Bit of Ivory

I’ve decided I must be channeling Teri.
First, I became unusually clumsy. Now, I’m getting stupid, unhelpful
comments on my writing.
Something very strange is going on here.
So just as Teri had to rant about her writing woes, so must I.
My Agronomy and Horticulture 100 TA has absolutely no idea what she’s
talking about.
I got an essay back that I wrote at the end of September. It had my
coolest title ever: “Biotech Crops: Boon or Bane?” The TA went on and
on before we turned in our papers about the necessity of writing well,
on a college level, with no glaring grammar mistakes, etc. Now, I’m a
senior majoring in English. I graduate in April. This is a 100-level biology
course. I can write 2-2 1/2 page papers in my sleep. So, I
figured, no sweat.
My paper has so many red marks on it, you almost can’t tell that it was
once white.
Supposedly, she “graded easy,” because it was our first paper,
and the teacher “made her” be lenient. So while my paper is almost
completely red, I got full credit. What worries me is that she soon
will be taking points off for my “mistakes.” Which, of course
aren’t mistakes at all. Example:
Original sentence: “Scientists and salesmen promise higher
yields, reduced dependence on herbicides and pesticides, and increased
profits; while environmentalists and organic farmers complain of
contamination, reduced profits and the loss of biological diversity.”
Her corrections: “Scientists and salesmen promise higher yields,
reduced dependence on herbicides and pesticides, and increased profits.
Environmentalists and organic farmers complain of contamination,
reduced profits and the loss of biological diversity.”
Excuse me? Ever heard of parallel structure? Seems to me that
it reads better my way. In fact, now that I look at it, if I were to go
back and revise this sentence, I would do it this way:
“Scientists and salesmen promise higher yields, reduced dependence on
chemical agents, and increased profits; while enviromentalists and
organic farmers complain of contamination, the loss the biological
diversity, and reduced profits.”
That makes it fully parallel. But really, what was wrong with the
semicolon? Do you have something against semicolons? Do they offend
you? I’ve always been taught that the correct use of semicolons was a
sign of polished writing. But then, what do I know? Apparently nothing.
My paper’s just full of stuff like that. The one that really irks me is
this:
Original Sentence: “There is also evidence that insects are
rapidly developing an immunity to the toxins in biotech foods, making
them unusable in the long term.”
She circled “them”, and wrote “the subject is insects.” Okay, explain
this to me. Even assuming that the subject of my sentence is “insects”,
which it’s not (it’s “there”, which makes this sentence existential;
but I won’t diagram it for you, even though I can), why does “them”
have to refer to the subject? Since when do all pronouns have to refer
back to the subject of the sentence? The antecedent of “them”
is “biotech foods,” and it’s entirely grammatical and proper to use it
thus. In fact, as the noun directly before the pronoun, “biotech foods”
is the logical antecedent.
I could understand all the corrections if my paper was horribly
ungrammatical, with spelling errors and incorrect citations. But my
grammar was flawless. My spelling impeccable. My
citations perfect.
So, in order to get a good grade on my next paper (which is due
Friday), I’m going to have to write badly.
This is going to be fun.