|
.Back to GrefStartyfor the CHART
|
Grefs8E, Cumulative REFERENCES
Copyright Terry Gibson, Updated May 2007
|
|
ok |
|
Please Note: By request, Grefs 4 and 8E
need your opinion of this course to be complete.
The three paragraphs are called "assignment 5"
|
|
Three Choices
GREFS are the grammar references presented
as self-instruction in eight units
AND in Allpoetry Classes:
TWO-TROPHY COURSE
if all five assignments of eight levels are attempted
(Choices exist)
ONE-TROPHY COURSE
if half the
assignments of eight levels are attempted
.*Points given for A's until my own are all gone. DeeCrepit*
.
Temporary Change ended June 1, 07
with thanks to Charlynn for continuing to help !
Ready to use but please scroll if links are still missing.
Please submit answers by e-mail to Terry or Charlynn
for full feedback (See end)
Did you download a copy of the Student Record
to keep track?.
..
.
|
|
Quick-Clicks Main Menu
|
|
PART A-B-C-D? Go directly
to Grefs8A.
Only PART E8 is here
|
|
|
| |
|
A8 |
. .
. . .WELCOME TO OUR LAST SESSION on prose, poetry,
. . . and general knowledge,
rewarding you with HUMOR
. . . .. . . The Column, Satire
and Humor
. . . .. . .Historical and Hysterical
Essays
. . . ...... Comic Poetry and
Ogden Nash
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Applying what you have learned: Satire, HUMOR, a, b, or c
a) A Hysterical Essay b, c) Blended Fairy Tale (prose or poem)
. |
| |
|
B8 |
. .The Weekly Anecdote, Just the Facts, Sir
...... . ...... . Dialogue at Cross-Purposes
|
|
| |
|
.
.
|
|
Do [a or b] a) Using sample, Character, Setting.
a) Character's oral characterization, plus providing a Bridge,
b) Continue to own next anecdote from last week
. |
| |
|
C8 |
. . . .. . . .The Wandering Antecedent.
|
|
| |
|
.
.
|
|
Review of GERUNDS, and Agreement with antecedent
Subject, Object, Possessive pronouns (subject of verb,
object of verb, object of preposition. Also subjective completion.
. |
| |
|
D8 |
. . . .. Opting Out? Use a Passive Voice
|
|
| |
|
.
..
|
|
a) The Passive verb form,
b) Gerund, Participle (...ing) "It is what it does."
c) Use of "may" cf "might" for permission, conditional, possibility. (See also, the Fine Art
of Excuses)
THIS IS THE END OF PART A-B-C-D Check
out E, below.
(Only the brave dare go there. T. Gibson, |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
. tTH. SEPARATELY FOR OUR PRO MEMBERS |
| |
|
E8 |
...The Analysis of ALL We Read and Write
Take a deep breath: Are you ready
for this?
. . . . . . . . . . College-level stuff.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
.
|
|
a) A general summary of analysis (review).
b) Detailed Graphic Analysis, to Explore Complex,
. . Compound, and Compound-complex
sentences,
where adjective phrases may contain subordinate
noun clauses as the objects of a preposition, and they, in turn,
may have relative clauses within them.
And if you think it cannot be so, it can! The one above (with subject understood) is an example where it does.
Very complicated sentences usually require a modified method called "parsing." An example of parsing
is given.
. |
| |
|
|
|
Grefs8 Part E
Your dictionary could tell these things, but add to a running list of terms.....
and definitions assembled and used with some confidence
Clawing back the Age of Literacy
At least we are eliminating confusion!
Updated USAGE
A8
The 1995 text that serves as reference is recent but will be replaced within.. ....
the next few years or so as we get more and more muddled. Keep current....
Practical English Usage by Michael Swan, OXFORD 1995 ......
And so we conclude
. . . a Leisurely
Crash Course
in Written Englishd Hg
ay-might
. . E8 REFERENCES
. . . Going Realistic, Analyzing
"everything"
. . Fragments, Complex
and Compound Sentences
a) Fragments have major
parts missing.
b) Complex Sentences have one principal clause and at least one subordinate
clause.
. . . .
. . . . .... c) Compound
Sentences have at least two
. . . .
. . . . ..... principal
clauses, but no subordinate clauses.
d) And horrors! Compound-Complex sentences have more than one.principal clause and at least one subordinate clause.
e) What is "parsing"?
f) Mixed assignments at end.
.
|
E
..
Copy / paste
to save time and to clarify:
__ Subject
__ .
\\ verb\\ . .
( word ) Adjective or Article ( the, a )(. . .
// word // Adverb .
