I would humbly like to point out that Gurmukhi is the name of the script, the painti (35 letters, actually 41) which is used to write the language (punjabi). So the term Gurmukhi vyakarn should actually be Punjabi vyakarn. Traditional punjabi vyakarn is similar to Hindi vyakarn. Most of earlier punjabi vyakarn were written by scholars who were also well versed in sanskrit vyakarn for example Punjabi Vyakarn by Prof Duni Chand of Panjab University.
The modern punjabi grammers are highly influenced by modern linguistics. Some very brilliant works have been done by Punjabi university as well as Punjab University professors. I loved a book (unfortunately I do not have a copy) "Punjabi Vyakarn- Shreniyaan te Ikaayiaan" by Prof Jagjit Singh. But punjabi linguistics is much more explored by stalwarts from Punjabi university patiala. The publication bureau has published a 3 volume Punjabi grammar in soft binding, which is prescribed at Bachelors level.
Grammar may be understood to be a set of rules which have been
found to be used in a language in its various forms, spoken and written. A Grammar comes into existence long time after language has established itself in a cultural group. Study of grammar is NOT a requirement for language usage by the native speaker. He uses the language fluently without any conscious study or usage of grammar rules, a fact which is evident by even a cursory social analysis. But study of grammar in schools and with young children serves some important purposes such as in-depth understanding of the structure and function of sentences and how these can be understood to achieve greater control over expression and formations of language. But the same thing can be achieved without grammar study too. For example writers, poets, historians and lawyers are known for best use of language but only first two are strongly connected with direct language learning, whereas as the latter two pick up the skills indirectly due to their vast exposure.
Therefore whether or not to teach grammar to school children is an old debate in linguistic circles.
Now Gurbani Vyakarn is a different case. It is a
subset of Punjabi Grammar. Why a subset, one may ask, why not a separate set? Well I consider it as a subset because it does not create different sentence structures, word categories or grammatical units. The structures and categories of Gurbani grammar are not new or separate from Punjabi grammar. It deals with a particular situation- the written aspect of Gurbani and mostly focusses on the spelling aspect. A full fledged grammar lays bare the structure and formation of a full language used a cultural group for everyday communication. This is not the case with gurbani grammar. Gurbani grammar explores the spellings of written Gurbani and tries to find out the categories of the words used and their inter-relationship with other words and thence find out the meaning of the sentence. So the paradigm of gleaning the meaning out of a utterance is different than traditional grammar.
Therefore as far as teaching the school children is concerned it should noted as to what we are trying to teach. If we are trying to teach Punjabi language to the chidren we should be teaching the traditional Panjabi grammar. This will teach the
language. Well if the children are not native speakers of the language then definitely it will help them
learn the language. But in case of native speakers it will serve a different function, as I mentioned above.
If our objective is to teach Gurbani to the kids. then we should teach the simple meaning of the lines first and then supplement it Gurbani vyakarn and show how we can find a grammatical basis of the meaning we are subscribing to.
The two objectives are different so please be very clear and careful.
ਸਤਿਗੁਰਬਚਨਕਮਾਵਣੇਸਚਾਏਹੁਵੀਚਾਰੁ॥