| Author | |
Lisa R
Forum All-Star
Joined: May 29 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 789
|
| Posted: Dec 13 2007 at 10:41am | IP Logged
|
 |
|
What is your opinion on learning sentence diagramming? Is it really necessary to learn all those terms or is it more important to be able to write good sentences? I've always felt that the most important skill is being able to communicate clearly whether in writing or speech.
We are/were doing Winston Grammar and I'm just wondering if it's all necessary. I know punctuation and basic parts of speech are important but what about all the rest? Is this kind of stuff on the SAT's anyway?
Thanks!
__________________
God Bless!
Lisa, married to my best friend, Ray and loving my blessings Joshua (17)and Jacob(15), Hannah(7) and Rachel (5)!Holy Family Academy
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
hylabrook1
Forum Moderator
Joined: July 09 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5980
|
| Posted: Dec 13 2007 at 2:48pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Whether you need to learn diagramming is a matter of opinion, I'm sure. I tend to like to look at things analytically, so I would say it is important in understanding what you are reading and what you are writing. All a diagram really is is an analysis of a sentence. Sometimes when you are reading a sentence that gets convoluted, you can untangle it by diagramming it, at least partially. Then you see the realtionships among the words and can make sense of the whole thing. Also, when you are correcting writing errors, one way of pointing out the mistake is to have your student identify whether there are both nouns and verbs (is it a sentence?), if a particular noun is *doing* the verb (i.e., if it is the subject), is it receiving the action, etc . For me, being able to know whether particular pronouns are subjects or objects clarifies word choice, as in, "Sam and me went to the store" versus "He and I are eating dinner," that sort of thing. Also, when your student reaches the point of studying a foreign language, it is important to know grammar, as it is often used in the process.
So, I would say learning diagramming, while perhaps tedious, is a highly beneficial part of a child's education, although I'm sure you'll find others who think differently. 
Peace,
Nancy
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Lara Sauer
Forum All-Star
Joined: June 15 2007
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 679
|
| Posted: Dec 14 2007 at 6:19am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I'll chime in with a strong second on teaching your children sentence diagramming, for all the reasons listed above.
We have always approached diagramming as a game. Sentences are puzzles and we need to figure them out. My kids actually like diagramming!
Peace!
__________________
You can take the girl out of Wisconsin, but you can't take the Wisconsin out of the girl!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
ALmom
Forum All-Star
Joined: May 18 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3299
|
| Posted: Jan 03 2008 at 10:15pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Ok, for my 2 cents, here is our experience:
For our children who found that grammar came to them rather easily, diagramming was an easy add on which they learned to do with pleasure once we had basic grammar concepts in place. They were able to grasp this rather quickly in about a year, doing very complicated diagramms of Shakespeare lines, etc. They enjoyed it immensely and found that it solidified things very well for them. It was not a burden and provided benefit.
With my children who simply found grammar to be a nightmare of the unknown, diagramming was the only way they could even wrap their heads around grammatical concepts and begin to distinguish even nouns from verbs. It gave them a means of owning the subject and putting some sanity into it.
Now we use Winston grammar with these children who find grammar particularly difficult and they find it very, very helpful. For my gifted grammar children, we did a more traditional grammar for one year, no grammar for other years and ended formal grammar study with a very fun Diagramming Book (The Complete Book of Diagrams). I'd never diagrammed in my life and I found going through this book, putting the diagrams into prose - and then going back to our prose and diagramming it was rather fun. The particular things chosen for diagrammming were very inspiring and truely beautiful. We spent a week or two with The Elementary Book of Diagrams just to get the how to / conventions of diagramming down and then spent the year with the Complete Book of Diagrams.
So the summary from me is, yes, I think diagramming is worthwhile for everyone. However the time we spend on diagramming and grammar and how we approach this subject is different depending on the child. Hope this makes sense.
Grammar questions are on standardized tests but not diagramming itself.
Janet
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
folklaur
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2816
|
| Posted: Jan 03 2008 at 10:45pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
When I was little,  , we used Warriner's English in my Catholic elementary school. ( I think it is one of the programs Seton still uses.) I loved diagramming.
I can say, when I went to college, having never taken a foreign language course before, I did really, really well in Latin, and I think that was due to being able to dissect a sentence and "see it"....which I think was due to the diagramming.
I used the Mary Daly Diagramming book for my oldest dd too.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
teachingmyown
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5128
|
| Posted: Feb 04 2008 at 4:00pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Okay, so what age/grade do you use Mary Daly's books?
__________________
In Christ,
Molly
wife to Court & mom to ds '91, dd '96, ds '97, dds '99, '01, '03, '06, and dss '07 and 01/20/11
Remembering Today
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
ALmom
Forum All-Star
Joined: May 18 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3299
|
| Posted: Feb 04 2008 at 5:06pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Molly, for which Mary Daly book are you interested in knowing age levels?
