Re: grammar & workplace writing, reply

[Sara Kimball <skimball@uts.cc.utexas.edu>]

Well, one of the documents prepared for my promotion case has a big old
subject-verb agreement error in the middle, one of those slips that can
happen when you make last-minute, fussy changes. Maybe the people who read
it figured "Gee,they really do need a linguist." When I'm the one writing
and editing the promotion documents, I'll make sure the final versions are 
proofread and
then sit there slapping hands if need be to keep mutliple committee
members (sometimes from two departments) from introducing changes and,
possibly, errors

On Tue, 5 May 1998, Jeanne H. Simpson wrote:

> Lynne
> 
> You got it.  The status markers that indicate fitness for tenure and
> promotion are quite clear.  Just like having the right dress to wear for tea
> with the Queen.   Standard grammar and punctuation, publications, service
> on the right committees...yup, that's how it's done, tenure and promotion
> being prime examples of status.  
> 
> And since you mention it, I'd like to call the attention of the group to a
> very interesting piece of work on this subject, Promotion and Tenure:
> Community and Socialization in Academe, by William G. Tierney and Esstela
> Mara Bensimon, SUNY press, 1996.   One of the things they point out is
> that there is only the perception of consistency of procedure in the
> academy, not reality.  And very strongly held beliefs about the culture of
> tenure/promotion on each campus.
> 
> Jeanne Simpson
> csjhs@eiu.edu
> 
> 
> Lynne Belcher > 
> > I'm not sure I buy the argument that "grammar" isn't important in 
> > work-place writing.  I would like to see how anyone who has the 
> > power over termination and promotion would respond to something 
> > written with the kinds of errors Hairston identifies as being 
> > "status markers."  It really don't make me no nevermind, though.  
> > 
> > Lynne Belcher
> > 
> > 
> 
>