[[ word ]] Object of verb
# word # Indirect object
.<
word > Conjunction
{( adjective )} subjective
complement
also called subjective completion.
{[ noun ]} same
as subject
Notice:
the Subjective-Comp CODE
must be updated if it differs from this.
.
|
| . . . . . . . .
. .a) Analysing Sentence Fragments |
. . . ."No!"
Probably the shortest sentence, it is not necessarily a fragment,
however. If it is an answer, the speaker ( he shouted ) is understood
. . .
He shouted what? __He__ \\shouted . . . \\ [no]
Most fragments can be analyzed according to their meaning in context, using "understood" our code . . . (un-der-stood)
If it is a reaction to a dangerous event, it stands alone, and
the significance is found in context.
Those two ways can apply to any group of words.
Let's look at a few bona fide fragments to see if it works.
Self-tester Try it on paper. See end for answers.
From B8 intro
. . . "Who was that?" Constable Hallett asked.
. . . "The wingnut."
. . . "Oh? What catastrophe did she report this time?"
. . . "Gunshots. Big gun."
From B8a Self-testers
a) Trying to explain an embarrassing situation to the
boss, parent, or teacher.
b) Spoken characterization, with shock and mannerisms, possibly written dialog where
misunderstanding creates parallel events.
From C8: Self-tester
Not to be submitted.
================ Answers: ================
From B8 intro
Here our code for "un-der-stood" is bold " . . .
"
"Who was that?" Constable Hallett asked.
["Who was that?] __ Constable Hallett__ \\asked.\\
--not a fragment. Note although you may, it is
not necessary to analyse simple subordinate clauses. Only if a sub. clause contains another clause, should it be
shown..
"The wingnut."
["The wingnut."]
--answer to question, fragment Speaker? . . .
"Oh? What catastrophe did
she report this time?"
["Oh? (What) catastrophe] \\did\\ __she__ \\report\\
//(this) time?"// not a fragment
"Gunshots. Big gun."
["Gunshots. Big gun."]
--answer to question, fragment, Speaker? . . .
Note, in dialogue where no confusion exists, the speaker can be understood.
(dialog, in US.)
---------------------------------------------------
B8a
Trying to explain an embarrassing situation to the
boss, parent, or teacher.
"Trying" is a either a GERUND or a PARTICIPLE
Trying to explain [(an embarrassing) situation] # to the
boss, parent, or teacher. #
but is it a fragment? Yes, not only because it feels
like one.
Add a subject and verb "__You__ \\are-- . . . Trying to explain\\
[(an embarrassing) situation] # to the boss, parent, or teacher.#
Spoken characterization, with shock and mannerisms, possibly written dialog where misunderstanding
creates parallel events.
(Spoken)__characterization__, (with shock and mannerisms,) //possibly// [( written) dialog] ( where misunderstanding
creates parallel events) \\can be added\\. . .
.
Misunderstanding is a GERUND, subject of the verb creates. Even though it is a compound-complex sentence, it is a fragment because the only verb, "creates," is part of a subordinate clause.
.
Obviously other right answers are possible if
they make sense.
(Spoken)__characterization__, (with shock and mannerisms,) may. . . //possibly// be. . . {( written) dialog ( where __misunderstanding__ creates parallel events)}
.
Caution:
The verb "be" alone, needs a subjective completion!
Characterization IS dialog.
From C8:
Not to be submitted.
__This__ \\is\\ .
. . //Not// \\ to be submitted.\\
It is a fragment because both the subject and verb "IS" were omitted.
.
|
complexAnalysis
. . .b) Complex Sentences
have one principal clause
. . . .
. . . . .and at least
one subordinate clause. |
Suggested method:
Isolate the principal clause
with verbs, verb phrases
because only clauses have verbs. Stack them.
Complex Sentences have one
principal clause and
at least one subordinate clause. (Does it have a verb?)
Decide what the rest is
TWO objects of the verb "have."
. . . (Complex) __Sentences__ \\have\\ [(one
principal) clause] and
. . . [ (//at least//one subordinate) clause.] Is it a complex sentence?
Verdict:
This was a simple sentence because it had only one verb.
From A8a
Isolate the principal clause
with verbs, verb phrases
Stack them.
There are four definitions
for the word,
of which, the fourth one concerns us here.
//There// \\are\\ (four) __definitions__
(for the word), (of which), {(the fourth) one \\concerns\\ # us # //here.//}
Alternately: Four definitions for the word are there, of which the fourth one concerns
us here.
Verdict
This was a complex sentence in which the complement
{subjective completion} is a subordinate adjective clause.
