Centrales eléctricas

Anyone who opens the HHH will first see the taxonomy shown in figure 2. The taxonomy

is important because it is a reader’s introduction to the text; its visual and spatial organization tell the reader what the text privileges and what it has to teach readers. It also introduces the reader

to the text by listing the book’s sections and chapters,the first 30 of which are grammar-related.

Those chapters are followed by chapters 31-45, which address writing, but this format raises questions for an observant reader of the text. Why does grammar deserve 30 chapters, or more

accurately, 33 chapters34, leaving only 11 chapters to writing? What impression does that create

on readers about what matters most in writing?

The order of the chapters suggests that grammar is more important than any larger issues of writing because grammar appears first in the text. As noted previously in this dissertation, this layout is important because the move from the smallest units of language to the larger elements of composition is, according to Crowley in Composition in the University, an identifying feature of CTR. She claims, “Current-traditional textbooks nearly always began with consideration of the smallest units of discourse: words and sentences. This suggests that their authors, and the teachers for whom they wrote, were anxious to correct two features of students’ discourse: usage and grammar” (Crowley, Composition in the University, 95). W. Ross Winterowd makes a

34 _{Though chapters 43-45 are included in the section on writing, they are part of a section for multilingual writers,}

related argument when he lists the components of CTR, one of which is that in CTR, “Instruction becomes bottom-up (from word to sentence to paragraph) rather than top-down (from purpose or intention to general plan to textual details” (89). Thus, given Crowley and Winterowd’s

arguments, CTR and CTR-based textbooks, address grammar before larger writing concerns because grammar is the preeminent concern for writing instructors, and by extension, students of writing. This is certainly the case for the HHH: grammar is located before writing, both

physically and pedagogically.

Given the book that Hodges created, there can be little doubt that grammar was his primary concern. In an effort to make grading more efficient, he created a system of numbers and letters that would make it easy to mark and identify grammatical errors in student papers. To be clear, those numbers and letters, in the first 30 chapters of the first edition, relate exclusively to grammar. That system, or taxonomy, found in the book is current-traditional because it moves from small units of discourse—the sentence, particularly the sentence fragment—to the larger components. As an example, chapter 1, “Sentence Essentials,” includes parts of speech, subjects and predicates, complements, basic sentence patterns, phrases, clauses, conjunctions and

conjunctive adverbs, sentence forms, and sentence functions. Chapter 1 opens by defining and exemplifying the parts of speech (2-10). The chapter’s last section defines and exemplifies sentence types: declarative, imperative, interrogative, and exclamative (41-42). Chapter 1, then, meets Crowley’s definition of as a current-traditional text because it moves from words to sentences. The consideration of words of sentences is considered before purpose, audience, and context, which also suggests a CTR-approach.

The move from what Crowley labels the smallest units of discourse can also be seen on the chapter level, as chapter one above illustrates, but it can also be seen in the move from chapter to

chapter. Whereas chapter 1 begins with parts of speech, chapter 30, the last grammar chapter, is titled “Variety,” and addresses topics such as how to revise sentence length and form. Thus, readers move from the smallest unit of discourse, the parts of speech, to larger units of discourse, sentences. Though this approach makes the text current-traditional, the book’s subsequent

chapters are focused on writing. Thus, it is important to ask whether or not those chapters have any impact on whether or not the book is CTR. I argue no because, as I said above, the text privileges grammar over writing by placing grammar first and by covering grammar in such detail.

Regardless of that format, the chapters on writing, which cover topics such as the rhetorical situation, drafting essays, revising essays, cannot be ignored. Therefore, it is important to

consider what the chapters on writing reveal about the theory of writing that underlies the book. On a positive note, the number of chapters on writing has increased since the 1st edition. That edition had 4 chapters on writing: the paragraph, planning the whole composition, the library & term paper, and letters. The current edition offers much more in the way of writing instruction. As figures 3 and 4 below illustrate, the writing chapters included in the 19th edition offer information such as understanding the rhetorical situation, determining the purpose of an audience, and using visual elements with a rhetorical purpose, all of which could be helpful to college-level writers.

However, there is no transition between what feels like two parts of the book. In other words, there is no bridge from the grammar chapters to the writing section of the book. Because of this, the writing chapters appear to be an addendum or an afterthought. In other words, they seem like a late and unnecessary addition. Or, if they are not an afterthought, at best, they confuse the purpose of the book. If it is a handbook, why include the chapters on writing? If it is a book about writing, why does it have so many detailed, specific chapters about grammar, and why is grammar listed first? To have grammar first suggests it is most important, which does not align with the aforementioned WPA Outcomes that privilege purpose, audience, and context. With all of this in mind, the question becomes, for what purpose is the book to be used? More importantly, who should use such a book?