The summaries are done by:
ENGL300-1: Rebecca Sisson
ENGL300-2: Mary Meadows
Due date for the summaries to be posted: Wednesday, August 24th, at the start of class.
Due date for the comments: Friday, August 26th, at the start of class.
_____________________________________________________
Mr. Ken Macrorie, in his book “Telling Writing”, explains how “Engfish” is defined. The play on words with a French accent struck a cord with the college professor. Engfish is now an urban term referring to the writing style students’ use nowadays. In so many words, it basically means that the students write only to fluff up their papers rather than give their paper a story to picture in the readers mind. I know I have been guilty of this on more than one occasion, but it was how I was taught to write.
Macrorie also makes the point that teachers are equally responsible for creating Engfish just as much as the students. Most teachers only grade on the punctuation and spelling rather than the content of the paper itself. If you are educated to write a certain way, it becomes ingrained in you to continue to write the way you know how, in order to get the best grade possible.
In the blog, a teacher is used as an example of someone who does not want Engfish. He wants his students to see, feel, hear, touch and even taste what they are writing, but receives Engfish instead. The teacher tries as much as he knows how to encourage writing in English, even making his students keep journals. However, even when writing in their journals, the students keep to themselves and do not divulge what they feel nor paint a picture in your head from their writings.
The blame does not all just go completely on the teachers and students either; schools and their textbooks are guilty as well. There was an example given out of a textbook beginning with an Engfish sentence for an introduction. It is now so common to see and read Engfish that students assume it is an acceptable practice used for every paper that they write for every class.
Macrorie pointed out the fact that we do not speak Engfish, just write it. If Engfish was spoken, conversations would be extremely boring, lengthy and probably need to have an interpreter on hand to explain what was said. “Wordy” would not even begin to define those conversations.
We all did not start out writing Engfish. A short passage is given by a third grader who does not use Engfish whatsoever. When you read it, you can picture every bit of his story in your mind with colors, scents, and sounds. It automatically grabs your attention and that is what the teacher is looking for, a creative story that will stick in your mind. The writer of this blog makes a clear distinction between the college student’s writing and the third grader’s, “…One is dead, the other is alive.” Unfortunately, accepted teaching methods and materials exposed us to Engfish in mass quantities throughout public school systems.
The child writes well because he writes what he thinks mainly because he has not been corrected otherwise. He does not hold anything back either and the story speaks straight to you. The college student’s papers are very drab and have no depth to them at all. Where did they lose it all?
by: Rebecca Sisson
_____________________________________________________
In the first chapter of Ken Macrorie’s book, Telling Writing, he explores the term Engfish.
Mr. Macrorie begins the article by telling a story about a girl who had an instructor who told her that she could not write. The girl retaliates against this instructor by writing a paragraph about him in another class in the style of James Joyce. When she shows the paragraph to the professor of that course he recognizes the word she uses, Engfish, as a word that defines the writing of schools.
Mr. Macrorie goes on to say that English teachers tend to correct students’ writing for spelling and punctuation, so when the students receive their corrected papers they believe that their instructors do not care about what they are writing only how they write. This is Engfish.
The next several paragraphs of the article are about a teacher trying to get his students to stop writing Engfish. He tries to give them topics that he believes will discourage them from writing Engfish, topics they will care about, however, this does not work. The students are too used to writing in the style of Engfish, so that even if they are writing about a topic they are close to they still produce this language. Mr. Macrorie describes in the article that students are trained in this language because of the response they receive from teachers.
In essence, Engfish is devoid of any true emotion or original thought. When students write Engfish they write what they believe their teachers want. They use fancy words to discuss a topic that does not require those words to be used, or they use simple language but still do not say anything at all. When students write Engfish they do not put any of themselves into their writing, which leads to the writing being devoid of any true emotion or passion, and relatively boring. Engfish is a language which only exists in the academic world.
To close the article Mr. Macrorie gives an example of writing from a third grader. The third grader does not write in Engfish. The third grader discusses “huhwayun” music in his or her paper. He or she connects “huhwayun” music to the way their grandma’s screams sound like when she is sick and connects their grandma being sick to a jar with a lid on. The words in a paper that is not written in Engfish, such as the example by the third grader, speak to one another. This makes the writing exciting, full of emotion and passion. The problem with Engfish is that the author does not write anything of consequence. The words do not speak to one another in an Engfish paper, and if they do happen to it is still dull. This is how Mr. Macrorie closes this article, by describing the difference between a college student’s writing and a third grader’s. He says that the difference is only that one is dead and one is alive. He mentions that we were once all third graders, but that by spending more and more time in the school system and being trained by teachers we go from writing in English to writing in Engfish. We begin to focus more on the words we use to say something instead of focusing on what we are actually saying. When we write in Engfish Mr. Macrorie believes that we are unable to discover truths that are relevant to us, but he believes that there is a way out of this Engfish cycle.
