The essays in this book, stemming from a national conference of the same name, focus on the single subject required of nearly all college studentscomposition.Despite its pervasiveness and its significance, composition has an unstable status within the curriculum. Writing programs and writing faculty are besieged by academic, political, and financial concerns that have not been well understood or addressed.At many institutions, composition functions paradoxically as both the gateway to academic success and as the gatekeeper, reducing access to academic work and opportunity for those with limited facility in English. Although writing programs are expected to provide services that range from instruction in correct grammar to assistingor resistingpolitical correctness, expanding programs and shrinking faculty get caught in the crossfire. The bottom line becomes the firing line as forces outside the classroom determine funding and seek to define what composition should do.In search of that definition, the contributors ask and answer a series of specific and salient questions: What implicationsintellectual, political, and institutionalwill forces outside the classroom have on the quality and delivery of composition in the twenty-first century? How will faculty and administrators identify and address these issues? What policies and practices ought we propose for the century to come?This book features sixteen position papers by distinguished scholars and researchers in composition and rhetoric; most of the papers are followed by invited responses by other notable compositionists. In all, twenty-five contributors approach composition from a wide variety of contemporary perspectives: rhetorical, historical, social, cultural, political, intellectual, economic, structural, administrative, and developmental. They propose solutions applicable to pedagogy, research, graduate training of composition teachers, academic administration, and public and social policy. In a very real sense, then, this is the only book to offer a map to the future of composition.

Re-presenting Remediation John Bell Academic Castes, Academic Authority, and the Educational Centrality of Writing Kenneth A. Bruffe ResponseKeith Hjortshoj Toward a Broader Understanding of the Rhetoric of Punctuation Michael Hassett Response John Dawkins

Reviews of 3 professional books: Revising the Rules: Traditional Grammar and Modern Linguistics by Brock Haussamen reviewed by David J. Cranmer; Grammar in Many Voices by Marilyn N. Silva reviewed by David J. Cranmer; Writings from the Workplace: Documents, Models, Cases by Carolyn R. Boiarsky and Margot K. Soven reviewed by Lois Birky.

This review of the relationship of law and art in the litigative context explores ways in which the methodologies of the novelist and other artists can be invoked by the lawyer in structuring and developing a case and presenting it to a court. To the litigators who transcend the form books and stereotypes and see their cases with a fresh eye, neither the law nor the facts are fixed in stone but rather created to meet the deepest realities of the case within the context of our most fundamental values and beliefs. Litigators, by the way they define and project the issues, can affect, even determine, what law and facts are legally relevant and dispositive. They must devise and write the story that threads the client's way out of the labyrinth. Mastery of the formal requirements of litigative writing is only a necessary first step. Freewriting; Hemingwayesque choice of words and syntax; harnessing the symbolic, often hidden, power of language; achieving the dramatic potential of case presentation—all these and more from the creative artist's repertoire empower litigators to win their cases. Resort is made not only to the applicable statutory, regulatory, and case law but also to the processes of the like of Cezanne, Conrad, Hemingway, Tolstoy, Joyce, Aristotle, and Faulkner.

Preface - new! improved!! not tested on animals!!! introduction - the air in your Aero 7 shades whiter beanz meanz Heinz - what makes slogans stick? it is. are you? - sentence types and sentence structure players pleas - puns, associations, and meanings you in the shocking pink shellsuit - pronouns and address bread wi' nowt taken owt - languages and varieties as signs do we have time for a coffee? - conversations and everyday life shall I compare thee to a pint of bitter? - metaphor see above, see above, see above...words and pictures concentrated Persil supports trees - green ads and agency AIDS, ads and them vs. us audiences, effects and REG.

Preview this article: Teaching Punctuation as a Rhetorical Tool, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/46/4/collegecompositioncommunication8721-1.gif

This study compares the effectiveness of five leading grammar/style analysis software packages in analyzing business students' writing. The software exhibited considerable differences in the following areas: correctly identifying various mechanical and style errors, avoiding annoying and misleading false error messages, and providing helpful remedial advice. No prior research study has empirically compared grammar/style analysis software along all these important dimensions. PowerEdit was found to be the overall superior package, demonsrating proficiency in detecting errors in punctuation, sentence structure, passive voice, and weak wording. The results have significant implications for utilizing grammar/style analysis software to improve students' writing.

