The telling part

TerzaRima · Nov 2, 2011

I was checking the nieceling's homework when I saw something like this question:

Read the sentence:

"Evan and Mom cooked soup."

What is the telling part of the sentence?

a) cooked soup
b) Evan
c) and

I told one of my teacher friends about this because it completely confused me, and she explained that it was decided by various educational poobahs that terms like subject and predicate are too hard and ponderous, and so they are being replaced by the terms naming part and telling part.

Is punctuation next? Will periods be called stoppy dots? Why don't we call exclamation points yelly marks?

Chris P · Nov 2, 2011

How about teachers saying "take away" instead of "subtraction"?

blacbird · Nov 2, 2011

This is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay stoooooooooooooooooopid.

Oh crap. I misspelled two words. I now flunk this teacher's class, right?

caw

JSDR · Nov 2, 2011

My gut instinct is to just say no.

MoLoLu · Nov 3, 2011

I hate grammar but what is wrong with correct terms?

To use an example from my world: Noone in IT would call a router a 'provider connecting box'. It has a proper name. The same should go for grammar.

Imbroglio · Nov 3, 2011

HAHAHAHA stoppy dots and yelly marks.

I can't stop laughing......

bonitakale · Nov 3, 2011

And talky marks. And what about the parts of speech--thingy words, do-ey words, showy words, tiny words? Can't think what to call an adverb.

Kill. :mob

Xelebes · Nov 3, 2011

TerzaRima said:
I was checking the nieceling's homework when I saw something like this question:

I told one of my teacher friends about this because it completely confused me, and she explained that it was decided by various educational poobahs that terms like subject and predicate are too hard and ponderous, and so they are being replaced by the terms naming part and telling part.

Is punctuation next? Will periods be called stoppy dots? Why don't we call exclamation points yelly marks?

It's a good thing, actually. We are moving away from using Latin and using English, yay!

Chris P said:
How about teachers saying "take away" instead of "subtraction"?

Loss is already there, being used by accountants and people working with money.

skylark · Nov 3, 2011

I had to go look up what a predicate was - subjects, objects, verbs etc. not an issue, but I've never encountered predicates.

Why would a child so young that proper names for parts of speech are considered too scary for them need to know what one was? I mean, I'm all for grammar...but since I have Latin O level and French A level, I'm just bemused by something I've never encountered needing to be given the sort of cutesy name I wouldn't insult anyone over the age of eight by using.

I did have "verbs are doing words" engraved on my brain at a very young age

Melhael · Nov 3, 2011

The more they dumb things down, the worse people are going to get at spelling and grammar. It makes language seem unimportant, when really it's the most important skill to learn, because it's the door to everything else.

When I was a kid, I hated school, but if there's something my teachers really got through to me it's the importance of language, grammar, conjugation (and I'm telling you, French conjugation is no easy thing). In my country, I was a part of the last generation of kids who were taught French properly. When the last of us dies, French will die with us.

AnWulf · Nov 3, 2011

I can't say that OE was much better ... the adverb would be the "byword" ... the verb was the "word" so byword makes sense for an adverb.

Grammar Terms in Old English
The following grammatical terms describe how the English people before 1066 described grammar terms in Old English.

Types of Words
adjectival – adj tógeíecendlic
adjective – adj tógeíecendlic
adverb – bíword n (byword)
demonstrative - éowigendlic adj, ætýwigendlic
interjection - betwuxálegednes f, betwuxáworpennes f
noun - nama m
preposition - foresetnes f, foresetenes f, foresetednes f
pronoun - forenama m (forename), bínama m (byname)
verb – word n

plural - manigfealdlic adj (manyfoldish) manifold
singular – adj ánfald, ánfeald (onefold) ... btw ... onefold is still in use.

TerzaRima · Nov 3, 2011

This is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay stoooooooooooooooooopid.

"Stooooopid" in this sentence is the describing part. I can't think of a Romper Room way to teach adverbs, except for Schoolhouse Rock (Lolly, lolly, lolly, get your adverbs here!)