Another example from A8a
Isolate the principal clause
with verbs, verb phrases
Stack them.
Most larger daily newspapers
have full-time columnists,
whose "take" on life makes them unique.
(//Most// larger daily) __newspapers__ \\ have\\
[ (full-time) columnists, ( whose "take" on life \\makes\\ them unique.)]
This whole sentence is the principal clause but its object is modified
by a subordinate adjective clause.
Subordinate clauses need not be further analysed, but it is:
( (whose) __"take__" (on life) \\ makes\\ [ them (unique.)]
This is a subordinate adjective clause, modifying the object "columnists"
Isolate the principal clause
with verbs, verb phrases
Stack them
. . . . . .People who love puzzles
. . . . . .tend to enjoy these convoluted things.
__People__ (who \\love\\
puzzles) \\tend to enjoy\\ [(these convoluted)
things.]
It is a complex sentence with a subordinate adjective clause.
..
|
compoundanalysis
ndAnalys
. . . .
. .c) Compound Sentences have at least two
. . . .
principal clauses, but no subordinate clauses. |
From A8a
Isolate the principal clauses
with verbs, verb phrases
Stack them.
Smiles start there, and
giggles follow guffaws down the hall after a good one.
__Smiles__ \\start\\ //there// and __giggles__ \\follow\\ [guffaws] //down the hall// //after a good one.//
This has two principal clauses.
From A8a
Isolate the principal clauses
with verbs, verb phrases
Stack them.
It does not intend to harm or to embarrass, and
+ should not be twisted into racist and other uses.
It has one compound bare predicate (verb phrase) joined
by the conjunction "or" in the first principal clause, and a regular second
principal clause.
__It__ \\does\\ //not// \\intend to harm\\ or \\to embarrass,\\ and __it__ . . . \\should\\ //not// \\be twisted\\ //into racist and other uses.//
The first principal clause is regular even with the double verb, but the second principal
clause has the subject understood.
From A8a
Isolate the principal clauses
and any verbs, verb phrases,
Stack them.
By definition, Compound Sentences have at least two
principal clauses, but
+ no subordinate clauses
at least two principal clauses
//By definition,// Compound __Sentences__ \\have\\
[ //at least// (two principal)clauses,] but
__they__ \\have\\ . . . [(no
subordinate) clauses]
Isolate the principal clauses
with verbs, verb phrases
Stack them.
Off-Balance to a point of excess it becomes farce, and
+ can in totalitarian societies
be hazardous
to health and safety, but temporarily at least, + very funny.
Two principal clauses, possibly two of them with parts understood.
(Off-Balance to a point of excess) __it__ \\becomes\\ {farce,} and __it__ . . . \\can\\
//in totalitarian societies// \\be\\ {hazardous //to health and safety//,(but temporarily at least, __they__. . .
\\are. . .\\ very funny).}
For those who enjoy challenges--fitting our final assignment :) --this sentence had
many tricks. It begins with an adjective phrase describing the subject "it" and has a complement, same
as "it," in the first principal clause.
Here it gets really interesting. A second principal clause, with "it" added,
has a second subjective completion describing the second subject, but within it, contains an adjective phrase. (That adjective phrase, with "it is" added, became a third
subordinate adjective clause, moving this sentence into category d). See below.
.
|
comp-complxAnalysis
| .d) Compound-Complex have more than one.principal . .
.. . .. . clause and at least one subordinate clause. |
From A8a
Off-Balance to a point of excess it becomes farce, and as mentioned before, can in totalitarian societies be hazardous
to health and safety, but temporarily at least, very funny.
Isolate the principal clauses
with verbs, verb phrases
because only clauses have verbs. Stack them.
Off-Balance to a point of excess it becomes
farce, and
as I mentioned before,
it can in totalitarian societies be hazardous to health and safety, but
temporarily at least, very funny.
With the subordinate adverb clause "and
as I mentioned before," added,
from the original one, we have a bona fide Compound-Complex sentence.
(Off-Balance to a point of excess) __it__ \\ becomes\\ {farce,} and //as I . . . mentioned before,// __it__ . . . \\can\\
//in totalitarian societies// \\be\\ {hazardous to health
and safety,(but temporarily at least, very funny)}.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE lifted from earlier reading.
Far more effective than an open attack, it opens eyes to what is going on, and remarkably
clears the hearing of large numbers of people who sincerely believe it was their own idea.
Isolate the principal clauses
and any verbs, verb phrases.
Stack them.
There are several right ways to deal wirh such challenges.
One, minimal change:
( Far more effective than an open attack,) __it__ \\opens\\
[eyes //to what is going on//,] and
//remarkably// \\clears\\ [ (the) hearing
(of large numbers of people (who
sincerely believe [it was their own idea.] ) ]
Complicated? YES.
