ATEG Archives

May 1996

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:
Larry Beason <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 8 May 1996 09:56:31 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
I think that sentence diagramming has been unfairly criticized by
English teachers & researchers.  I reluctantly used it in a
course preparing students to teach English (Grammar for Teachers),
but I was pleasantly surprised at how well diagraming worked
as a visual representation of connections and purposes of the
indvidual parts of sentences.  I use Mark Lester's Grammar in
the Classroom, which is heavily based on conventional diagraming.
 
I would add, though, that the danger of focusing too much
on such a level of language is that students don't make connections
to meaning or to other grammatical issues.  At times, they
can diagram a sentence w/o understanding much about the whole
sentence structure or even the individual words.  In short,
diagraming is still just one tool with its own strengths &
shortcomings.  I'm sure you know that but I had to say it!
 
larry beason
Eastern Washington University

ATOM RSS1 RSS2