Reconsidering Some Prescriptive Rules of Grammar and Composition

The author proposes that writing and editing decisions should be based not only on prescriptive grammar but also on "Organic" grammar ( the grammar "hard wired" in our brains), research in cognitive psychology and human factors, research in other relevant disciplines and reflection. I believe that grammar mavens apply logic to language use. I believe that the capacity for language is hard wired and not merely a cultural artifact. For instance, since my mother has always said 'warsh rag' instead of 'wash rag' i find myself always repeating it the way that she spoke it.  I strongly agree with the fact that we organize an organic grammar as a child. For instance, my Spanish teacher in high school decided that she was going to introduce her newborn baby to both languages, Spanish & English. It is significantly easier for a child to learn languages at their critical period of language acquisition. I never really considered violations of organic grammar, such as when the reader becomes aware that something did not get processed properly.
As stupid as it sounds, I never considered the different problems between languages until this article.  For example, subject/verb agreement. The article uses the example of the word data. "The Latin word data is the past, plural, passive participle of the verb dare which means to give. Therefore, the literal translation of data is "things having been given," and every editor knows that plural nouns such as data take plural verbs such as are"(268). I could not imagine learning English as my secondary language for the reason of subject/verb agreement. Everything seems so confusing, and unless you work in the profession, it is hard to write and speak accurately all the time. It seems like we have the most confusing language, because words are not meant literally like they are in other languages. For accurate English skills, it requires more than following the traditional rules of English composition. Although this article had very interesting points that I had not considered before reading, it was a rather boring article. It just didn't seem to catch my attention or prompt me that it was actually worth reading. It was probably my least favorite article that we have read this year.