I'm not sure the Elementary Diagramming Worktext was ever intended as a grammar text as much as a quickee guide to the conventions of diagramming for those of us poor, handicapped souls who were never taught such a useful skill. (I qualified for that and as a parent, it was a real blessing to have something that was so quick and easy. I could learn the conventions easily and then move quickly to help my children develop some skills and didn't have to bog through an advanced grammar text to figure things out). It is so simple that anyone who is reading reasonably well would be able to do it without help. I'm not sure it would be useful to teach grammar. (In desperation we did use it with a middle school child who just couldn't keep nouns and verbs straight and it was a simple way for him to independently learn how to diagram. However, Winston with a more informal diagramming approach, worked better for actually teaching him grammar. We then went from the informal to formal diagramming with Winston's sentences.
The Whole Book of Diagramming is designed for an older child -I'd guess around middle school or high school. They would have to have a basic grasp of general grammar and a good reading level.
Janet
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Lisa R
Forum All-Star
Joined: May 29 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 789
|
| Posted: Feb 04 2008 at 5:27pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
We've decided to stick with Winston Grammar. My boys are learning a lot from this book and the hands-on cue cards are so helpful. We also use Latina Christiana and there is some overlap which has been helpful for retention. 
__________________
God Bless!
Lisa, married to my best friend, Ray and loving my blessings Joshua (17)and Jacob(15), Hannah(7) and Rachel (5)!Holy Family Academy
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Ouiz
Forum Pro
Joined: July 10 2006
Location: South Carolina
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 109
|
| Posted: Feb 04 2008 at 11:21pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I was wondering if my son (who will be going into 5th grade) would be too young for this?
I remember diagramming sentences, but can't remember how old I was when I was taught it (of course, I also remember thinking it was useless, but now that I look back on it, I'm much more appreciative... isn't that how it usually works? )
__________________
Ouiz
Blessed to be married to the man of my dreams and mom to 8 wonderful children here on earth
B-17, G-16, G-14, B-13, B-11, G-9, G-7, B-4
Chez Ouiz
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Lisa R
Forum All-Star
Joined: May 29 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 789
|
| Posted: Feb 05 2008 at 4:20pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Ouiz,
Are you asking about Winton Grammar or Mary Daly's book?
__________________
God Bless!
Lisa, married to my best friend, Ray and loving my blessings Joshua (17)and Jacob(15), Hannah(7) and Rachel (5)!Holy Family Academy
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Ouiz
Forum Pro
Joined: July 10 2006
Location: South Carolina
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 109
|
| Posted: Feb 05 2008 at 8:29pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I was asking about diagramming in general. I haven't looked into either book (yet), since we are "in the home stretch" for finishing up this school year (and I didn't want to get tempted to buy more books!)
We use Intermediate Language Lessons for my oldest son, but I don't think they get into diagramming sentences (better look to make sure).
I just know that it proved helpful for me (looking back on it) to learn how to diagram sentences... just wondering when I should start?
__________________
Ouiz
Blessed to be married to the man of my dreams and mom to 8 wonderful children here on earth
B-17, G-16, G-14, B-13, B-11, G-9, G-7, B-4
Chez Ouiz
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Mary G
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5790
|
| Posted: Feb 05 2008 at 9:46pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
OK, I'll be the dissenter (yet again  ) and say I can't stand diagramming! I think it's artificial and ruins the loveliness of words. I think diagramming classic works like Shakespeare or Tolkein ruins the lovely flow.
That said, I GUESS  there is a need for showing older children this method -- I would NEVER start them diagramming before middle school (if that soon) but let them experience the lilting language and enjoy words for words' sake.
Please understand that this post is from a very un-analytical type person who majored in print-journalism and has always hated that "real school" rips apart literature under the guise of "understanding what the author meant". Real literature should speak to the reader and allow the reader to reap the meaning just by reading and NOT analysing.
Can you tell this is a pet peeve?
__________________
MaryG
3 boys (22, 12, 8)2 girls (20, 11)
my website that combines my schooling, hand-knits work, writing and everything else in one spot!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Lisa R
Forum All-Star
Joined: May 29 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 789
|
| Posted: Feb 05 2008 at 10:05pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I like all you said Mary G. and agree. We'll probably keep doing Winston Grammar just for the sake of saying we covered diagramming.
Ouiz, my boys are in 6th and 7th grade and I think it's just the right time for them. Not too early and not too late. We also use Lingua mater.
I'm planning on using Primary Language Lessons, Intermediate Language Lessons, and Lingua Mater with my girls when the time comes. I will have them do a "season" of Winston Grammar as well. I love how PLL, ILL and Lingua Mater flow and will keep that as my main Language Arts curriculum.
__________________
God Bless!