Preview this article: The Grammar and Rhetoric of Inclusion, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/57/2/collegeenglish9139-1.gif

To find out more about the communication needs of people in business, the author sent questionnaires to 2,200 chief executive officers (CEOs) and directors of personnel or training. I received 207 answers. Respondents believe that oral communication before a small group is important and that principles of communication should be stressed over formats for letters and memos. They believe reading and editing, as well as grammar skills, are very important. In many respects, the results of this survey are similar to those of others done across the country in the past 20 years, but there are some comments on reading, editing, and writing letters with bad news that were not part of earlier surveys.

This article discusses collaborative design in the context of developing a Toolbook hypertext intended to introduce graduate students to the fields of rhetoric and professional communication. It examines the new grammar and rhetoric of hypertext, discusses the importance of document planning within an emergent design, and argues for a functional aesthetic.

The major problem with report writing is not primarily due to poor grammar or mechanics—often blamed by the technical community. The real problems stem from lack of, or poorly developed, point and audience awareness. Such problems can render reports useless for the audience and for the author. These major deficiencies and many lesser deficiencies, however, can be avoided effectively and painlessly if authors follow a simple outlining approach in writing their reports.

shot through as the term is with local contexts, different approaches, and standardized grammar tests. Any article or research report on writing has to be read carefully for how its author describes writing. are equally elusive. Sometimes they are called remedial, implying that they are retaking courses in material that already should have been mastered. Sometimes they are called developmental, suggesting a cognitive or psychological problem. At other times and in other places, they may be called Educational Opportunity Students, suggesting division by access to education. Or they are just basic, requiring foundational or fundamental instruction in writing. As a case in point, several years ago, I wrote an article, on the writing program at Indiana UniversityIndianapolis, published in the Journal of Basic Writing. Impossibly, it seemed to me, I found an article on Harvard University's writers in the same issue in which my own article appeared. Surely, we weren't talking about the same students, nor the same writing. And, indeed, we were not. While the students I wrote about were having trouble producing any text, even text with attendant problems in organization and mechanics, the Harvard students were instead having problems with originality, creativity, and elaborating arguments (Armstrong 70-72). Yet the presence of basic is tenacious in English departments and we might want to ask ourselves why the term-which seems only to give some vague indication of a deficiency-continues to signify something important to us. The signification of the term is often masked by the way basic is

The prescriptive principles often used to improve writing in general genres have little relevance to the very complex legal prose found in acts or other technically legal documents. This article explores some of the stylistic complexities of definitions and requirements in a Canadian Provincial Act, and generates and justifies fifteen recommendations for creating a plainer legal language in acts. The recommendations range from orthographic presentation, referencing, and sentence arrangement to complex listing, clause separations and punctuation. Although only the English language version of the Act is studied in detail, reference is made to the French version where that is helpful.

Edward A. Kearns, Michael Walker, Kathleen McCoy, Mark Balhorn, Four Comments on "The Politics of Grammar Handbooks: Generic He and Singular They", College English, Vol. 56, No. 4 (Apr., 1994), pp. 471-475

Composition theory generally has ignored grammar over the past 15 years, focusing instead on what has been described as “classifications of texts and relations among writers, readers, and subject matter.” Nevertheless, composition has been and continues to be strongly influenced by the model of language that is implicit in modern grammar. This model proposes that language is rule governed and, as a result, is deterministic. Transformational-generative grammar is the most well-known articulation of the model among composition specialists. This article describes the general features of the model and discusses some of the ways it has influenced composition. After assessing the various weaknesses of the rule-governed model, the article outlines a new model of language that is being developed in cognitive science by David Rumelhart, James McClelland, and others working in parallel distributed processing. This alternative model is associational and probabilistic and is grounded in connectionist theory and research. An association model of language provides composition specialists new perspectives on writers, research, and theory. The article concludes by suggesting possible ways to reconsider the act of composing and related theories.