~ Mary Meadows ~
After reading the article entitled Engfish, it has become quite clear that students have fallen into the concept of presenting essays or "themes" as to professional and lacking personal testimony. Without the use of personal annotations in reading assignments, reading then becomes more of a drag for the reader. The use of "fancy" words is acceptable, as long as emotion is involved as well. The comparison between a elementary students ability to write with vivid detail versus a high school or college students ability is almost incomparable. Though the elder and more mature students have more to write about, their ability to be as descriptive as a elementary student is limited due to the simple fact that Engfish has been instilled in them since their middle school days and up.
ReplyDeleteEngfish is an article about the decline of emotional appeal in student writers as they advance in the educational experience. The reason for the decline is correlated to the expansion of their vocabulary and professional jargon. As students begin to enter higher levels of education they are expected to write in a more formal manner. The Engfish process begins at the middle school level and continues to increase as they move forward
ReplyDeleteI think that it depends on the style of the paper being written. If its for official, school, or business it should be in proper English. If it is a story about your life, then it should be allowed to be in engfish.It will give the paper more personal life then just fluff to fill up the paper.
ReplyDeleteEngfish is an article about the absence of emotion and live within student papers. At some point within every child's education their papers change. The papers become less emotional and more dull. If you are speaking about your life, it should be filled with life. It should allow the reader to jump right in and feel what they read. Descriptions that bring the words to life rather than dull words that do not bring forth livelihood to the story.
ReplyDeleteI think many students lack creativity within their papers because teachers are told to teach the test rather then teach what they want. They are told to teach by the book, when the textbook is written in Engfish. I think it is important to have life within papers to make the experience enjoyable for the reader and the writer as well.
This article makes a major point in how students are writing now. A lot times they do just write what they think the teacher/professor wants them to write, instead of just writing how they truly write. Most of the time in a high school English class students are taught the rules and to not break them, which is great when it comes to grammar, but most of the time it isn't grammar that is being taught. This article does bring up a good pont of how little kids can write so honestly and paint a brilliant picture of comparison, but adults and college students tend to produce boring by the books writing. A lot of this does have to do with how we are taught, if only more teachers could provide students with room to learn by writing what they want.
ReplyDeleteWhen I first read the title of this blog I had no idea what Engfish was. However, after reading the summary it makes sense. It seems that when we were in grade school we were able to express ourselves more freely because we didn't know anything else. As we grow up though, we sometimes tend to write more than needed just to fill up space and make our papers longer. Somewhere along the road in our education we became more restricted with our writing. I think we are afraid of putting too much emotion into a paper because it might become fluff and won't be as professional. I will definitely be keeping Engfish is mind the next time I write a paper.
ReplyDeleteI was so confused after looking at the title of this article. What is Engfish? Then I realized that it was how most students write. The article made the point that all college students were once third graders, but as we advance in school we are told that writing like a third grader does isn't good writing. I know for a fact that I write differently in homework or a paper then I would write to one of my friends, but that is how we are conditioned. After so many teachers telling you that your writing needs to be more professional, we all start and continue writing in Engfish. I guess in order to break that habit I need to pay attention to my writing, but I have a feeling that my academic writing won't change.
ReplyDeleteI have neither heard of nor read anything about Engfish until I read the blog; little did I know I commit Engfish all the time. I believe this article makes a valid point in how students write today, as I have experienced it first-hand. When I write for my English classes, I am always careful. I watch what I say, never get too personal, and add additional descriptive words to make my writing sound better. To me, this guarantees that I will not stick out from the rest of the class, and the teacher would read what he/she wanted. Previously, in my English 290 class we had ten minutes of non-stop, free writing. This exercise was supposed to help our voice’s emerge and develop in our writing. Reading this article helped me recognize the importance of expressing my inner voice instead of writing to impress the teacher.
