# Is Grammar overrated?



## Shlama_98

I might be the only one who feels this way but sometimes I feel like some people take grammar a little too seriously, I mean I can understand spelling but with grammar small mistakes do happen...

I understand that there's a proper way to speak a language without using slang, but following all the grammar rules seems pretty overrated to me, I mean languages do evolve and sometimes you have to go with the flow, perhaps the grammar of language x could evolve as well.

Any thoughts?


----------



## V3nom_is_here

I agree ... as long as the other posters understand your point .. it doesn`t have to be a perfect grammar . Mistakes do happen .. and people who usually correct the grammar mistakes want to seem "smart" .


----------



## Shlama_98

I was speaking in general, not just on the forums, for example let's say you had to write a paper assignment for school, should the professor really be that strict over small mistakes? I mean like you said, as long is it seems proper and understandable, why not let it slide?


----------



## Lemminkäinen

Shlama_98 said:


> I might be the only one who feels this way but sometimes I feel like some people take grammar a little too seriously, I mean I can understand spelling but with grammar small mistakes do happen...
> 
> I understand that there's a proper way to speak a language without using slang, but following all the grammar rules seems pretty overrated to me, I mean languages do evolve and sometimes you have to go with the flow, perhaps the grammar of language x could evolve as well.
> 
> Any thoughts?



Here's something I wrote in EO a little time ago:



> [P]eople make language - not grammarians.
> 
> And if I may add another point: grammar is a descriptive art, not prescriptive. Meaning grammarians don't say "this is how the language works; now talk like this", but rather "this is how you talk, so this is how we'd describe the grammatical rules of your language"



Grammarians don't say "this is correct and this is not" in the sense of "you can't say this" - they see that in language X, for instance, no users end their sentences with prepositions - in fact, when presented with a sentence ending in a proposition, these speakers don't think it makes any sense.
With that basis, a grammarian might say as a "rule" that in language X, you can't end a sentence with a preposition.
It's not like somebody sat down during the Middle Ages and discussed whether they should "allow" English to end sentences with prepositions. 

You can't separate a language from its grammar.


----------



## V3nom_is_here

Shlama_98 said:


> I was speaking in general, not just on the forums, for example let's say you had to write a paper assignment for school, should the professor really be that strict over small mistakes? I mean like you said, as long is it seems proper and understandable, why not let it slide?


 
Well .. it depends on the professor ... some of them don`t mind some grammar mistakes .. but there are some madman type of teachers .. who would do anything to give you a smaller grade .. 
But I agree .. as long as it seems proper and understandable .. it should be ignored


----------



## caballoschica

Let me ask you this:

What would language be without grammar?  

Be language grammar without would what?

Would another person understand the second sentence?

To make my point clearer:
What about the following sentence:

Language what grammar without be would?

One of my professors said this on my paper: "grammer?" And gave me a lower grade because of my 'writing quality.'


----------



## V3nom_is_here

I`m not saying that you don`t have to learn grammar . But the thing is .. that little grammar mistakes should be ignored . But when you make many mistakes like that ...


----------



## xarruc

Grammar was hardly taught at my school. Now it is all but taken off the curiculum. This has impaired my ability to learn foreign languages. I have had to teach myself English grammar. I have had to teach it too to the few people I have subsequently taught Spanish.

To know grammatical rules is important if you correct non natives use of your language. How do you explain why one example is right and one is wrong so that they do not repeat their errors? This does not crop up so frequently between natives because we can generally follow grammar rules without understanding them.

Of course you can take it too far...

As for the forums, I like people to correct my use of language, including in English. There is always more to learn. For example I spent all my life believing that _ostensibly_ mean't "particularly" until I bothered to look it up in a dictionary,


----------



## caballoschica

V3nom_is_here said:


> I`m not saying that you don`t have to learn grammar . But the thing is .. that little grammar mistakes should be ignored . But when you make many mistakes like that ...



What if everyone started making little grammar mistakes?

Someone may make a mistake of using the wrong form of a verb for a tense.  Another may omit commas all together.  And yet another may be comma crazy.  And so on and so forth.  Without a norm, there would be pandemonium!