Preview this article: The Politics of Grammar Handbooks: Generic He and Singular They, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/55/5/collegeenglish9294-1.gif

Chaucer's 'A Treatise on the Astrolabe' despite its medieval roots, still serves as a model for incorporating coherent organization, appropriate content, accurate and precise descriptions, personable tone, effective metadiscourse, and varied sentence structure and length in modern technical writing. This article explores how Chaucer merged his logico-rational self (as exhibited in the work's deliberate organization and thorough content) with his humanistic self (as shown in his simple style and personable tone). This is shown to be an effective technique for humanizing and strengthening a technical document. By following the lessons learned from Treatise, modern technical writers can minimize the semantic and psychological noise of a document, while maximizing the accurate and comfortable transmission of its content.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

Abstract: Eberhard the German's Laborintus, the first of the artes poetriae to be printed, has received comparatively little scholarly attention. Both Kelly and Murphy have noticed that the work conveys a pedagogical emphasis. This essay, however, demonstrates that Laborintusis not merely a manual for teachers of verse. Rather, the work is a delightful maze of verse, grammar, and rhetoric, a labyrinth of learning containing an allegorical account of grammar,poesy, and rhetoric. On one level, the rhetorical figures are used as inventional schemes for the composition of verse in proper meter. However, the examples used in Eberhard's account of the rhetorical figures also contain Christian homilies on faith and action that are exemplary primers for teachers. The homilies in tum underscore Eberhard's pedagogical theory, which is ultimately the key to his labyrinth.

This article describes a method for motivating second-language (L2) business communicators to increase their English proficiency through the use of double translation. The lesson is explained and illustrated in light of current research on both L2 pedagogy and intercultural communication theory. Examples of double translations are offered, along with anecdotal observations concerning the positive effects of the lesson. These data support the notion that teaching methods that empower L2 communicators while involving them in ideas are preferable to traditional grammar and syntax exercises.

(1993). Mirroring ourselves? The pedagogy of early grammar texts. Rhetoric Review: Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 418-435.

Recent scholarship wrestles with the issue of creating a setting within centers that encourages genuine collaboration between those who seek advice (or input) and those who give it. Some scholarship suggests that too often the people who fund, administer, and use centers see the facilities as primarily remedial. Among problems, this attitude promotes the us-and-them mentality that Richard Leahy cautions against (45) • Lex Runciman, too, blames misconceptions about the meaning of tutor and tutoring for assumptions made by students, administrators, and tutors themselves that writing centers serve only bad (Defining 28) and are little more than emergency rooms for critically ill grammar. Both scholars urge us to create an environment which everyone is free to develop his or her own best processes (Leahy 45), where good writers go order to make enlightened decisions about context, organization, idea development, tone, and the (Runciman, Defining 33). To create such a place, Leahy urges us to foster a community of people who love and like to share their with each other (45). As a logical first step, Runciman suggests we abandon terms that carry remedial connotations (e.g. tutor a.nd tutoring and adopt terms that more accurately describe who we are and what we do. Although I agree that we need to encourage an enlightened, collaborative environment in centers, I believe we can achieve this goal (whether or not we rename ourselves and our work) through the intelligent and humane use of humor.

In The Idea of a Writing Center, Stephen M. North takes task his colleagues in university English departments for their unenlightened views: For them, a writing center is illiteracy what a cross between Lourdes and a hospice would be serious illness...(435). In the nineties when multiculturalism is all the rage and American universities attract larger and larger numbers of international students. North and his kind may need take on a different Goliath. Now that we've overcome the idea of writing centers as the proofreading-shop [s]-in-the basement (North 444), we may need battle the idea of writing centers as sentence-scrubbers-for-foreignstudents as my colleague Ray Smith says. But if the writing center does not exist merely to serve, supplement, back up, complement, reinforce, or otherwise be defined by any external curriculum (North 440), how is it ever become a place where non-native writers can receive remediation and guidance? What changes will have be made in the philosophy of the writing center and in the job descriptions of tutors? Anyone who has worked in a college writing center for any length of time will know the plight of international students who have demonstrated some level of English proficiency by achieving a requisite score on a discrete-item grammar and vocabulary test such as the TOEFL (Test of English as a Foreign Language). However, scores (enough get in the door) do not always translate into satisfactory academic writing (enough leave with a diploma in hand). As undergraduates, these students join