ReplyDeleteWhen I first saw the title of the article I was confused at what it could be about. After I began reading farther though, I realized that I myself am guilty of using Engfish in most of my college level classes. We are all taught growing up to write in a style that the teacher would appreciate. However, when I started writing papers in college the writing style was mainly "Engfish." When the article talked about how a third grader wrote better than most college level students I agreed completely. I took a Philosophy class freshman year and my professor made a point of not making a length requirement because he believed that by eliminating length his students wouldn't feel forced to add extra "fluff" or how Mr. Macrorie would describe it as Engfish. I believe that is important to teach students at a young age to write for quality rather than quantity. Most of the time when students aren't given requirments on how long they have to make a paper they write in a way that is much more simplistic and to the point. After reading this article I have changed the way that I read and write papers. I will strive to write with meaning rather than writing to impress my audience.
ReplyDeleteThe type of writing being described in Engfish is what high school students are taught to write for the ACT exam. They are taught the mechanics of writing and that is it. What it is asking us to do is realize the mistake we are making. If the writing is such as this, without emotion and dull, then no one wants to read it or talk about it. Without actual feeling or experience nothing can be learned from reading it.
ReplyDeleteI remember reading Engfish, but it's always good to return to it. It's definitely hard to be a student who is writing in a class, because in essence, you are always writing 'for' the professor to a certain extent. Throw in some past experiences (some of them traumatic) wherein a (bad) teacher has punished the writer due to disagreeing with the point that was argued in the paper, and things become messier for the writer. Writing can be a very complicated process--to whom are you writing? What is appropriate for the audience? Writers may initially put on airs to please their invisible audiences or they might not have an audience in mind at all--which makes the paper seem unfocused or unprofessional in certain circumstances. What's lacking is an authentic and original voice--the voice that children have when writing papers. I think this is a really fascinating insight--and brings up questions as to how teachers should teach writing.
ReplyDeleteThe main thing I got out of reading "Engfish," was that students are taught throughout school a procedure for writing. We are taught to go guidelines for professional writing, but that kind of writing is dull and emotionless.
ReplyDelete“Engfish” is about Ken Macrorie’s book Telling Words. Telling Words describes how students write essays to poof up papers rather than to give the readers an image. Instructors grade the students on punctuation and spelling rather than the content of the paper. Teachers find it hard to get students to write more expressively in their journal assignments. Students are taught by school textbooks and teachers to focus more on punctuation than spelling. “Engfish” is more common in writing than in conversation. The article expressed how there is more emphasis in writing on grammar than the actual content of the paper.
ReplyDelete"Engfish" talks about how students tend to lose the use of emotions in their academic writing. This is due to the fact that their teachers mostly grade their papers based on their grammar and punctuation. Since there is more emphasis on grammar in students writing rather than expressive writing, students tend to create boring works to make their teachers happy. If teachers could combine a way of grading with proper grammar and added emotional interest, then there could be a way out of this "Engfish" writing style.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading these posts about "Engfish" I began to feel guilty. I have been taught to write these colorful papers adding fluffy words my entire life. The concept of student writing engfish is so true and its happening everywhere. Growing up, I never had a teacher grades me on my content and emotion of my paper but rather just the grammar and punctuation. Granted, punctuation and grammar are very important in a paper but whats really missing in the meat and potatoes. A good written paper needs emotion and feeling and it needs to really reach out and grab whoever is reading it. Teachers today need to change engfish by connecting punctuation and grammar with emotional writing and feeling in papers.
ReplyDeleteUpon reading "Engfish", it has become clear to me that I too write in the manner frowned upon in this piece. But why is it that students feel the need to embellish in their writing? I can recall numerous English teachers that I have had throughout the years who seem to encourage this impersonal writing style, yet "Engfish" explains that this particular style is boring and repulsive to teachers. It seems to me that these teachers need to be clearer in their expectations of students' writing.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading "Engfish," it is clear that teachers should allow their students to express themselves through their writing with discipline, rather than controlling what it is they can write. For instance, instead of a teacher having a student write a 10 page paper just to fill up space, he or she should have the student write a 3-5 page paper so that it can prove what the student actually knows. Writing is a way for people of all ages to express themselves. With a combination of discipline and pathos, an outstanding writer. For example, J.K. Rowling is a great writer because not only does she have sophistication in her writing, but she is able to have an emotional appeal as well. In conclusion, teachers need to be able to know how students interchange their thoughts in both speaking and writing to ensure that their students are reaching their highest level of understanding the material.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading "Engfish" it explained why students lose there creativity for writing. Teachers discipline students to be so structured their creativity flows out of the mind. The students focus so much on the structure of writing, they forget to put in the scene,and create a picture of their story, over time they lose their creativity. I believe Macrorie is trying to make a point by keeping the creativity and focus the structure around the creativity.
