So you wanna be a writer, but you don't know grammar for shoot.

People will say it's been done and they will give examples. I'm sure these examples are few and far between though. I think you need everything in your power. A firm grasp of grammar is very important. I'm going to say NO.

I think the answer is obviously NO.

Gimme a break. The whole purpose of grammar is to make writing understandable between a wide range of people. It's a common set of rules so that people can communicate and understand each other better.

If your writing isn't even understandable grammatically or if a person is too lazy or inept to learn the rules of grammar, then they have no business writing with the intention of others reading it.

As far as I'm concerned, a person who refuses to learn grammar and insists on calling themselves a writer is just indulging in narcissistic fantasy.

I have been asked to read manuscripts in which a writer, who claimed to be a voracious reader of fiction, failed to paragraph dialogue and everything else throughout, and I refused. Too many "clinkers", to use a musical analogy also cause me to stop reading published material.

Then there is FINNEGAN'S WAKE. Also unreadable imo although I enjoyed ULYSSES twice, first time with the help of the KEY, as the book of notes was titled.

Grammar is the foundation. Without a sound foundation, the house falls.

I like cliches, because they're often cliches for a reason.

I agree that someone who has a tin ear, and eye, for language has little potential as a writer. To me, poor grammar and spelling indicate indifference to the very tools of the craft, or laziness, or superficial rebellion, or all three.

Broad and attentive reading should enable a person to write proficiently in his or her own language. Someone who cannot read well enough to pick up the basics is a bad candidate for writing. Conversely, a good candidate will pick up not only the basics of grammar but some idea of style and narrative structure.

As for what posts portend, I can't take seriously those who don't care enough about writing to put on their best "face" when communicating with fellow writers.

Why would someone who doesn't know the basics of grammar want to be a writer? Part of why I write is because I love language and all the wonderful images I can create. If I were only a storyteller instead of a writer, I'd find a way to tell my stories without writing them. There are open-mic venues for storytellers who prefer to do it live, perhaps because they don't like the solitary act of writing or because they don't have the skills to write.

It's like King said in On Writing, grammar is a tool in the writer's toolbox. Without it, you're a carpentar without a hammer. Damn useless.

Two assumptions inherent in this though.

1) People who are lazy/prone to typos on a forum will be similarly lazy in their manuscripts. Possible, but unproven. It is probably just a register issue, in some cases at least.

2) Language/spelling problems = lack of love for language. To which I note that Diana Wynne Jones was told she couldn't be a writer because she was dyslexic. Doesn't necessarily follow.

ETA: Of course, this falls under extraordinary circumstances, which Birol notes.

Now me, I'd hesitate to present myself badly on a public, searchable forum, given that I want to be a professional writer. So I stick to fairly high-register here in general. This is my position, and doesn't stop other people from deciding differently -- and bad grammar is far from the only way that happens.

Phaeal said:

I agree that someone who has a tin ear, and eye, for language has little potential as a writer. To me, poor grammar and spelling indicate indifference to the very tools of the craft, or laziness, or superficial rebellion, or all three.

Click to expand...

I don't think this it always true.
I used to think you had to have native talent to succeed, but people with quite poor language skills can improve enormously if they try and know how to learn. Learning how to learn is after all pretty key in all areas of life and there is no reason why writing should be an exception.
In many ways it is more difficult to improve if you are naturally talented. Intuitive writers usually don't know why they do what they do, so don't know how to get better.

I'm pretty crap at spelling and punctuation. I didn't get taught grammar at school and I must have been mentally absent when we were taught punctuation. I write and read quickly and make a lot of mistakes and I never catch all of them on a reread, but I am perfectly serious about what I do. While I think what you say is quite reasonable i have to disagree, I don't consider myself, indifferent, lazy or rebellious just careless and rushed...
Oh, OK and a little bit lazy.

timewaster said:

I don't think this it always true.
I used to think you had to have native talent to succeed, but people with quite poor language skills can improve enormously if they try and know how to learn. Learning how to learn is after all pretty key in all areas of life and there is no reason why writing should be an exception.
In many ways it is more difficult to improve if you are naturally talented. Intuitive writers usually don't know why they do what they do, so don't know how to get better.

I'm pretty crap at spelling and punctuation. I didn't get taught grammar at school and I must have been mentally absent when we were taught punctuation. I write and read quickly and make a lot of mistakes and I never catch all of them on a reread, but I am perfectly serious about what I do. While I think what you say is quite reasonable i have to disagree, I don't consider myself, indifferent, lazy or rebellious just careless and rushed...
Oh, OK and a little bit lazy.

Click to expand...

