Blog #13 Response

Dawkins - "Teaching Punctuation as a Rhetorical Tool"

Rhetorical Overview of the Article

1. Dawkins is trying to make a the point that there are no such thing as punctuation rules. He argues that the way handbooks teach students to write is not the way real writers use grammar.

2a. At first I thought his audience was primarily students, but then as I read I realized he isn't just talking to students; he's talking to all writers in general. I realized he was speaking to all writers when he said, "One needs to recognize an independent clause in one's writing, which requires bringing a conscious level what one knows intuitively."  

3. I think the thesis/ niche can be found immediately within the text. I think it is the following sentence: "... manuals of style and college handbooks have it all wrong when it comes to punctuation (good writers don't punctuate like that)."

Summary

1. In his article, ""Teaching Punctuation as a Rhetorical Tool," Dawkins argues that there is no right or wrong way to punctuate writing. He compares different sentences of famous writers to the sentences found in a college grammar handbook. He is able to prove that the famous writers' sentences were more logical and made more sense intuitively. He concludes his argument by stating that "by teaching raising and lowering, we will be adding to our students' repertoire of skills; we will be encouraging students to clarify the meaning of sentences and to gain intended emphasis... [and] proclaim but don't always demonstrate: writing is thinking."

2. Specific "rights & wrongs" on punctuation = incorrect. No rules on punctuation = correct. #noconstraints 

Burkean Parlor/Intertextuality

1. I think that Dawkins' article has a similar message as Allen's. Allen discusses the idea of "the inspired writer" and how some people try so hard to follow the rules of how to be a good writing. Dawkins also discusses how many people follow grammar rules because they are just trying to be good writers. Both, Dawkins and Allen, encourage writers to break away from what some believe to be "right or wrong" and just go with your gut feeling.

Personal Reflection

1. The part that had the most impact on me as a writer was when Dawkins said, "One needs to know to recognize an independent clause in one's writing, which requires bringing to a conscious level what one knows intuitively." He means that there are no rules on his ideas of writing, it just comes naturally. Also, I really like how he used many examples to get his point across. The comparisons he made were very persuasive.

2. So, on page 149 he gives the handbook example: "This is called anchoring the mall" and represents seminal work in shopping center theory." He then gives three different examples that the system allows. As a writer he or she can choose whatever one he or she thinks is "correct"? If that i true, then is he suggesting that teachers shouldn't grade for grammar because techincally anything can be considered correct?