ReplyDeleteAs a photojournalism major, I understand that the importance of having a strong photo is as significant as having a strong story. Journalists need to be able to tell a story within a given amount of space. To achieve this, they must convey their ideas concisely. "Engfish" is saying that students should be able to express themselves through their writing. However, journalists are taught to write in a style that reports news without adding their personal opinions into the story. Unless you are a columnist, writing news is about stating facts. It is the key principle of journalism. For people in other professions, this article would seem to match their own ideas about how they write. As a journalist, this article is contrary to what we are taught about writing.
ReplyDelete"Engfish" is an article depicting the impersonal writing style of many students in their attempts to please their teachers.
ReplyDeleteLast year I helped with a friend of mine with an art class at a local school. We took students from grades fourth through ninth. We would place a mirror, paper, and markers in front of them and inform them that the assignment was to draw what their face the way they saw it. Right away, the fourth graders would ink their faces green with wild purple hair, not caring about accuracy. That was simply what they wanted to see. In comparison, our ninth graders were so precise and focused on creating perfect lines to match the ones they saw in the mirror. Why this reminds me of Engfish, is that sickening desire for students to ignore their own expression and write Engfish words to please their teachers. Students shouldn't paint their papers with words so impersonal and meaningless that they are unrecognizable. What you write should be a mirror to who you are.
The clear issue at hand with this article is the correct way to write; however, there really is no certain way one should do so. The beauty of writing and the study of literature is, like many things in life, all about perspective. I believe it is ridiculous to tell someone how to write their own work. Controlling the author of something completely takes away the entire essence of it. The same goes for reading a work. In that case, it is what one takes from the reading that he or she connected with just as a work of writing is dependent on the author, what he or she puts into it, and the style in which he or she does so.
ReplyDelete"Engfish" is about how most students are trained to write the "text book" way, but are hindered from writing with their own unique style and still be able to present a correct paper. I myself can relate to what the student was going through. You want to write a really interesting paper, but by the time you follow the rules of how a proper paper is suppose to be done, you lose your own style and voice. It's all hidden behind big word and phrases that the average person would have to google to find out what your even talking about.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I have never heard the term "Engfish", it is something with which I am very familiar. My former teacher referred to it as "fluff" and tried his best to discourage me from using it. Even though I know better, in the past I have used it to turn a two page paper into a four page paper. As a student, you learn quickly which teacher looks for creativity and which teacher looks for "proper mechanics". Hopefully. I can refrain from the use of "Engfish" in the future.
ReplyDeleteWell I have never heard of the term engfish before, but i can say that this article is interesting though. This is very important for me because as a journalism major i must make sure i'm very detailed and know how to tell an story the correct way. Not just by knowing how to use correct grammar and punctuation but story telling is as important. Engfish would help me out a lot.
ReplyDeleteThe essay Engfish is applicable to almost every student who has ever written a paper. Students are often given assignments that have no application to any true life experience. Also teachers tend to love giving students assignments with limited word requirements rather then limited content requirements. The author best describes students work when he explains how most students are most concerned with grammar. When this is the standard for student work the "Engfish" will continue to be a result.
ReplyDeleteThe Engfish story relates to some of my experiences in an academic environment. It has been my experience that teachers expect you to write without using “Fluff” but it’s the engfish that gives papers originality and keep them from being boring. Why not jazz it up? Standard English can be a bit boring at times. Without Engfish professors would commandeer papers from different students with the same sentences. It’s use in the academic environment is debatable but I like it if that counts for anything.:)
ReplyDeleteThe first time I read this article I found the "Engfish" examples confusing, I had to think it over and came to the realization that of course they are confusing...It's Engfish! It is meant to impress not explain. It paints no picture in a persons mind. We are all guilty of writing "Engfish" at one time or another. Somewhere along the way to college we were misguided by redundant, boring textbooks and the ability to simply click our mouse to interchange everyday language with complicated words. I loved the reference in this article to the third-grader who had spirit in her writing. If this article has inspired me to do one thing it is to embrace my inner third-grader and write with heart.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, "Engfish" is what keeps the originality in student's writing. We see it everywhere, not just academically, but in music, magazines, newspapers, EVERYWHERE. Even though it is best academically to keep writing as concise as possible, especially with the students in this class being English and Journalism majors,students feel like that is what professors are looking for. To make our writing sound as intelligent as possible.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this summary I believe that this commonly happens to students. Personally, i spend much of my time getting straight to the point with my essays. However, I go back and create "fillers" to complete my product. I am a visual person so I like to give as much detaiil as possible. Some students are effected with Engfish because some teachers reccommend student get straight to the point rather than 'lolliegag' around the main point which may sometimes cause the writer to lose focus. I try to stay away from 'Engfish' as much as possible. As a writer, to me, the more discription the better a reader can adapt to the story.