That errors in writing are somehow is no news to the field of composition. Yet there is a recurring discrepancy in the approach compositionists take toward this dimension of written error. On the one hand, what counts as an (or as correct) in writing is generally recognized as social: most compositionists freely acknowledge the of the controversial imposition of standards of correct notation as a set of arbitrary conventions. On the other hand, the production of particular errors is regularly identified and treated as social but as individual, evidence of an individual writer's cognitive or perceptual difficulties, trouble knowing and/or seeing error. We might account cynically for the discrepancy between recognition of what might be called the sociality of errors and the focus of research and teaching on error as a sign of ethical irresponsibility. I would argue, however, that this discrepancy results from an impasse in how the sociality of error has been theorized. To acknowledge that errors are seems to mean primarily that one acknowledges the of the regularization of conventions for writing English, a regularization which, coincidentally, has favored the syntactic forms of dialects spoken by more powerful social groups. But all this seems to be viewed as afait accompli, history in the sense of something in the past about which there is little now to be done, a digression that takes attention away from the immediate problems of our students and their writing. The proper focus of attention for researchers and teachers of writing, it seems largely to be assumed, is on matters of student cognition and perception of error. In her 1985 review of Research on Error and Correction, Glynda Hull testifies to this state of affairs. Hull acknowledges that [m]ost of the controversy correctness in writing has finally to do with power, status, and class, but observes that much recent research on error can be viewed as walking a middle ground in the controversy, neither despairing that students must learn a privileged language nor grieving overlong that there is a cost (165, 166). This research takes as its purpose not a delineation of the social and political implications of error and correctness but an investigation of those mental processes involved in making errors and correcting them (167).1 Note that researchers pursuing such matters do deny the social controversy surrounding errors. But

Since the rise of college-level spelling instruction, pedagogies have been few, based primarily on “demon lists” of spelling words and injunctions to students about developing “informed doubt.” This study examines spelling instruction historically, then describes a large-scale analysis done in 1986 of the spelling errors found in 3,000 nationally gathered and stratified student essays. The result of this research is a new and somewhat unusual “demon list” indicating that the most commonly misspelled words are homophones, spellings based on pronunciation, and visual errors. The study then examines the changes wrought in student spelling by the advent of word processing with and without associated spell-checking, examining 100 word-processed essays with and 100 without spell-checking. This research indicates that word processing greatly increases the number of spelling errors unless spell-checking is used. The study concludes by exploring the question of what the future may hold for spelling pedagogies.

Literacy in the United States: Readers and Reading Since 1880, Carl F. Kaestle, with Helen Damon-Moore, Lawrence C. Stedman, Katherine Tinsley, and William Vance Trollinger, Jr. Richard Arthur Courage Academic Literacies: The Public and Private Discourse of University Students, Elizabeth Chiseri-Strater Ronald A. Sudol Writing Space: The Computer, Hypertext, and the History of Writing, Jay David Bolter David Kaufer, Chris Neuwirth, and Myron Tuman At the Point of Need: Teaching Basic and ESL Writers, Marie Wilson Nelson Vivian Zamel ESL in America: Myths and Possibilities, Sarah Benesch Nancy Duke S. Lay Grammar and the Teaching of Writing: Limits and Possibilities, Rei R. Noguchi Constance Weaver Rhetorical Grammar: Grammatical Choices, Rhetorical Effects, Martha Kolln Thomas J. Farrell Doing Grammar, Max Morenberg Paul Jude Beauvais Textbooks in Focus: Handbooks A Writer’s Handbook: Style and Grammar, James D. Lester New Concise Handbook, Hans P. Guth The Scott, Foresman Handbook for Writers, Maxine Hairston and John J. Ruszkiewicz Dennis Shramek Selected Essays of Edward P. J. Corbett, Robert J. Connors James L. Kinneavy Interviewing Practices for Technical Writers, Earl E. McDowell Alice I. Philbin