It starts with an adjective phrase describing "it".
It "opens" and "clears" is a double verb as bare predicate of "it"
opens what? Object, eyes how? //to what is going on//
BUT
that adverb phrase contains a noun clause,
object of the preposition "to" __what__
\\is going\\ //on//
So far not so bad. Wait for it! Remember, this is how we normally write.
and
how? //remarkably// __it__
\\clears\\ what? [ (the) hearing --
]
[ the hearing (of large numbers (of people) -- )
of people is a phrase within an adjective phrase.
and YET ANOTHER adjective, this time
the subordinate adjective clause (who
sincerely believe) describing people, making it
[ the hearing (of large numbers (of people(who sincerely believe) ) what?
[that .
. . it
was their own idea.] a subordinate noun clause, object of
the verb "believe." now including that within the original parentheses, and the whole object's brackets
blue:
[ the hearing (of
large numbers (of people(who sincerely believe [that . . .
it was their own idea.] ) ) ]
Are you still with me? I will check brackets and colours to make it as clear as possible,
but if you have read Great Expectations by Charles Dickens, you'd be glad not to have one of his long sentences to do!
I do not expect these liguistic gymnastics of you !
It is at this point that the code method breaks down attempting to make all this clear, and parsing, of which this is a modified form, listing the parts and telling what they are and do
becomes the only way to keep order.
Two, let's try adding understood
words to clarify meaning.
(Let's is "Let us")
Far more effective than an open attack, it opens eyes to what
is going on, and it . . . remarkably clears the hearing of large numbers of people who sincerely believe that . . . it was their own idea,
( Far more effective than an open attack,) __it__ . . . \\opens\\
[eyes // [to what is going on]]//, and //remarkably//
\\clears\\
[ (the) hearing (of large numbers of people (who sincerely believe
[that . . .it was their own idea.]) )) ] ]
Whew! There should be two of each kind, color and size.
Not having to code every word
within phrases and clauses reduces what can become very confusing.
,
|
parsing
.
| . . . .
. .. . . . . .. .What
is MODIFIED PARSING? |
Back in the "dark ages" (later 1930's, 40's) when this interepid author attended school,
by eighth grade parsing was the way we proved we really knew what made sentences tick.
It is a typical compound-complex statement.
To analyse this sentence, it would look like this:
//Back in the "dark ages" (later 1930's, 40's)// //when
this intrepid author attended school,// //by eighth grade,//
__parsing__ \\was\\ {(the) way] (that . . . __we__ \\proved\\ [that . . . _we_ //really// \\knew\\ [ _what_ \\made\\ [sentences tick] ] }
It is colour coded to help you find the subordinate clauses.
How it's Done
We stack it vertically, first by clauses and phrases, then within those by parts of speech and what they do. Repeat when one contains another until all
are accounted for.
In modified PARSING it looks like this:
//Back in the "dark ages"
(later 1930's, 40's)//
First identify the part
Adverb phrase, modifying the principal clause, "parsing was"
to say when.
Then, one after another, identify the words and phrases.
"Back" adverb, telling
when.
"in the "dark ages"
adverb phrase modifying the adverb "back"
"(later 1930's, 40's)"a pun adjective phrase modifying
"dark ages"with the preposition "in". .
. (understood)
//when this intrepid author attended school,//
Adverb clause modifying the adverb phrase (above)
"when" subordinate conjunction introducing the adverb clause . . . . . . . . above.
"this" adjective modifying the noun "author"
"intrepid" adjective modifying the noun "author"
"author" noun, subject of the verb "attended"
"attended" verb, bare predicate in the subordinate adverb
clause . . . . . . above.
"school" noun, object of the verb attended.
(it can also act as an adverb, answering where
or as object of the preposition "at," understood,
in "AT. . . school"
Nice that they all can be right depending on point of view.
//by
eighth grade,//
Adverb phrase modifying the verb "was,"
answering when
"by
" preposition
introducing the adverb phrase "by eighth grade"
"eighth"
adjective modifying the noun "grade"
"grade"
noun, object of the preposition "by"
__parsing__ \\was\\ {(the) way] (that . . . __we__ \\proved\\ [that . . . _we_ //really// \\knew\\ [ _what_ \\made\\
[sentences tick] ] }
It is long, but it all belongs together with TWO embedded clauses
in the subjective completion That is how we really write. . .
Principal clause begins here
and continues to the end at "tick."
Let's take it apart, noting the verb "was."
