By By Kenny Ola
A good number of scholars and language pundits have given numerous and distinct definitions of what grammar implies based on their various interests in language studies. Some scholars view grammar from the perspective of adherence to prescriptive rules, and others see grammar from the angle of psychology. These diverse scholarly views on grammar not only enrich our knowledge about linguistics but also inform us about the value of critical thinking. It is not enough to consume, but one’s cognitive ability to come up with invaluable insights in whatever one reads makes one a productive consumer and prolific producer. Being one of the most prestigious languages in the world, the official and pedagogical functions of English language make its grammar inevitable to master by anyone who desires to be relevant in this modern age.
While it is not just misconstrued by many that grammar refers to high-sounding or grandiloquent words, grammar is as well not taken seriously by some creative writers who believe its rigorous mastery kills creativity and consequently erodes the artistic aesthetics inherent in any piece of writing. If actually the aim of writing is to carry out communicative acts, then this piece hopes to unearth the relevance of grammar and its sacred place in human communication.
It must be stated that grammar is to a language what a brake is to a vehicle. It is not just a body of rules; it is an essential phenomenon without which human language cannot function properly. Grammar embodies more than just conventional rules. It is a linguistic concept that allows for possible combinations of words in any language. Since words in human language are not strung together indiscriminately, their appropriate combinations owe so much to grammar that it determines whether they make or break communication.
It is noteworthy, at this juncture, that grammar is not, as wrongly presumed, a compendium of grandiloquent words and likewise its adequate mastery does not, in any way, result in the death of creativity. Grammar refers to a conventional set of rules that guides appropriate use of language. It is a linguistic phenomenon any writer is expected to immerse themselves in if they hope to communicate consummately.
Notwithstanding the advent of artificial intelligence which has been erroneously taken to replace human thinking thereby culminating with intellectual laziness, the sacred place of grammar in human communication is irreplaceable as its fastidious mastery fosters the efficacy of human communication therefore preparing one for a primary function of language which is the communicative function.
Writing, being a productive and literacy skill and one of the four essential skills of communication, requires precision to breed effective communication and what brings exquisite precision to writing is meticulous application of grammatical rules. What is in a piece of writing when its content lacks meaning, its paragraphs are devoid of unity and coherence never finds a place to thrive? Yes, ungrammaticality, sometimes, does not tamper with meaning. But, where lies the beauty of a piece of writing when every line is not twisted in accordance with the established rules of grammar? When every word does not occupy their accurate grammatical slots? And when every sentence is not wielded with pinpoint accuracy? Such a piece of writing is not a blend of elegance and styles. It is a mixture of grammatical pitfalls that renders communication meaningless and makes writing an act whose composition lacks sparing adherence not just to the conventional rules of grammar, but to the nuances that justify the purity of writing.
My initial explication of the grammatical relevance of writing is not to undermine other forms of human communication. It is to make explicit the onerous and exacting nature of writing as a form of human communication which demands thorough rumination and its effectiveness can be achieved only through strict submission to those rules that determine grammaticality. Of course, speaking, listening and reading are also paramount to human communication as they are useful channels employed by humans to discharge their communicative behaviour.
Unlike writing and reading whose lack of spontaneity calls for a careful exercise of grammatical rules, speaking and listening are communication skills that come spontaneously to humans, even though they can as well be sharpened through cautious reading and conscious practice. Their use is quite subconscious for they are inborn linguistic competence. Despite the existence of spontaneity in speaking and listening, using them without any recourse to the existing conventional rules of grammar not just brings about arbitrariness in communication. It makes communication look riotous and opens interlocutors to communicative perils which, as a consequence, impede the pleasure that is meant to add colour to communication.
Hence, adhering to the conventional rules of grammar not only breeds local and global intelligibility. It attests to the law-abiding nature of a writer, reinforces the servility of a speaker and corroborates the subservience of a reader and listener.
Avid readers who are patient enough to witness the end of this article should note the conclusion that while language is the means through which human communication is achieved, underplaying the role of grammar in human communication is like downplaying the importance of a brake to a moving vehicle. Adequate internalisation of grammar not just makes communication. Its poor mastery breaks the efficacy of human communication. Since knowing a language is knowing its grammar, language users and communication experts are, therefore, enjoined to take grammar seriously.
*Kenny Ola writes from the Department of English Language, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria.*
