ATEG Archives

March 2004

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Edgar Schuster <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 7 Mar 2004 07:18:51 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (40 lines)
Like Martha, I first encountered R&K diagrams in the forties.  I learned them
in Catholic elementary school, where I was taught by nuns for eight years,
and I loved diagrams, not perhaps because they helped me visualize relationships
between words and phrases, but rather because they presented challenging
puzzles that I was good at solving.  They sure beat chanting the times tables,
flunking out of spelling bees, and memorizing the catechism, which are my other
most vivid elementary school memories.

I thank Martha for her interesting comments on diagramming.  Those concerned
with the history of R&K diagramming might like to compare her comments with
the following comments of textbook authors who used diagrams.

    "These diagrams are made as simple as possible to prevent the student
from becoming more interested in complicated lines than in grammatical
relationships."  John C. Hodges, Harbrace Handbook of English, 1941 (first edition).
    "Diagramming is included in the grammar chapters and used for illustrative
 purposes elsewhere because many teachers find it useful in making word
relationships clear.  The diagrams, however, are an accessory and not an integral
part of the method.  They may be ignored if the teacher desires."  John E.
Warriner, Warriner's Handbook of English, Book One, 1948 (first edition).
    "Sentence diagrams are presented only as visual aids for
students---visualizations of abstract grammatical relationships---requiring no drill."  This
last is from Book One of Basic Composition, by Philip Burnham (Scott, Foresman,
1949).  It did not have the phenomenal success of Hodges or Warriner, but it
did well in the private school market, and it was the first textbook I used as
a teacher, in 1959.

Ed Schuster

PS.  Some history buffs might also be interested in this comment, which I
found in the original Warriner Preface:  "The only valid reason for teaching
grammar at all is to enable students to apply it to specific usage problems" (p
v).

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/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2