Descriptive Rules and Prescriptive Rules

Related to the distinctions between grammatical language and ungrammatical language and between standard and nonstandard language is the distinction between descriptive grammar rules and prescriptive grammar rules.  Grammar rules that merely describe what native speakers of a language do are the rules that produce grammatical language.  For example, native speakers regularly use the word ain’t as a contracted form of be plus not.  On the other hand, grammar rules that tell what a person should do, whether they reflect what native speakers actually do or not, are prescriptive rules.  The rule that tells us not to use ain’t is a prescriptive rule.

Activity 1.2: Prescriptive rules or descriptive rules?

Use the definitions of descriptive rules and prescriptive rules below to label each rule.

Grammaticality is tied to a description of the English language: when we talk about whether native speakers say some like this or not, we are merely describing what native speakers do.  Descriptive rules tell what native speakers actually do when they speak.

Standardness is tied to prescriptions for the English language: when we talk about whether someone should say something like this or not, we are prescribing what a speaker should do.  Prescriptive rules tell what every user of English should do when they speak.

Like native speakers, non-native speakers must learn the prescriptive rules for English, but they also have to learn the descriptive rules, something native speakers already have when they begin to attend school.  In fact, the kinds of errors that non-native speakers of English will make are much more likely to be errors of grammaticality than of standardness.  ESL/EFL teachers must understand their role as teachers of the entirety of the English language, and not just as teachers of standard English.  This is one key difference between the ESL/EFL teacher and the mainstream secondary English teacher.  On the flip side, as teachers, they must also know when certain forms are appropriate and when they are not; and they are responsible for standard language as much as grammatical language.

And then the protestations begin anew, “Okay, but I teach young children, and they aren’t able to understand grammatical explanations.  Why should I study grammar?”  And one reply is that an ESL license in many states, as it is in Minnesota and North Dakota, is a K-12 license.  To qualify for the endorsement or license, a person must demonstrate knowledge of the language and ability to work with all grades.  The Praxis II for ESL or other tests of professional knowledge will contain questions on grammar. A cursory look at the Minnesota proficiency level definitions for ESL students demonstrates that metalinguistic knowledge of English is expected of teachers of ESL:

•Intermediate-level learners can comprehend short conversations and simple written narratives in familiar contexts. A limited vocabulary range necessitates frequent repetition and rephrasing for their understanding. They frequently use contextual and visual cues to derive meaning and also rely on guessing. Their production is characterized by simple vocabulary, verb tenses and syntax [emphasis mine].  Many errors occur, some of which interfere with meaning. With appropriate instructional strategies and scaffolding of materials [emphasis mine], intermediate ELLs can learn age-appropriate academic content in English through instruction using sheltered English techniques.  (Minnesota Department of Education, 2005, p. 5)

Page 4