After taking this course, I would very much agree with this statement. Communication is such a difficult thing in itself, that we need the safety of grammar to fall back on. There is so much to learn about grammar, more than any one person could ever understand; the pursuit of this knowledge can only make you better. Taking apart the way we speak, the way that we communicate, has taught me to understand language better than I ever have before. There is so much nuance, and tiny, nit-picky things that go into creating a legible sentence, and this course has taught me to pay attention to language, not to just consume and produce it unthinkingly. I love the beauty, and dependability of proper sentence structure, you know where the verb will fall, where the clause will end, and I have found grammar to be a very precise and soothing exercise.

Woolf, in juxtaposition to Hemingway, writes in long, winding clauses, connected by commas. Hemingway, on the other hand, writes in shorter, choppier sentences, and his writing feels less of a stream of consciousness, and more matter-of-fact. Hemingway and Woolf both write in a very passive form, Woolf with the subjects and main verbs, scattered throughout her sentences. The main difference between these two excerpts in the amount of clauses in each sentence, Hemingway opts for far less per sentence than Woolf. Hemingway's narrator seems much more mature with his sentence structure, if not somewhat blunt. Woolf's sentence structure suggests youthful breathlessness, a pouring forth, and stumbling over of unconnected clauses and ideas.

As many other have pointed out, right from the beginning this song is filled with the imperative clause. This list of commands causes a sense of eeriness, or discomfort in the listener. Mirrorball and Enter Sandman both tell stories, albeit rather different stories, and each song employs different tactics to fit the tone of their stories. Mirrorball is written as more of a first-person narrative, whereas Enter Sandman is almost like a lullaby to the listener, or a warning. Mirrorball is much less dense, lighter, a perfect example of pop music. Enter Sandman and Mirrorball both fit their respective genres, and the grammatical choices made in the songs are proof of it.

Levertov, in comparison to Wordsworth, uses commas to dissect each different idea here; Wordsworth, on the other hand, is all about the semicolon. Wordsworth, of course, is the older poet, and this is obvious through his stylized grammatical choices. Levertov's grammatical choices are also extremely stylized, and much more modern. Her ideas are more spread out, and pulled apart. This poem is one long sentence, one long idea, with only one period in it. Wordsworth's poem is similar in that aspect, his seems to be just one grammatical sentence, and yet his poem contains multiple pieces, different ideas, which the semicolon brings together.

In my experience, the defense of most people who argue for the continuation of "he" and "she" pronouns is convention, like stated here. But, I have found that they really don't care about convention as much as they care about forcing people into boxes, and then care when people don't fit these boxes. A big problem with the whole "I identify as..." is that people hear the term "identify" and feel that these people are choosing to identify as something other than a "she" or a "he", when, really, that's just who they are. Language is a way for us to communicate parts of ourselves to others, to be known, and now is a better time than ever to explore the ways in which language fails us in terms of gender identity, especially when that gender identity falls outside our scope of language. I am a huge supporter of whatever the hell people want to call themselves. One, I am so happy that they feel comfortable enough to defy societal norms, and two it's really nobody's business except theirs.

This whole case to me was rather entertaining, and it entertained me even more to think of farmers and truck drivers discussing the nuances of the Oxford Comma. I am in agreement with the ruling, as the legislature is unclear, and, in this form, does not make it obvious if it exempts the three categories, or packing for the shipments. The Oxford Comma would fix this issue easily, and the fact that they rewrote the legislature to include semicolons instead, is silly, in my opinion. One comma, and this lawsuit would be null. One comma, and the dairy might have kept the five million dollars.

I find myself agreeing with the Italian humanists, and this system of freedom found in their writings. As a writer, and a reader, I believe that, while grammatical rules are necessary, they are also meant to be broken to encourage the most honest and raw works. Obviously, such rules have their place, in legalise or lab reports, but to hold every genre to this set of scrutiny dilutes the works. While grammatical rules create unity, they also, inherently, exclude and discredit “improper” forms of English. One example of this I find relevant, is the issue of teachers correcting Black students for writing using AAVE, instead of “proper” English. The greatest thing about literature and writing is the diversity in it, the chance for every individual to use their unique voice in their works. Each writer must find their own voice, and make their own creative choices, and this freedom only enriches the literary environment.