Lisa, married to my best friend, Ray and loving my blessings Joshua (17)and Jacob(15), Hannah(7) and Rachel (5)!Holy Family Academy
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
SallyT
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 08 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2489
|
| Posted: Feb 08 2008 at 11:57am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I had an interesting experience just the other day. I'm teaching English one day a week for our high-school co-op, which meets in a parish-church basement, with the blessings of two wonderful and supportive priests, one of whom is also our Latin teacher (and my 9th-grade daughter's new hero -- Fr. Victor ROCKS, she says). I was putzing around in my classroom during the Latin hour, getting ready for my class the next hour, when in comes the other priest -- whom I like and respect very much, I should say on the front end. He and Fr. Victor are both rigorously orthodox "older" priests (in their 60s) who have taken a lot of flak over the years for not being all touchy-feely-groovy like everyone else -- and they are very supportive of Catholic homeschoolers.
I should also say on the front end that I already knew that this particular priest has in his mind that "Catholic homeschooling" means replicating Catholic school circa 1948, and is often frustrated when homeschooling kids don't fit that imaginary mold in one way or another. So when he came in to chat, and said, "Now, purely for my own edification and for the glory of God, I would like to see what grammar curriculum these children have been using." (and I pretty much quote -- that's exactly how he talks), I was not all THAT unprepared for the tirade that followed, about how the kids (as revealed by their Latin struggles) didn't know parts of speech, or that verbs had conjugations in English, or what the parts of a sentence were, etc etc etc.
So I said something about intuitive learning-by-reading, which prompted another tirade about the "domination" of intuitive thinkers, which leaves the door wide open to fuzzy liberal thinking, etc etc etc.
This really does have to do with diagramming and grammar, I promise. The conversation went on for a long time (like my whole planning hour -- my lesson on Hebrew poetry was a little scattered), and consisted mostly of Father talking and me nodding in what I hoped was an understanding and not-moronic way. But the interesting part of it, which I've been thinking about ever since, was his argument that if you don't know how language is constructed, logically, then you can't think logically, can't reason, can't argue, as in constructing a watertight argument with logical and irrefutable points. In other words, he was arguing for teaching grammar as a way of teaching thinking.
And you know, I'm flaky as they come -- I spent umpteen years in a creative-writing graduate program, for heaven's sake! I'm all arty and intuitive and can't think structurally to save my life . . . but I think Father really had a point. I've come around to having much more interest in grammar now than I ever did in school, when I thought it was deadly, but I have not thought that much about why it might matter to the development of a mind, though I've gotten little glimpses, as through a door that opens and shuts again quickly, as I've been helping my daughter with her Latin.
I'm not sure I agree that diagramming Shakespeare or Tolkien kills the joy, though I do believe in loving the language for its own sake. But there's a lot to be learned in figuring out how and why a sentence works, what all its parts are, how it achieves the effect it achieves, which isn't accidental and IS the result of someone's having a high degree of mastery over the language (Tolkien of course had a high degree of mastery over -- I forget how many languages, ancient and modern, including knowing their grammars. He HAD to understand grammar as a system to be able to invent languages for Middle-Earth).
The poet William Carlos Williams (he of "Red Wheelbarrow" fame) once said that a poem was "a large or small machine made of words." We're so used to concentrating on poems as expressions of feeling, or on how they make us feel, that we forget that they are constructed things, and that they only work as well as their construction (Shakespeare's sonnets aren't good sonnets because the feelings expressed are original or superior -- they're good sonnets because they're marvels of mastery of the sonnet FORM. They affect us because they WORK as sonnets -- prose summaries of them wouldn't move us the same way at all).
So I've thought about poetry that way for years, but really have not taught my kids language in the same kind of structural way -- but have been thinking a lot about it since my little tete-a-tete with Father the other day. And am now as a result looking for some diagramming resources to play around with. I think we can have fun looking at how sentences work, and marvel at the intricacies of our language, and maybe emerge as stronger thinkers as well.
Some random thoughts on the subject, at any rate!
Sally
__________________
Castle in the Sea
Abandon Hopefully
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
hylabrook1
Forum Moderator
Joined: July 09 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5980
|
| Posted: Feb 08 2008 at 3:18pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I agree with Mary G. about appreciating the flow and lilt of poetic or Shakespearean language. But, often enough, the reader (particularly the young reader) is stumped as to what the poem or work actually SAYS, in the purely comprehensional sense. For that reason, diagramming can help clarify the basic, underlying, albeit prosaic, meaning of the piece. So it does have some value in that application. Studying poetry or Shakespeare involves MANY more levels than that, so it certainly shouldn't stop at or concentrate on the information that comes from a sentence diagram!
At the same time I totally agree with Sally's priest: diagramming is a very analytical tool that examines language logically. And THAT is of huge value in processing information and ideas throughout a person's life.
Okay, now I'm up to having added my 4 cents worth.
Peace,
Nancy
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Language Arts Come Alive
Topic: grammar?
