Review of Breaking the Rules: Liberating Writers through Innovative Grammar Instruction by Edgar H. Schuster Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 2003. 256 pg. ISBN: 0325004781 Paperback, $25.00
The empirical and inquisitive approach that flavors Schuster’s Breaking the Rules makes it an enjoyable and informative book. The first two chapters, on language acquisition and traditional school grammar, show Schuster’s inquisitive approach as he questions the reliance on grammar instruction as a means to improve writing. The friction between natural language learning and academic instruction initiates the examination of the inadequacies of traditional grammar instruction. Schuster presents a history of grammar texts and handbooks, which were based on Latin grammar and dedicated to correcting mistakes. He illustrates how the utilization of inadequate and inaccurate definitions for grammatical terms derived from these handbooks inhibits rather than liberates writers. His critique may appear caustic and judgmental, but once one starts to appreciate the author’s thought-provoking attitude and notes his genuine interest in promoting good writing, the book is quite valuable.
Schuster wants Freshman English students to learn how to write, and he is also an experienced teacher who wishes to support his colleagues. In chapters 3 to 5, he addresses usage and punctuation, essential concerns of English teachers, and presents positive, deliberate approaches, often based on empirical examinations of current texts, to teach writing. Schuster takes a descriptive rather than prescriptive approach to the language, and he bases his description on an pragmatic approach, evident in chapter 4, “Writing: Liberating the Student Writer” and especially chapter 5, “Punctuation Today.” In both these chapters, Schuster examines sentence structures and punctuation used by current writers in respected publications. When tallying punctuation, for example, he finds that dashes, parentheses, and colons are often used more frequently than semicolons. Based on the current preference for certain punctuation marks, Schuster takes a utilitarian perspective and suggests teaching how to use these punctuation marks. At the same time, he suggests considering how commas and semicolons are used and adapting teaching to incorporate these usages. In his perusal of English textbooks, he did not find one instance of the semicolon used before conjunctive adverbs, which is a usage of the semicolon presented in many books devoted to the teaching of college writing. Consequently, Schuster proposes his own rule – use a period before a conjunctive adverb and start a new sentence. He us not disregarding all rules; he is re-writing or disregarding the rules that do not rule. Schuster’s suggestions are thoughtful and considerate of writers–both novices and professionals.
Schuster addresses a number of issues plaguing writers and writing teachers. In a chapter about usage, he brings up the confusion between “than/then,” as well as a couple dozen other pairs, and he presents guides to identify the appropriate word. This section of Breaking the Rules seems very traditional, but Schuster is not bound to tradition when he considers the origins of usage rules and concludes that many “mythrules” are arbitrary and temporary. This is not to say that he condones non-standard English in the college classroom. Instead, he considers an awareness of English—its history and current trends—to be more instructive than admonishments to avoid or use certain language structures.
As he deflates and discards the accepted and traditional “mythrules” regarding English grammar, Schuster, in Breaking the Rules, provides useful and thoughtful approaches that can help students become better writers.
©Copyright 2005. Contact author for permission
Maintained by Jay Howard,Apr 2005