Fallen · Nov 3, 2011

TerzaRima said:
"Stooooopid" in this sentence is the describing part.

*coughs* is the predicate adjective

Saying that, I hate teaching the kids the term 'adjective', it's too generalised for my liking. Give me describers and classifiers any day:

the (article) old (describer) white (describer) Edwardian (noun classifier) whistle (head noun).

Steve Coate · Nov 3, 2011

TerzaRima said:
I was checking the nieceling's homework when I saw something like this question:

I told one of my teacher friends about this because it completely confused me, and she explained that it was decided by various educational poobahs that terms like subject and predicate are too hard and ponderous, and so they are being replaced by the terms naming part and telling part.

Is punctuation next? Will periods be called stoppy dots? Why don't we call exclamation points yelly marks?

Some high schools here in Florida have done away with mid term and final exams, so really, I'm not that surprised.

Next, kids will be texting their assignments from home...

TerzaRima · Nov 3, 2011

I hate grammar but what is wrong with correct terms?

To use an example from my world: Noone in IT would call a router a 'provider connecting box'. It has a proper name. The same should go for grammar.

I agree, except that I love grammar. My favorite part was diagramming sentences and I have often thought a really fun rainy day activity would be a diagramming tournament, kind of like the ones people have for Scrabble. Who's with me?

Xelebes · Nov 3, 2011

AnWulf said:
I can't say that OE was much better ... the adverb would be the "byword" ... the verb was the "word" so byword makes sense for an adverb.

Grammar Terms in Old English
The following grammatical terms describe how the English people before 1066 described grammar terms in Old English.

Types of Words
adjectival – adj tógeíecendlic
adjective – adj tógeíecendlic
adverb – bíword n (byword)
demonstrative - éowigendlic adj, ætýwigendlic
interjection - betwuxálegednes f, betwuxáworpennes f
noun - nama m
preposition - foresetnes f, foresetenes f, foresetednes f
pronoun - forenama m (forename), bínama m (byname)
verb – word n

plural - manigfealdlic adj (manyfoldish) manifold
singular – adj ánfald, ánfeald (onefold) ... btw ... onefold is still in use.

To add:

Verb Participle: dælnimmand (Dealnimmand)

AnWulf · Nov 4, 2011

Oh I have a whole long list of OE names for grammar parts ... some make sense others are just as befuddling. OTOH, on another forum, we had just been talking about a way to describe "transitive" and "intransitive"

To yoke something is to bind it with another so it works in that way for a transitive verb. A yoked verb is one that must be bound to an object. If that is so, then yokeless would work for intransitve.

Or maybe a bind or bound-verb and a bindless one?

A friend wrote:

SUBJECT (L. subiectus "to throw under..."; "put beneath")
PREDICATE (L. praedicatum that which is said of/about the 'subject')

"Naming Part" and "Telling Part" are still a bit odd, but they are better understood by English speaking children. It is almost a guarantee (from Frankish *warand) that English marks would go through the roof should more staffcraft words switch to English ones!

Subject in OE was gecneordnes, from cneordnes f. zeal, diligence, study

Some thoughts:

period > closing (mark) < OE clȳsung/clȳsing; end-mark, end-dot, stop-mark, stop-dot. ... Or just a "full stop".
exclamation mark > call-out mark, loud-mark

AnWulf · Nov 4, 2011

Xelebes said:
To add:

Verb Participle: dælnimmand (Dealnimmand)

That makes sense. Deal = part, share (thus a 'big deal' is a big share!)

nimmand would be "taking" or the "action of taking" ... I think. Niman was "to take".

So dealnimming would be "taking a part" ...

BTW, beniman (benim) meant "to deprive". A good word that should be edquickened (ed- = re-).

Chrissy · Nov 4, 2011

Wow. This is high tech, and I had an English teacher for a mother.

IMO, if we can just get young kids to read, read, read, when they grow up they'll instinctively know all the correct ways to construct a sentence. Exposure through reading gets the rules get ingrained into their little brains and it becomes second nature.

