and conduct, to be able to write what we want without having to think of the repercussions is always a thrill. Maggio counters this with the argument of consistency. Having been able to pick our words wisely with parents, advisers and peers, to be able to look after what we say in our writing shouldn’t be much of a challenge. Lastly, the expectation that filtering what we say will lead to absurdities in our writing. Many cynics and critics of this language lifestyle have given the blasphemous examples that take Maggio’s theory too far. Using words such as “personipulate” and “woperson” is just “a fault in logic,” claims Maggio.

In Maya Angelou’s inauguration poem she presents a wide variety of human beings. Depicting the variance of racial and religious backgrounds, levels of social status and even sexual preference among us, Angelou demonstrates the importance labels have in allowing us to differentiate between each other. Giving examples of racial background such as: Asian, African, Native American, and Greek, the author uses terms we all use in our daily lives. Society finds it perfectly acceptable to use these “biased” terms because they allow us to compartmentalize and separate individuals into recognizable categories; they are not found to be prejudice. These terms were not meant to pass judgment on one another, but to show distinction from one another. Other titles including Rabbi, Priest and Sheik, acknowledge the various relationships one has with their religion and god. If one is not allowed to use these terms Kakutani states “Some messy molar dilemmas,” could ensue; while trying to navigate to the use of politically correct language. Many of these terms symbolize to our author the tolerance we have of others. No longer do we refer to Native Americans as savages, or Asians as gooks. Using her examples of “biased” terms, Angelou illustrates the abundance of diversity and multiculturalism we often fight to protect, and that represents the differences in all of us. This brief cartoon demonstrates that everyone is different, but peace can still achieved.

Critical Reading Collaboration: Shawna Blumenschein and Jennifer Kerr

"Bias-Free Language: Some Guidelines" by Rosalie Maggio and "The Word Police" by Michiko Kakutani in Exploring Language are two essays that address the question of politically correct language. In Maggio's essay, she advocates the usage of unbiased, gender-neutral terms, whereas Kakutani argues that the political correctness movement has been taken too far.

Before reading these articles the titles of each create certain expectations about the content. The title "Bias-Free Language: Some Guidelines" clearly communicates the subject matter. The expectation is that an analysis of the impact and effect of words and word choice will follow, and that the argument will center around increasing awareness about biased language. However, the addition of "Some Guidelines" in the title sounds presumptuous, thus creating a defensive mindset in the reader. The phrasing of "Some Guidelines" sounds dogmatic, as if Maggio is telling others what to think before making her argument. The second article's title, "The Word Police," brings to mind people who obsessively correct the grammar of others. For example, imagine a party-goer who constantly interrupts conversations to correct people's speech. This expectation is proven false as the article responds to the political correctness movement.

Both articles address the movement of political correctness in speech and text. However, they take opposite sides of the argument. Maggio advocates strongly for the abolition of biased language. She addresses a variety of categories of language including inclusive versus exclusive constructions, nonsexist terminology, and the people first rule. Examples of inclusive and exclusive phrases are "the people" or "our generation" which include everyone, as opposed to referring to the human race as "man" which excludes women. Nonsexist terminology involves not referring to sex unless it's necessary. According to Maggio, sexist language "promotes and maintains attitudes that stereotype people according to gender while assuming that the male is the norm" (447). Thus, statements should be made with equal terminology, for example saying husband and wife instead of man and wife. Other gender non-specific words abound such as mail carrier instead of mailman and firefighter instead of fireman. These words do not give the impression that women should not and indeed can not pursue these careers. The people first rule is important in the medical field. Persons with disabilities should be put before their medical condition because their condition should not define who they are. Therefore, it is a child with Down's syndrome, not a Down's syndrome child.

Kakutani takes the opposite side of the argument from Maggio. Kakutani references a poem by Maya Angelou that lists several ethnicities, religious groups, and labels applied to various social groups. Kakutani says that such extensive recognition with an eye toward including everyone and offending no one is an "official embrace of multiculturalism and a new politics of inclusion." (453) This is the beginning of the political correctness movement, which Kakutani agrees with in theory, but that she feels advocates like Maggio have pushed to the level of absurdity. Indeed, Kakutani says that using nicer words, such as "underhoused" instead of "homeless"(456), could in fact detract from the severity of the problem. Ultimately, Kakutani feels that the extreme emphasis placed on politically correct language amounts to a smokescreen that obfuscates the real problems of inequality, racism, and sexism and makes them seem solved when in fact they continue to thrive.

