I find it hard to resist sentence diagramming (Reed Kellogg-style) when I am teaching grammar and wish I were more aware of its flaws.  The most obvious one is that it requires memorization of a number of symbols (lines, dotted lines, "platforms," diagonal lines, etc.) in addition to the memorization of the categories they represent.  I do not doubt that when it comes to describing the complexity of the language, RK sentence diagrams may occasionally prove to be crude instruments (are there any other kind, though?).    With that in mind, I wonder if the following two cases are representative of the flaws of sentence diagramming:
1) Make me smile.
2) Take me fishing.
It seems to me that in example number one, "me smile" could be a nominative clause that functions as a direct object.  If I were diagramming it, I would put "me" on a diagonal line in the subject position (which seems counterintuitive since “me” is objective case) and put the entire clause on a “platform” in the object position.  Is that what RK would do with this sentence?  What would Reed Kellogg do with the Star Trek command:  "Make it so"? 

I’m not sure what RK would do with example number two.

Thoughts?

Steve Benton
Assistant Professor
Department of English and Languages
East Central University




To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/