I agree. Anyone can be a writer, (rephrase, is a writer) if they put their mind to it and learning is always a big part of that.

This 'intuitive writer' business is encroaching on the 'natural writer' argument, which is an entirely different discussion than whether or not someone can succeed as a writer without knowing basic language skills.

In most cases, you have to learn the rules before you can break 'em.

Of course, the world is filled with published authors that are self-taught (I'm one of 'em). You don't need an MFA. You don't need a degree in English. But you do need a basic grasp of how to tell a story in a way that can be readily consumed by a reader.

We're moving this thread to Roundtable.

Yes, I am speaking in the first person plural. Why do you ask?

With one exception, I would agree that a grasp of grammar is vital to a writer. But not to a storyteller. (These are related but not the same.)

Writing is the art of telling a story (or relaying information) via words on a page. To do that effectively, certain rules must be followed. That's where grammar comes in.

I see someone has already mentioned dyslexia. Having dyslexia does not mean not understanding grammar, it means mis-reading words.

The only point I'd quibble about is the 'age of ten' statement. My mother - who knew no English - emigrated here from Germany when she was 20. It took her years but her English was better than most American's. So it can be learned past age 10.

Grammar can obviously be learned at any age. It's not rocket science. All that's necessary is an elementary school level understanding of it.

If a writer doesn't learn that - at whatever age - they don't deserve to be called a writer.

BarbaraKE said:

With one exception, I would agree that a grasp of grammar is vital to a writer. But not to a storyteller. (These are related but not the same.)

Click to expand...

Agreed, and it seems to me, as a reasonable wordsmith, that the storytelling side is actually, probably, more important.

I see someone has already mentioned dyslexia. Having dyslexia does not mean not understanding grammar, it means mis-reading words.

Click to expand...

That was me, guilty as charged
I know. That's why I called it a "language issue" in general. I mentioned it 'cause it was an example I had to hand -- if she could overcome that, and people being negative at her, I think anyone who wants to can overcome grammatical issues.

And I think that's an important point.

While I do agree that anyone who will not work to figure out standard English grammar will have a very hard time selling stories, I think the OP has a number of assumptions built into the question.

The only point I'd quibble about is the 'age of ten' statement. My mother - who knew no English - emigrated here from Germany when she was 20. It took her years but her English was better than most American's. So it can be learned past age 10.

Click to expand...

And here's another important problem with inherent assumptions in the initial post, IMO. We do have non-native English speakers on the board, or people whose dialect of English is nonstandard -- who understand their dialect of the language perfectly well, but have chronic troubles with the standard form. These people aren't necessarily lazy or careless at all, but they may (in forum posts) say something that sounds wrong to those of us fortunate enough to speak the standard (prestige) dialect.

This isn't the same thing as having a tin ear for language at all. It isn't a major problem IMO, it's just another hassle that people can deal with.

All of which is irrelevant to people who think they don't need to write well to be writers -- I do agree that those people are hurting themselves

I think the distinction here is the difference between a storyteller and a writer- one can be a great storyteller and a terrible writer- I consider the first the meat and bones- the talent, if you will. The writing part is the mechanics and that can be learned- trying to teach someone how to tell a story a is a waste of time- You either have the talent or you don't.

I hope not, but do have you heard about these?

They are bestsellers in Japan.

When I begin basic instruction in my composition classes, I relay the concept of the importance of grammar in this way:

"Suppose you're invited to the party of the year; the old addage, everyone who's anyone will be there. You are given detailed directions as to how to reach the spot where the party is being held. You climb into your car and speed off, knowing that your social future depends on your timely arrival. Suddenly, you're forced to pull to the side of the highway. You realize that your directions include street names and landmarks that should serve to guide you on your journey, but the highway has none of these, just a series of roads and streets that intersect from all directions. You are lost, with no method of reaching your goal."

In literature of any kind, grammar and punctuation serves as the roadsigns, guiding the reader through the piece, telling him/her when to stop, when to pause, when to hear a scream or a whisper. Without the proper use of grammar and punctuation in any work, the audience is easily lost and therefore, unwilling to finish reading. Are you a writer if no one reads your work? Maybe. Are you a writer if no one CAN read your work? The answer to that question is an emphatic, "NO!"

In regards to the AW boards, I sometimes slack off, often moving so fast to answer a question or give a comment that I leave misspellings and failed punctuation behind. This is primarily due to excitement. I think that's probably true of most of us, but in writing, whether it be a novel, poem, or short story, there is no room for such mistakes, especially if it is your intent to one day bask in being published.

sheadakota said:

The writing part is the mechanics and that can be learned- trying to teach someone how to tell a story a is a waste of time- You either have the talent or you don't.