As far as changing the terminology for parts of a sentence, it is frustrating because, as a mother, I need to be able to help my children with their homework so I have to figure out how the concepts are being taught and learn the "new way."

Happens with math too. Like I don't have enough do besides learn how to count by nines. ;-)

PorterStarrByrd · Nov 4, 2011

Melhael said:
The more they dumb things down, the worse people are going to get at spelling and grammar. It makes language seem unimportant, when really it's the most important skill to learn, because it's the door to everything else.

Aren't already well on our way to this dumbing down? Don't know if we even hope to slow it down.

Things like tweeting don't help much. Limited character count creates intentional misspelling , things like IMHO, elimination of words, and abandonment af a complete thought within a message. About the only possibly good thing it does is prevent run-on sentences.

Will people be ABLE to read books in 30 years?

Melhael · Nov 4, 2011

PorterStarrByrd said:
Things like tweeting don't help much. Limited character count creates intentional misspelling , things like IMHO, elimination of words, and abandonment af a complete thought within a message.

The culprit isn't Twitter, it is laziness.

Brevity can encourage sharp thinking and clever wording, if the person who writes a tweet cares about those things. If he doesn't, he's not going to produce anything of interest anyway, so it might as well be no more than 140 characters.

PorterStarrByrd said:
Will people be ABLE to read books in 30 years?

I think they will read... most likely, books with spelling mistakes they won't even notice.

The quality of language—even of spelling—is already terrible in all French-speaking newspapers in Belgium. (Granted, French is even harder to spell than English, but that's no excuse.) Journalists can't spell anymore, not to mention write properly. When I read their rubbish, it feels as if I were reading the work of a moderately-gifted 14-year-old kid.

scarletpeaches · Nov 4, 2011

Isn't the whole sentence 'telling'? What exactly do they mean by 'telling' anyway? What proper term are they trying to replace with this unmitigated wank?

MoLoLu · Nov 4, 2011

scarletpeaches said:
Isn't the whole sentence 'telling'? What exactly do they mean by 'telling' anyway? What proper term are they trying to replace with this unmitigated wank?

This reminds me. In primary school here (switzerland) verbs were referred to as 'doing words'. This then got untaught in secondary school (talk about confusing, no wonder my grammar's so crap).

So nonsential. What I guess would be highschool in the rest of the world then spent ages re-teaching grammar with correct terms.

Not that I can remember them any better now, just to make the point.

bonitakale · Nov 4, 2011

I don't think it matters what words you use, but it's a lot easier if we all use the same ones, darn it. And "predicate" isn't any harder to say than, "Sesame Street." Yes, it has to be defined, and you might define it as "the telling part," but why not use what everyone else uses?

Dawnstorm · Nov 4, 2011

bonitakale said:
I don't think it matters what words you use, but it's a lot easier if we all use the same ones, darn it. And "predicate" isn't any harder to say than, "Sesame Street." Yes, it has to be defined, and you might define it as "the telling part," but why not use what everyone else uses?

Well, non-familiar words do have the advantage, that you don't come at them with every-day expectations. I can already see teachers having to explain how in a sentence like

Someone likes Bill.

"Someone" is the naming part, even though the only that's named in the sentence is "Bill". And then you have to explain what you mean with naming and telling in detail, and your students have to separate every-day naming from grammar naming.

As for everyone using the same words: would be nice, but that's not what happens anyway. "Subject" is relatively stable, but there are at least two different usages of "predicate" (one that includes the "object", and one that stands beside the object).

The telling part

Absinthe O'Malice

Likes metaphors mixed, not stirred

wants moar baddassery.

PERPETUAL EXISTENTIAL CRISIS VICTIM

Delerium ex Ennui

Indie writer

Absinthe O'Malice

Stood at the coalface

...

Absinthe O'Malice

Delerium ex Ennui

Bright and Early for the Daily Race

nutruring tomorrows criminals today

Indie writer

punny user title, here