David,

It all seems obvious to me, too.  Unfortunately, the world is not with us on
this issue.  Some researchers have even come to the rediculous conclusion
that the normal human mind can't possibly learn this complicated stuff. We
know better, but that's not enough to convince the opposition.

So we have to come up with a simplified grammar and ways to teach it so it
doesn't take much time or effort.  I see such a simplification in a phrase
structure grammar loosely based upon Chomsky's kernel sentences with a few
elaborations and transformations.  Doing this, I've been able to reduce
necessary terms to about 60.  From this list, about 15 sentence constituents
have to be mastered.  It's a simple list, nearly all traditional terms,
starting with subject and predicate.

Your mention of verb conjugation is of interest to me because that is one
area that I simplify.  I'm not sure there is enough value in the complete
traditional conjugation to spend the big time that is necessary for learning
it.  The TG formula for the auxiliary and verb seems more practical and
matches the English language better than traditional analysis.  And it is
extremely simple.  No one could reasonably claim that it is unlearnable.

I also put a low priority on traditional parts of speech because the phrase
constituents (Noun Phrase, Verb Phrase, etc.) are, again, a more accurate
reflection of the syntax of the English language than are the traditional
parts of speech.  I do expect my college students to learn the eight parts
of speech and their traditional definitions; but, by the time they go
through the phrase structure constituents, the parts of speech are only
important as rather slippery names for lexical items.  They don't really
have a lot to do with syntax.

There is much thinking we can do to make sure that what we teach can be
learned efficiently.  In the meantime, make sure those upper division
students who still can't separate subjects from predicates recognize that
they should have learned to do so earlier.  I feel strongly that we must
hold the "well-educated" English speaker accountable for editing final
drafts of their written documents.  If it is important that we learn to
edit, there must be negative consequences for not doing so.  Although many
claim that they learned to edit without studying grammar formally, for many
persons, learning to edit entails overt mastery of the fundamentals of
systematic grammar.

Jeff Glauner
Park University