Some of the points Kakutani makes are anticipated by Maggio. She outlines four arguments often used by detractors of unbiased language. These arguments include the fear of losing words, that people are tired of paying attention to what they say, it's limiting the use of language, and that it will create absurd terms. Maggio responds to each of these excuses. Firstly, she says that losing offensive words will not impact negatively on society or language because of our vast vocabulary and ability to create new terms. Secondly, Maggio flips the argument of watching what one says into people being tired of being sensitive; she adds that we have been taught from childhood to filter what we say depending on who we are speaking to. Thirdly, Maggio does not view being careful speakers and writers as limiting, but rather as being thoughtful. Lastly, Maggio points out that particular examples of absurdities, such as saying he/she all the time, are used to condemn the entire idea of inclusive language, including terms that would not sound as comical or unwieldy. Maggio further says that using specific, non-cliched words is rewarding and allows for better communication.

Political correctness is a well-intentioned movement. However, like anything, there is the potential for it to be taken too far. As such, being politically correct is often a target for comedians and social commentators.

Critical Thinking and Reading Blog Post, by Andrew Heck and Brent Stempfle

Prior to reading the essays of Rosalie Maggio and Michiko Kakutani, some immediate things stick out in the titles. In "Bias-Free Language: Some Guidelines," the term "guidelines" sticks out with a domineering effect. Guidelines are a set of expectations, or rules, if it is taken far enough. This sounds somewhat unfair in nature, as bias itself is something that must be considered quite subjectively. In a way, almost all language contains bias, so it is difficult to set universal laws for all to follow. In "The Word Police," this same impression is felt. The prospect of the hypothetical enforcement of word usage that comes with policing is very daunting and autocratic, which serves as an impairment to creative expression through text--something that comes off as very stifling to writers.

In Maggio's essay, she mentions a few reasons that some people avoid using bias-free langauge. First, she criticizes the political incorrectness that comes with using old and simple terminology and lack of foresight in writing, like using the term "Indian" for a Canadian First Nations' person. Although thoughts may come quickly into our minds, it is important that we search for the best possible way to put the words to paper, which can require alteration of terms and careful placement in the context of a sentence. Second, she attacks the fear of "losing" words that could possibly fall out of touch with audiences who do not actively use them. This may be true, but she advocates the evolution of words to fit the contemporary conscience as a way to more effective communication. Third, she exposes the irresponsibility and neglect of people who use certain terms that are deemed inappropriate or unfit for common use. Calling a homosexual person a "queer" implies an unfair fickleness that a person might not embrace. The laziness and lack of consideration of some writers becomes obvious when they refer to people or ideas with terms that they are familiar and comfortable with, as opposed to close consideration of the effect that these words will have on readers. Fourth, she points out the myth of absurdities that might arise from becoming overly gender neutral or inclusive. She explains that the use of bias-free language does not need to be awkward and can easily be assimilated in writing. The fact that people purposely choose to avoid unbiased terms for this reason shows their willful ignorance and carelessness. In addition to these main reasons, she argues that avoiding them will not only increase the level of acceptability of writing, but can also contribute to the growth of a writer's style. This is something that is definitely worth considering for anyone who wishes to improve their skill and development as a writer.

In Kakutani's essay, the author mentions a poem by Maya Angelou that expresses a view of "humankind" that we are adopting in modern times. The changing demographics of Western society has forced a phenomenon of multiculturalism and created a cultural mosaic that would not have been predicted fifty years ago. In describing the different people, Angelou creates a new sense of unity in our population, which Kakutani believes has led us to an excessive desire to create unbiased terminology and forced social acceptance. The degree to which we are experiencing the shift has caused much hype to be around word usage, to an over-bearing extent, instead of naturally and gradually accepting the change. By using satire, Kakutani shows us the reality of the situation with specific examples.