Preface Acknowledgments Introduction PART I The Structure of Sentences Chapter 1 An Introduction to Words and Phrases Chapter Preview Form Classes Nouns The Noun Phrase Verbs The Verb Phrase NP + VP = S Adjectives and Adverbs Prepositional Phrases Grammatical Choices Key Terms Chapter 2 Sentence Patterns Chapter Preview Rhetorical Effects The Be Patterns The Linking Verb Pattern The Intransitive Pattern The Basic Transitive Verb Pattern Transitive Patterns with Two Complements Sentence Pattern Summary The Optional Adverbial Questions and Commands Punctuation and the Sentence Patterns Basic Patterns in Prose The Short Paragraph Key Terms Rhetorical Reminders Punctuation Reminder Chapter 3 Our Versatile Verbs Chapter Preview The Expanded Verb Using the Expanded Verb Special Uses of the Present Tense Other Auxiliaries The Passive Voice Using the Passive Voice The Obscure Agent Well-Chose Verbs: Showing, Not Telling Key Terms Rhetorical Reminders Chapter 4 Coordination and Subordination Chapter Preview Coordination Within the Sentence Parallel Structure Coordination of the Series Climax Coordination with Correlative Conjunctions Subject-Verb Agreement Compound Sentences Conjunctive Adverbs and Transitional Phrases Compound Sentences with Semicolons Compound Sentences with Colons Punctuation Pitfalls The Compound Sentence: Punctuation Review Subordination: The Dependent Clauses Revising Compound Structures Key Terms Rhetorical Reminders Punctuation Reminders Part II Controlling the Message Chapter 5 Cohesion Chapter Preview Reader Expectation Repetition The Known-New Contract The Role of Pronouns Personal Pronouns Demonstrative Pronouns The Role of the Passive Voice Other Sentence Inversions Parallelism Repetition versus Redundancy Key Terms Rhetorical Reminders Chapter 6 Sentence Rhythm Chapter Preview Intonation: The Peaks and Valleys End Focus Controlling Rhythm The It-Cleft The What-Cleft The There Transformation Rhythm and the Comma Power Words Correlative Conjunctions Adverbials of Emphasis The Common Only Key Terms Rhetorical Reminders Punctuation Reminder Chapter 7 The Writer's Voice Chapter Preview Tone Diction Verbs and Formality Nominalized Verbs and Abstract Subjects Contractions Metaphor Metadiscourse The Overuse of Metadiscourse Point of View Key Terms Rhetorical Reminders Punctuation Reminders Part III Making Choices: Form and Function Chapter 8 Choosing Adverbials Chapter Preview The Movable Adverbials Adverbs Prepositional Phrases Proliferating Prepositional Phrases Noun Phrases Verb Phrases Dependent Clauses Punctuation of Adverbial Clauses Movability of Adverbial Clauses The Because-Clause Myth Elliptical Adverbial Clauses Key Terms Rhetorical Reminders Punctuation Reminders Chapter 9 Choosing Adjectivals Chapter Preview The Noun Phrase Preheadword Modifiers Determiners Adjectives and Nouns Modifier Noun Proliferation The Movable Adjective Phrase Postheadword Modifiers Prepositional Phrases Adjective Phrases Participial Phrases The Prenoun Participle The Movable Participle The Dangling Participle Relative Clauses The Relatives The Broad-Reference Clause Punctuation of Phrases and Clauses A Punctuation Rule Revisited Key Terms Rhetorical Reminders Punctuation Reminders Chapter 10 Choosing Nominals Chapter Preview Appositives The Colon with Appositives Avoiding Punctuation Errors The Sentence Appositive Nominal Verb Phrases Gerunds The Dangling Gerund The Subject of the Gerund Infinitives Nominal Clauses Nominals as Delayed Subjects Key Terms Rhetorical Reminders Punctuation Reminder Chapter 11 Other Stylistic Choices Chapter Preview Absolute Phrases The Coordinate Series Repetition Word-Order Variation Ellipsis Antithesis The Deliberate Fragment Key Terms Rhetorical Reminders Punctuation Reminders PART IV Your Way With Words Chapter 12 Words and Word Classes Lexical Rules Parts of Speech The Form Classes Nouns Plural-Only Forms Collective Nouns Proper Nouns Verbs Adjectives Adverbs Derivational Affixes The Structure Classes Determiners Auxiliaries Qualifiers Prepositions Particles Conjunctions Pronouns Personal Pronouns The Missing Pronoun Case Errors The Unwanted Apostrophe The Ambiguous Antecedent Reflexive Pronouns Intensive Pronouns Reciprocal Pronouns Demonstrative Pronouns Indefinite Pronouns The Everyone/Their Issue Key Terms Rhetorical Reminders Punctuation Reminders PART V Punctuation Chapter 13 Punctuation: Its Purposes, Its Hierarchy, and Its Rhetorical Effects The Purposes of Punctuation Marks Syntax Prosody Semantics The Hierarchy of Punctuation The Rhetorical Effects of Punctuation Key Terms Glossary of Punctuation Glossary of Terms Bibliography Answers to the Exercises Index