----------



## V3nom_is_here

That`s not my point . I`m saying that a few grammar mistakes can be ignored by the teacher when giving the grade (but they should be corrected , so that the student knows his mistakes) . And it`s not like if a few grammar mistakes aren`t punished , everybody will make them .. I`m saying that the teacher shouldn`t be so harsh .. it happens to everybody to forget a letter or something


----------



## cuchuflete

Shlama_98 said:


> I might be the only one who feels this way but sometimes I feel like some people take grammar a little too seriously, I mean I can understand spelling but with grammar small mistakes do happen...
> 
> I understand that there's a proper way to speak a language without using slang, but following all the grammar rules seems pretty overrated to me, I mean languages do evolve and sometimes you have to go with the flow, perhaps the grammar of language x could evolve as well.
> 
> Any thoughts?



What do you mean by "overrated"?  By whom? In what circumstances?  What works for casual conversation on the street corner may not be appropriate in another context.
Grammar is especially important if you are writing for an audience that includes language students, who may not yet have the baseline knowledge needed to understand exceptions to standard language rules.  

Grammar follows usage.  The best grammar books I have ever seen, both AE and BE, frequently note that current usage has evolved, and they show how it is different from what was formerly required.  

Slang has little or nothing to do with grammar.  That is a matter of vocabulary and register for the most part.  

If you are studying music, and you play a note one half tone higher or lower than what is written in the score, it sounds out of place.  If you are doing math, and round a number up when you should round it down, you get an answer that may be close to what is correct, but it is still wrong.  Languages also have standards—which do evolve over time.  If you do not comply with the standards, you appear to either be ignorant of them, or to be unmotivated to take the care to use them.  

Sometimes, especially in conversation, the need for adherence to grammatical rules is reduced by physical gestures, tone of voice, or context.  In writing you have only written words and structures to communicate.

Is overrated this of importance?


----------



## caballoschica

I completely agree with you in that respect V3nom is here.  I mean I make quite a few small blunders in my Spanish papers and she usually gives me a pretty good grade.  They needn't be harsh with students as long as they know they've made an error.  Grammar is complex.  It's a difficult thing to learn, but nonetheless important.


----------



## Shlama_98

caballoschica said:


> Let me ask you this:
> 
> What would language be without grammar?
> 
> Be language grammar without would what?
> 
> Would another person understand the second sentence?
> 
> To make my point clearer:
> What about the following sentence:
> 
> Language what grammar without be would?
> 
> One of my professors said this on my paper: "grammer?" And gave me a lower grade because of my 'writing quality.'



Small grammar mistakes are one thing and train wrecks are another thing, what you gave me was a train wreck.


----------



## Shlama_98

Lemminkäinen said:


> It's not like somebody sat down during the Middle Ages and discussed whether they should "allow" English to end sentences with prepositions.
> 
> You can't separate a language from its grammar.



Indeed, but what I'm trying to say is a language can evolve, and when it evolves the grammar changes over time.


----------



## xarruc

Picking up on V3noms's point about grammar in the classroom. My uni ran language ancillaries and I always felt that grammar was marked too harshly (particularly accents) while little or no credit was given for tryng to write challenging texts. I think this was so that the swots on track for a first at maths didnt drop down due to not being able to pick up French. On the other hand it did almost nothing to advance my ability in Spanish. My point is that grammar shouldn't take over - content can be more important.


----------



## Shlama_98

cuchuflete said:


> What do you mean by "overrated"?  By whom? In what circumstances?  What works for casual conversation on the street corner may not be appropriate in another context.



Overrated by those who take it a little too seriously, while a street corner conversation might not be appropriate for certain places like business meetings, school presentations, and so on, a proper formal is (Even if there was a few grammar mistakes involved).


----------



## guixols

My Italian prof had this to say about grammar and its inconsistencies, contradictions, etc.:
"Spoken language came first. Grammar is just an attempt to explain the mess after the fact."
I was taught almost no grammar at all in any of the American schools I went to; in Germany they were quite strict about it; in Italy they taught us to speak correctly but pointed out colloquialisms that were ungrammatical but accepted nonetheless.
That said, I think prescriptive grammar has its place, especially if it helps you communicate an idea more clearly.