. . . . . . . . . The verb
"to be" --was-- takes the {complement} . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. to match the subject.
__parsing__ \\was\\ {(the) way--
}
Principal clause begins here with its
complement.
"parsing"a
gerund, subject of the verb "was"
"was"copula
verb joining subject "parsing"and "way" as the . . . . . . . . . . same thing
"the"
article, acting as an adjective modifying the noun "way"
"way"
a noun, subjective completion same as the subject, "parsing."
(that . . . __we__
\\proved\\ [that
. . . _we_ //really// \\knew\\
Adjective clause modifying the noun "way"+
"that .
. . " subordinating conjunction . . . introducing the adjective clause "that we proved" to modify the noun "way"
"we"
pronoun, subject of the verb "proved."
"proved"
verb, bare predicate of the pronoun "we"
"that
. . ." subordinating conjunction .
. . introducing the noun clause "that we really knew," object of the verb "proved"
"we"
pronoun, subject of the verb "knew"
"really"
adverb modifying the verb "knew"
"knew"verb,
bare predicate of the pronoun "we"
[ _what_
\\made\\ [sentences tick]
Noun clause, object of the verb "knew"
"what"
relative pronoun, introduces the noun
clause AND
. . . . . . . .as a pronoun, is
its subject
"made"
verb, bare predicate of the pronoun "what"
"sentences"
noun, object of the verb made
"tick"
second verb of verb phrase made tick.
There may be a better way, (but it's late!)
MODIFIED?
I called it "modified," because originally the words were just
stacked in order vertically, one by one, like this:
I personal pronoun subject of the verb "called"
called verb the bare predicate of the pronoun "I"
it pronoun, object of the verb "called"
modified, past participle acting as adjective, modifying the pronoun "it"
because subordinating conjunction introducing the adverb clause modifying the verb
"called," answering "why"
originally adverb modifying the verb phrase "were stacked" telling when
the article, acting as an adjective modifying the noun "words"
words noun, subject of the passive verb phrase "were stacked."
were auxiliary verb, part of the verb phrase "were stacked."
just adverb modifying the verb phrase "were stacked"
stacked past participle, part of the passive verb phrase "were stacked"
in preposition, introducing the adverb phrase "in order"
order noun, object of the preposition "in order" answering "how?"
vertically, adverb, modifying the verb phrase "were stacked." answering "how?"
one noun, same as (in apposition to) the subject, "words")
by preposition, introducing the adverb phrase "by one"
one, noun, object of preposition in adverb phrase answering "how?" modifying the verb phrase "were stacked."
like acting as preposition, introducing the adverb phrase
"like this"
this.acting as a pronoun, object of the preposition "like" telling how.
There are no secrets left in this family of words.
Easier to keep track with the modified method.
Personally I prefer using code, but this method leaves no chance of error,
while demanding patience and a sharp eye.
The words "acting as preposition" are there because
"like" can also act as a conjunction in another context.
Likewise "this, acting as a pronoun,"
can also be an adjective, as in "this one, this hand, this house"
If in doubt, consult a dictionary; I did.
And for the poets among us:
For you brave souls about to embark
on a romp through the effort that follows,
free to use any method you choose.
All of them can display way that allows
understanding made easy to mark.
-- galloping rhythm, dadaTA dadaTA, anapestic.
Anyone care to do an analysis of the two sentences in it?
Hmmm. Thought not.
.
|
. .
. . Final
Assignment 5
. . .Required
for Trophy 2
. . (or for one when doing only
half.)
"AP has suggested, since five parts are expected, that a fifth assignment
be included to evaluate this course."
1. Please write your candid comments in these three short paragraphs, to tell if you liked the course, or to be
honest, why not.
Go for it! We learn more from mistakes than from praise. Even very negative
comments cannot harm your grade!
2. Did you make use of the e-mail grading process to ask for and get answers for things that confused, puzzled,
or annoyed you? Did the feedback clarify and explain? Was it reasonably prompt--within a week? How could we improve?
Again, be frank. (Looking for suggestions to improve, not for compliments.)
3. Are there things you would have liked to include? At which point, 1 to 4 or 5 to 8?
(That is how humour got to be included. Humor in US)
Please evaluate this course frankly.
|
|
.
And that, is all! To all a good night, au revoir, .
sayonara, as we go dancing one by one, off stage-- as with Julie Andrews and the Von
Trapp family in the Sound of Music, to a well-
earned rest!
. .. .. . A medal for courage
to all!
. .. .. ..Only the bravest have
completed this course.
It was a great review for me too, and truly a privilege to share what few
seem to know, anymore.
. . , ,. .Terry . .
.
|
.
.
|
|