Click to expand...

I'm not convinced that's true. I doubt it's possible to teach people to have stories to tell, but many elements of storytelling are teachable. I think Uncle Jim does just that in his learn writing thread, for example.

But then, I don't see Talent as some mysterious thing you have or don't; I think what we call talent is a catch-all term that actually refers to a mixture of interest, skill, doggedness, experience with stories, and having something of interest to share.

It drives me up the wall when people say "Oh you're so talented" as though there's something magic about it besides reading a lot and writing a lot and paying attention a lot and struggling with the concepts for a long time.

Willowmound said:

What do you all think -- is it possible to do well as a writer if you don't even grasp the basics of grammar?

Click to expand...

Grammar can be learned. I really don't see that as an issue. Passion for writing and the ability to tell a story... I'd venture to say probably not, but then, anything is possible.

I'm not talking about knowing the difference between defining and non-defining clauses, or where to use the subjunctive. I'm talking about not grasping the most basic rules, intuitively.

If I wroted a novel and use the kinds of grammar I see here occasionally, could there be any hope for me? Ever?

Click to expand...

I'm going to jump out on a limb and say that the grammar you see here isn't necessarily reflective of what you might see in someone's MS. It certainly isn't reflective of what's in my own writing. I say this because I'm fluent in two languages - English, and Gamer. Sometimes they overlap, and some of the time I'm doing it on purpose, but then, sometimes I'm not. I often don't post in the correct grammatical format, because in my head I'm thinking something else. For instance, instead of saying "You are probably not going to like that" I might type "yer not gonna like that."

Now, granted, I do grasp the basics of grammer (or I'd like to think I do), so maybe I'm proving your point here. You can break the rules if you know them, etc.

However.

I do know someone who speaks just fine (grammatically) in real life, but in the game... <whistles>. I mean it's a nightmare trying to figure out what he's typing. You have to be able to translate a mass of typos and incoherent babble to understand what he just said. It's hardly English.

We all know that shoddy grammar will send your MS into the agent's bin quicksmart. And we can probably agree that basic grammar can be learned.

What I'm wondering is more along the lines of, if you don't even have the basics of language, intuitively, by -- I don't know, ten? -- can you possibly have what it takes to be a writer?

Click to expand...

That's the great thing about the human race. We can learn, right up until the day we die. If someone is serious about it they can go back to school and learn grammar basics. I'm more concerned about the passion / storytelling aspect. I mean you could have someone who has a perfect understanding of the English language and they could be a really shitty storyteller.

Not because being confused about grammar means you're stupid -- but because language is the tool of writing, and if you have any talent at all, wouldn't this be second nature to you, the one thing you never have to worry about?

I certainly think so. I'd be interested in hearing other peoples' views.

Click to expand...

I think I've mostly spelled out my opinion. I'll also say that Shweta has a point... if you're writing outside of your native language, it's going to be a lot harder to write and people will think you don't have a basic grasp on grammar, when that really isn't the case. If you can't write well in your native language, you can always learn. I don't buy that if you suck to start with you'll never be good. It's just not the 'maircan attitude!

Never say never, and all those other cliche things

timewaster said:

I used to think you had to have native talent to succeed, but people with quite poor language skills can improve enormously if they try and know how to learn.

Click to expand...

Natural talent for storytelling is a separate entity from having good language skills.

sheadakota said:

I think the distinction here is the difference between a storyteller and a writer- one can be a great storyteller and a terrible writer- I consider the first the meat and bones- the talent, if you will. The writing part is the mechanics and that can be learned- trying to teach someone how to tell a story a is a waste of time- You either have the talent or you don't.

Click to expand...

I agree with this. Anyone can LEARN how to write. Not everyone can learn to be a storyteller.

I think I'm a very skilled writer. I'm learning, however, that I'm not a very good storyteller. That really depresses me.

I would say, absolute --IF-- they were willing to learn. Like everything else you need the tools for writing. Grammar is one of them. You don't need them to start, but you do need them to finish IMO.

Not because being confused about grammar means you're stupid -- but because language is the tool of writing, and if you have any talent at all, wouldn't this be second nature to you, the one thing you never have to worry about?

Click to expand...

Boy don't we wish it was all easy and it was all second nature. Though I was lucky enough to grow up in a home where proper grammar was spoken so though I can't name the parts of grammar (I'm trying to learn them now) I have a feel for it.

Not everyone is so lucky. My school glazed over grammar, even my college courses so when people start talking about participles my head starts to spin. I was never taught those things more than a ten second run down and moving right along kind of deal.