----------



## V3nom_is_here

Nobody says that grammar isn`t important in a discussion , it does ...


----------



## don maico

caballoschica said:


> Let me ask you this:
> 
> What would language be without grammar?
> 
> Be language grammar without would what?
> 
> Would another person understand the second sentence?
> 
> To make my point clearer:
> What about the following sentence:
> 
> Language what grammar without be would?
> 
> One of my professors said this on my paper: "grammer?" And gave me a lower grade because of my 'writing quality.'


I think he was refering to peole beinmg overly pedantic. My grammar aint great but I live with it.


----------



## jinti

I think it's possible to go too far to the extreme in either direction.

For instance, clamping down on all grammar mistakes to the point of ignoring content is ridiculous in a classroom setting, particularly a language class.

However, in the workworld, employers keep saying they have trouble finding employees who can express themselves well in writing.  At my own job, I hire writing tutors. Those who use correct grammar themselves but can't explain it are less valuable employees to me, and my hiring practices reflect that.

And, oh yes, when I turn in reports or proposals at work, they are expected to be grammatically correct. It would reflect poorly on me if they weren't, so I'm glad I got put through my grammar paces at school.

Small errors happen.  But you need to be able to turn up your performance when necessary, and if you're not held accountable at the lower stages, you won't be able to do that when you reach the higher ones.


----------



## mytwolangs

Well, it is best to strive for perfection with things, but understand that things are not going to be perfect. Strive for perfection, but expect excellence. 

If they let the standard slide, and slide, and slide... sooner or later the original standard would be so out of whack that it would be nothing like the original. 
Grammar does seem overrated, but they do so to keep a language in it's best form. Like anything, there MUST be a top perfect standard, even if things will never reach that height. It is all in good intentions. In the real world though...


----------



## Etcetera

Lemminkäinen said:


> You can't separate a language from its grammar.


I agree!

There should be a system, a standard, an ideal, if you like. Grammar rules aren't there to make learning a language harder - they are there to make communication more effective. A standard is always easier to understand.


----------



## palomnik

Before I started participating in this forum I probably would have agreed that minor grammatical errors should be ignored.  However, one thing that has struck me forcibly in reading postings here is how easy it is for a relatively minor mistake to change the meaning of an entire sentence or even render it unintelligible.  As a result, I have to come out on the side of the grammarians.


----------



## elpoderoso

If two people on a street corner are talking without using the ''correct'' grammar,they will still be able to understand each other.
If a ''better educated'' person comes along and joins the conversation, then who should change their grammar?
Obviously in a formal or educational setting the grammatical standards should be observed, but to be so pedantic in an informal conversation would be pointless and rude.


----------



## danielfranco

Yes.




Oh, would you like me to elaborate?
Cool. Yes, grammar is overrated. After all, it's only the formalized form of the rules most everyone who speaks a certain language has put in place already for a long time.
I mean, I don't think there's any grammar guy going, "Muh-ah-ha-ha-ha-ha!" every time he thinks of some obscure rule to ruin school-aged people's grades while he sits in chains in some dark dungeon.
I think grammar-guys are just sifting through what people already do with the language.
Of course, by the time they manage to sift through all the crap to come up with something cool, people already started bitching about something else with the language, so the grammarians have to start all over.
Phew! What a mess...


----------



## caballoschica

OK, here's how I think of it.

A language cannot be separated from its grammar.  You end up looking like a fool if you don't know the grammar of a language, but you know the vocabulary.  

As for street talk, grammar isn't necessary.  Anyway, it is probably a different dialect all together.  They know how to speak it with their own set of grammar.  I'm sure some sentences would sound odd in their dialect.  

As for formal papers, Heck yes, it's important.  If you're trying to publish a paper in an academic journal, you don't want your grammar detracting from your studies.  Academics may or may not let it slide.  

Informal writing: Minor errors that don't change the meaning of the sentence which are understandable in the original meaning and context are fine.  Minor errors which change the entire meaning are unacceptable as the recipient will think you mean something entirely different.


----------