Despite intense research efforts by both advertising and communication researchers, there is no definitive answer to the question of what makes a print advertisement successful. Yet, common wisdom contends that lexicon, syntax, and text layout have much to do with how readers perceive advertisements. This study, an extension and refinement of two of our previous studies, tests this assertion by assessing reader reactions to a broad range of lexical, syntactical, and text layout conditions, both in isolation and interactively. Our results suggest that in affecting readers' perceptions, the role of each of these elements independently is not quite as critical as perhaps assumed. Nonetheless, this research does suggest that certain perceptions are significantly affected by specific lexical, syntactical, and layout combinations, which indicates that creating effective advertisement text requires tailoring the copy to the target audience and thinking of the text as a synergy of both language and text layout elements.

This article contains results from a literary analysis of fifty scientific papers selected from the top 100 most-cited papers appearing in the Science Citation Index for the period 1945–1988. Most papers are from the field of biochemistry and became citation superstars because their authors discovered a method or material that numerous others could use in their own research. The typical paper has two authors, two tables, six figures, and twenty-two references. It adheres to the conventional topical organization, with the topics distributed as follows: 2 percent abstract, 5 percent introduction, 25 percent methods and materials, 50 percent results, 10 percent discussion, 4 percent conclusion, and 4 percent reference list. Tables and figures occupy about 30 percent of the article. With respect to the writing style, the average sentence is somewhat long (24 words) but not unreasonably so, and the sentence structure is simple greater than half the time. Moreover, sentences tend to rely heavily on to be verbs (about 80% of sentences have at least one) and abstract nouns (0.66 per sentence). Explanations for the typical form and writing style in these papers are provided.

There are differences of vocabulary, grammar, and usage in American English and British English. As international interchange of information increases, we must alert writers and editors to these differences, and encourage them to find forms of expression common to both versions of English. If they do not, their texts may create difficulties, not only for readers using English as a foreign language, but also for native speakers of American English or British English.

With the vocabularies of their own disciplines, students majoring in technical subjects can access fresh insights into how writers write. For example, the symbols of computer flowcharts may bring insights when used to monitor rhetoric. Charts of organizational hierarchies, such as those that many corporate executives use, may illuminate equally well the shifting hierarchies of the characters in a work of fiction. Graphs and charts of syntactic and lexical networks may reveal the hidden structures of a narrative. An engineering major needs to see how a writer engineers words, a business major to see how a writer establishes hierarchies, a computer science major to see how a writer devises the flow of rhetoric. If we encourage students to explain literature with the professional vocabularies of their own disciplines, we can train them as lively apprentices, not as drudges. If we English teachers heed our students' special vocabularies, we may expect students to examine our own jargon more thoughtfully, such as the vocabulary by which we chart subordination and punctuation. Literature is everyone's heritage. No discipline monopolizes the critical insight or the vocabulary with which to articulate it.

The study was conducted in a classroom that used a process approach to literacy. Ten case studies examined the ability of 6th grade Hispanic bilingual students to construct meaning in dialogue journals and literature logs in first and second language. Journals and literature logs were coded and analyzed for language code (L1/L2), topic, codeswitching, sensitivity to audience, writer’s voice, spelling, and grammatical structures. Findings indicate that students were more effective in constructing meaning in dialogue journals than in literature logs. Success in the journals revealed positive self-images while failure with literature logs evoked poor self-concepts. Findings also suggest that implementation of process approaches can pose its own set of instructional problems that need to be addressed, especially when effectiveness is judged in terms of the particular students involved. For example, although the students in this study were able to write in English before having complete control of the language, their development of complex ideas and the construction of meaning suffered considerably. The length and quality of the writing also degenerated when the topic was imposed, when students found no relevance in the literacy activity, and when they were not assisted in contextualizing writing tasks in their own terms. Overall, mere exposure to standard writing conventions did not improve the students’ use of them. The practice of implementing popular instructional programs without incorporating appropriate social, cultural, and linguistic adaptations appears to be ineffective with L2 learners.