In this video, Mark Steyn explains how our excessive use of unbiased, vague terms can lead to confusion:

Image Used:

http://z.hubpages.com/u/83238_f520.jpg.

Critical Reading Collaboration, Caleb Caswell and Ramona Korpan

The title of "Bias Free Language: Some Guidelines" by Rosalie Maggio, elicits the idea of an essay based on writing without expressing a particular attitude to either side of an argument. The author may use technical language with large amounts of explanation and examples to elucidate her point of argument; showing some essays that do this well and others that do not. The examples given would be more-so for application to commonly used subjects; trying to inspire idea's rather than creating several specific extreme examples. Maggio's book, "The Bias-Free Word Finder" extrapolates on many of her ideas and contain more examples of bias-free language.

"The Word Police" by Michiko Kakutani was more straightforward. The expectations set out by the title were achieved by the topic being about terms and colloquialisms that have become regarded as inappropriate in public usage. It also includes a history of how these changes became social norms, and the future progression of language that may be censored later on.

Both essays include several examples of terminology that could be substituted as bias-free in place of gender or race sensitive terms. Two examples of terms that are bias-free which are not included in either essay would be mail-carrier as opposed to mailman, or server in the place of waitress, and many more exist.

According to Maggio, four excuses people make to avoid using unbiased language are as follows:

1. To demonize other races in times of conflict (racial slurs, eg. gook, nigger, wop, etc)

2. To discourage women from attempting careers in certain areas (eg. mailman, longshoreman,etc)

3. To demonize another group in an area of public debate (eg. Newspaper articles referring to another group that may support abortions as "killing human babies" rather than "removing fetal tissue")

4. Being used to certain terms and considering them colloquial and acceptable

In the case each issue, Maggio suggests that language affects the way we act, and by disposing of these harmful terms, we can create a society that is more open to change and collaboration by several peoples and sexes. What we may have considered excusable due to location or era does not excuse bigoted behavior or treatment, as location and era are relative to each individual. Her final counter-argument goes as such: "Bias-free language is logical, accurate, and realistic. Biased language is not."

Kakutani uses a quote from Maya Angelou's poem "Humankind", wherein she addresses people of many different races and social standings. Starting with a wide spread of politically correct terms for races, she continues with titles for people from specific countries, religions, sexual affiliations, and social positions. Kakutani implies that Angelou has created "a kind of official embrace of multiculturalism", along with a new political stance of inclusion.

Below is a video that shows what can happen when bias-free language and outlooks are applied to culture that is inherent within a nations history.

Critical Reading by Shayna Fehr and Billie Fleming

Prior to reading Rosalie Maggio's essay "Bias-Free Language: Some Guidelines" one would assume that this piece of writing would be structured and give informative rules on how to use bias-free language. On the other hand, after reading the title "The Word Police" by Michiko Kakutani, one would expect it to be satirical, not an information based essay like the former.

Both texts refer to bias-free terms frequently. An example not mentioned in either essay would be the word history. A bias-free term for history could be the-story or the-past. Another example could be semester. The unbiased term would be ester.

There are several excuses people may use to avoid using unbiased language. A reviewer in Maggio's essay says, "There's no fun in limiting how you say a thing." She counters this by saying that it does not take any more time to search for a bias free word, than to search for the proper spelling of a word. Another excuse is the fear of "losing" words, but Maggio responds to this opinion by saying that we can use our imaginations to find unbiased terms that will not destroy our language. A third example reveals that individuals are tired of being accountable to others feelings and do not want to "watch what they say." Maggio opposes this belief, by giving examples of how people have been choosing certain terms to appease society from an early age. The last example people use to avoid unbiased language, in Maggio's opinion, is the most important. This is the opinion that bias-free language will lead to "linguistic massacre." Maggio believes that by breaking down the barriers that bias language puts up, writers will be able to express themselves in greater capacity. Maggio offers more defense of unbiased language by presenting her theory that bias-free language is the way of the future and bias language is becoming prehistoric.

In Kakutani's essay he refers to a poem written by Maya Angelou. In this poem he mentions several different classifications of people, all of whom would be considered minorities. Kakutani implies that biased terms are directed to these groups of people and that is what they symbolize.

Lecture 3: Critical Reading and Mechanics Review