ReplyDeleteAfter I reading the article "Engfish" I was a bit confused.I really didn't know what to think. I think Engfish is incorrect use of the English language. The article is saying that there are many ways to use Engfish. I kind of see Engfish as people writing the way they talk, at least that is how the article made it sound to me. The many ways to use "Engfish" makes it difficult for students because they will never know what is correct and many students use "Engfish" without knowing they are.
ReplyDeleteThe article "Engfish" describes the way in which people speak. It states that as students progress through school they are taught to not write the way they speak but to write in proper English. Personally, I agree with the idea that students should write more Engfish than English. Most papers end up being mostly fluff and "fillers" because students are trying to write correctly instead of honestly. Although some students take Engfish too far and their writing becomes illegible, most would benefit from a little more Engfish.
ReplyDeleteAs I read the article "Engfish", I realized that all throughout high school I have witnessed this style of writing in my peers work, and even in my own. I did not even know that there was a term for fluffing up your papers. I believe that this can happen for a number of reasons. I think the main one is for papers having a page requirement. Although it is necessary so students do not write half of a page, but I think a lot of my papers can be said in seven pages, but I have to stretch them into ten pages to please the teacher. That is when Engfish comes into play.
ReplyDelete"Engfish"is a term coined to describe a trend in writing with current students that is dangerous to good writing. The article states several times that students are unable to "paint a picture" in the reader's mind. Any avid reader can tell you that their favorite authors are those who are able to execute that very task. Students are only doing what they are being taught though, to be correct. Some teachers, as seen in the above article, are fighting back at "Engfish", but many or their efforts are in vain.
ReplyDeleteThis article opened my eyes completely. After reading this article I realized that I have been writing in Engfish since I was in High school. In ways I feel that it is good for a person to write in Engfish because it makes students aware of the various and more sophisticated way to say a sentence. On the other hand, just as the article says, it takes away from the feeling the writer receives. I believe that there can be an equal balance of both. I do not believe we should eliminate Engfish from our language but we also do not need to continue to use simple English when we have the ability not to.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis article helped me to realize that everyone has a different style of writing and it also helped me to define mine. As a journalism major it can be hard at times because you have to change your style of writing to go with the piece you are writing.
ReplyDeleteBefore I read this article I thought that this was just going to be another article stating how students ability to write has been in decline recently. Though It did talk about how students righting ability may not be great it points the finger of blame more towards schools, teachers, and text. When students are given examples of writing it is normally a long wordy example in turn the student believes that this is what the teacher wants, because of this the student will just try to wright a bunch of stuff and that may not be a great work then.
ReplyDeleteBy Brittney Hosey
ReplyDeleteThe idea of Engfish is an extremely complicated one. We have been taught since the beginning of our writing careers that deadlines and word counts are far more important than stories and mental pictures. Teachers have always stressed to us that to make these page markers causing students to add filler information that has little or a far fetched connection to their original topic. Making us believe that we are being graded far more on the number of pages rather than their content.
After reading the article and able to finally post due to mishaps with my email,This article makes a valid point on how students are writing today. Majority of the time they only write what they think may be right instead of voicing their opinion and backing it up with facts.Most high school English teachers confines the students ability to freely write. I remember one time my English teacher told me write about anything I wanted, but I couldn't. I was so use to being told what to write and how to write i lost the ability to write for myself. This article does a good job on showing that as children we are able to write and draw about anything, but getting older being "taught" has hinder our real freedom on being able to write.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article it made me realize how many different ways of writing there are. Because there are so many ways, everyone has a different way of writing. This makes it hard for teachers to teach their students English and how to write because it might not be the right type of writing style for that student. Teachers should realize the different ways students chose to write and incorporate it when teaching writing and English to their students so that everyone can understand.
ReplyDeleteI am guilty of Engfish. It is interesting to note how widespread the concept actually is. I do it self contiously a majority of the time. When I go back to proofread, I often notice that I put words that are unnecessary. For example, the word that in the last sentence.
ReplyDelete