The study demonstrates the language skills value added by business writing instruction. Descriptive Tests of Language Skills of the College Board (DTLS) covering sentence structure and usage were administered as a pretest/posttest assessment to students enrolled in two business writing courses. Instruction in business writing resulted in improved language skills as measured by the DTLS.

It is pointed out that veteran technical writers and editors sometimes suspect that the professors who teach technical writing and editing are too deeply immersed in their academic culture to translate effectively into the classroom the world of work culture in which technical writing and editing are practised. It is argued, however, that the two cultures are remarkably alike, sharing the same goal-to improve communication. Differences arise primarily in the approaches taken to achieve that common goal. Drawing on 25 years of experience as a visiting professor in a university writing program, the author discusses the different approaches that industry and academia take to such topics as grammar, rhetoric, audience, editing, artwork, decision-making, and collaborative writing.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

For me it is a starting point in all thought about language that, whatever I say or do with words, my expression will never mean exactly the same thing to you that it does to me; and of course yours will never mean exactly the same thing to me that it does to you. It cannot: each act of expression is a gesture against a context; it derives its meaning largely, perhaps entirely, from its relation to that context; and for each of us the context of every gesture is different, if only because one of us is doing it, the other observing. Think of the tennis game, and how differently the same shot is experienced by you and by me. From your point of view, having made the play, the ball disappears across the net into the larger scene from which it is about to be returned; for me, the ball emerges from such a scene to become increasingly the object of focus and potential action. For you the shot is something done; for me it constitutes a challenge: Can I respond? This is to focus on the difference between the sender and the receiver, between the person who writes words in her study, on a pad, then sees them printed and sent forth into the world to merge with all the other books and articles out there, and the other person, who finds this book or article among the others, idly glances at it, or chooses to read it with care, and thus locates it within the world of the other texts that he has known. This is one difference, but not the only one, for our sense of context and action is different in many other ways as well: our sense of the words themselves is different, for they have different histories for each of us; our sense of the way words are related by syntax varies too, since, as any language teacher knows, we inhabit different syntactical worlds; and our experience of the natural world, of other people, of institutions, of other gestures on other occasions-all of which provide parts of the context against which the particular performance occursvary too. My meaning can never be your meaning; all writing is a way of addressing, or avoiding, that fact. It is this theme that I wish to pursue in responding to the various articles written about my work, beginning with that by Eugene Garver.

Introduction Social Science Perspectives Who are Basic Writers? by Andrea Lunsford and Patricia A. Sullivan Development Psychology and Basic Writers by Donna Haisty Winchell Literacy Theory and Basic Writing by Mariolina Salvatori and Glynda Hull Linguistic Perspectives Modern Grammar and Basic Writers by Ronald F. Lunsford Dialects and Basic Writers by Michael Montgomery TESL Research and Basic Writing by Sue Render Pedalogical Perspectives Basic Writing Courses and Programs by Michael D. Hood Computers and Writing Instruction by Stephen A. Bernhardt and Patricia G. Wojahn Writing Laboratories and Basic Writing by Donna Beth Nelson Preparing Teachers of Basic Writing by Richard Filloy Appendix: Selective Bibliography of Basic Writing Textbooks by Mary Sue Ply Name Index Subject Index

Despite the advent of computerized spelling checkers, being a poor speller is still asignificant burden for a writer. Spelling errors are stigmatizing, considered a mark of illiteracy both in academia and in business. Occasions for spelling errors are far more frequent than are opportunities for other errors, and misspellings arc more noticeable. Relatively few readers respond to comma splices or dangling participles, but virtually everyone reacts to "dosen't" or "stuped" or "thair." For the poor speller, writing, particularly in impromptu situations, is a gamble; spelling errors always threaten to sabotage the communication. Since spelling instruction is usually not part of the firstyear composition curriculum -even in a basic writing course, only some students will be poor spellers -assistance with spelling problems should become a regular part of a writing center program; it may be the only resource available to students who need help.

Harris argues that linguistic theory is useful for solving certain problems encountered in technical writing theory and pedagogy [1]. However, he undermines his purpose by introducing irrelevant distinctions between competing syntactic theories (Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar and Transformational Grammar) and by failing to exploit the full potential of the few applications he mentions. The passive rule is a case in point. It not only constitutes an operational test for identifying passive sentences, it also contributes to the flow of discourse by rearranging both thematic roles (e.g. agent and patient) and given/new information. The passive rule is only one of a class of noun phrase-moving operations that technical writing specialists may find useful.

When faced with mathematical material, editors with limited technical training often address only superficial concerns such as format and punctuation. A few simple guidelines are presented here which can help one do a more complete job. Superfluous symbols should be deleted; the remaining symbols should be defined properly, redefined where necessary, and used according to the rules of grammar.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

This study analyzed the persuasive essays of high school juniors and seniors to determine the specific rhetorical and linguistic features that contributed to raters' holistic judgments about the overall quality of the essays. Essays written by a random sample of an ethnically, socially, and economically diverse population of high school writers were analyzed using an array of rhetorical and linguistic measures: overall quality, use of a five-paragraph structure, coherence, three types of persuasive appeals, and sentence-level errors. The relationships between the variables and the holistic scores were examined using a correlation analysis. A forward stepwise regression analysis was also used to estimate the amount of variance contributed by each variable. Results indicate that use of logical appeals, five-paragraph structure, coherence, and number of words were strongly correlated with the overall quality ratings.

It is noted that existing editorial style sheets/guides do not address the unique needs encountered in developing computer-delivered information. The author presents guidelines that supplement the stylesheets/guides. These guidelines suggest ways to handle the organization and presentation of information, paragraphs, sentences, questions and responses, language, punctuation, and screen design.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

The author notes the unique needs of the graphic interface and the demands these needs make on the technical writer. Ten principles to help cope with writing for the graphic interface are presented, with emphasis on lexical, syntactic, and display issues. The principles are: (1) avoid verbal shortcuts; (2) keep the words simple and direct; (3) keep the syntax simple and direct; (4) keep the punctuation simple and direct; (5) keep the layout simple and direct; (6) keep the writing brief; (7) keep all dialogue and window text self-contained; (8) be absolutely consistent; (9) revise; and (10) always keep the user firmly in mind.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

students. In 1966 Orin Seright, in On Defining the Appositive, contrasts the appositive with the adjectival, using this example of the adjective clause: My sister, whom we elected president, is here (108). Seright calls the italicized clause a non-restrictive although it is a modifier of sister rather than the main clause. (Seright points out that appositives, often presented as if they were always nominals, not only restate previous structures but also may substitute for them [109]; thus, verbs, adverbials, and adjectivals as well as nominals may function as appositives.) Seright's belief that the adjective clause is a modifier may follow directly from what I regard as an oversight by Seright's colleague Francis Christensen. In the 1968 article entitled The Problem of Defining a Mature Style, Christensen objects to the term modifiers--only because the constructions one another as well as sentences (143). He overlooks the possibility that many of these sentence actually modify a particular word in the (usually) preceding word-group. Indeed, calling them modifiers, in contrast to modifiers,' he explains that bound modifiers word They close or limiting or restrictive modifiers. But free modifiers are modifiers not of words but of constructions, from which they set off by junctures or punctuation. Grammatically, they loose or additive or nonessential or nonrestrictive (143). Free modifiers, Christensen seems to say, always modify the preceding main clause or free modifier, and concomitantly free modifiers do not modify a particular word in the preceding unit. But as I view these modifiers, they indeed seem to be loose; and they clearly additive, nonessential, and nonrestrictive. However, many of them do not modify consrucions but single words.

Typical spelling errors that the Japanese make when writing in English are discussed. An improved spelling checker for Japanese users that takes their linguistic idiosyncracies into consideration is described.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>