daijobu Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 I've been reading Magic Lens with my 7th grade dd, and we just hit the verb chapter. Whoa. The difficulty and complexity of this grammar instruction is beyond my understanding. I feel like how I suspect non-mathy folks feel about AOPS. I've never personally had this level of grammar instruction, particularly all those perfect forms, and I'm getting nervous about teaching it. Can a non-grammar parent survive the 3 remaining MCT levels of grammar? I need some hand-holding and reassurance. Has anyone else learned as they went through upper levels of MCT grammar? Or are all you Magic Lens teachers grammar experts and grammar lovers? Did anyone abandon Magic Lens and just continue with the vocab and academic writing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dana Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 I use the TM for Magic Lens and pretend I understand some of the constructions. Dh hears the adults from Peanuts when ds and I talk grammar :) I still really like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swimmermom3 Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 I've been reading Magic Lens with my 7th grade dd, and we just hit the verb chapter. Whoa. The difficulty and complexity of this grammar instruction is beyond my understanding. I feel like how I suspect non-mathy folks feel about AOPS. I've never personally had this level of grammar instruction, particularly all those perfect forms, and I'm getting nervous about teaching it. Can a non-grammar parent survive the 3 remaining MCT levels of grammar? I need some hand-holding and reassurance. Has anyone else learned as they went through upper levels of MCT grammar? Or are all you Magic Lens teachers grammar experts and grammar lovers? Did anyone abandon Magic Lens and just continue with the vocab and academic writing? :D Yes, to the bold statement above. I don't remember there being anything too difficult or complex in Magic Lens, but I just received my first book from AoPS (Intermediate Algebra) two weeks ago and if you hear sizzling and crackling and smell smoke, it's only brain synapses frying - mine - on a daily basis. I was reading about what to post on the "Basic" AoPS high school board and frankly, I might do better reading Chinese, even though my second language is Spanish. :tongue_smilie: The main question with MCT is always, "What does your student think?" Mine loved it and was driven to distraction the year we used Rod and Staff, which we did just because I knew several secular board members who swore by it. We swore at it. Use what works for you and your student. It can be the AoPS of grammar, but if your student hates it or you don't have the time to teach it, then it's okay to use something else. While I prefer MCT, one year I moved to Sadlier Oxford for vocabulary because I had an older student come home that year and he needed a lot of my time. My youngest and I didn't have the time we needed to do justice to each MCT component. Many, many teachers on this board have learned subjects alongside with their students.If you are sincerely interested and willing to put in the time, you will be just fine. Be sure to ask questions here if you get stuck. I think it's admirable that you are willing to give it a whirl. Sometimes when I am working on problems from AoPS, I do think "What am I doing here?" But now, I am also thinking, "Do I want to go back?" I have seen holes where I didn't know there where holes and I want to fill them. If you start to go deep, I think it's hard to come up and play only on the surface. You can ignore all this too. I just meandered over from the high school board because I liked the title of your thread. Good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EndOfOrdinary Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Your discussion of MCT this way has me so completely intrigued I had to go look it up! I am the math geek in the house and LOVE AoPS. My husband is the English guy. I am going to try and get my hands on a couple MCT books to try them out. Hopefully my brain doesn't completely implode! Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dana Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Your discussion of MCT this way has me so completely intrigued I had to go look it up! I am the math geek in the house and LOVE AoPS. My husband is the English guy. I am going to try and get my hands on a couple MCT books to try them out. Hopefully my brain doesn't completely implode! Thanks! He speaks at some conventions. If you can hear him, he's excellent! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Marple Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 When I discovered AoPS I was thrilled - my boys were not quite to the same thrilled level :p . I admit that when I discovered MCT Magic Lens (that was our entry level) I felt similarly. Both programs made sense to me. My boys and I are more math/science oriented, but we had no problems with MCT ML. One frequent poster on these boards did take issue with MCT teaching (specific items, not in general). Because I'm not as oriented to grammar/writing I listened to her critique. So, while I had no problems with it, I'm not sure I would have recognized problems either. Both programs are in my top 10 favorite home school items. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodland Mist Academy Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 We will finish the 4th level of MCT this semester and move on to the 5th with all the books. There are some books we have liked better than others, but we've always found the program worth continuing in its entirety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 We will finish the 4th level of MCT this semester and move on to the 5th with all the books. There are some books we have liked better than others, but we've always found the program worth continuing in its entirety. Is there a step up in Magic Lens between the first two levels? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodland Mist Academy Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Is there a step up in Magic Lens between the first two levels? Yes. In addition to stepping up, Magic Lens 2 also looks like it will do an excellent job synthesizing what we've been doing across several programs. I'm looking forward to the entire level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalis Academy Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 I sure am glad you still like Magic Lense, Woodland Mist, because I blame my decision to buy it on you! :smilielol5: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodland Mist Academy Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Uh oh! Do you like it???ETA: Maybe I don't want to know!! :ohmy: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Yes. In addition to stepping up, Magic Lens 2 also looks like it will do an excellent job synthesizing what we've been doing across several programs. I'm looking forward to the entire level. Please more details! I have a long way till Magic Lens. :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodland Mist Academy Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Please more details! I have a long way till Magic Lens. :( Maybe I misunderstood your question. Were you asking if there is a step up from level 1 to level 2 of Magic Lens, or were you asking if there a step up from the Island level to the Magic Lens level? Or something else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Maybe I misunderstood your question. Were you asking if there is a step up from level 1 to level 2 of Magic Lens, or were you asking if there a step up from the Island level to the Magic Lens level? Or something else? No, you didn't misunderstand. I am so excited about MCT and so glad to hear that there is new material in every level (unlike in Voyage level grammar, which is apparently a repeat of Town). I can't wait until my kids are older and ready for upper level MCT (we are only in Town). I am intrigued by your comment that MCT "will do an excellent job synthesizing what we've been doing across several programs." I am hoping you can elaborate more on that comment. Most discussion on MCT seems to be about his lower level Gramnar books. I would love to hear more about the middle school levels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalis Academy Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Uh oh! Do you like it??? ETA: Maybe I don't want to know!! :ohmy: Honestly, I haven't spent enough time with it yet, I decided that we're going to finish Killgallon this year and do ML at the beginning of next year. But I think it looks really good, and I see what you mean - it does take things to the next level. I was disappointed at the redundancy of GT and GV and so was worried ML would be more of the same, but it looks like it is a significant extension. It took me so long to figure out how to use WWW (which is going swimmningly now that I figured it out!) that I couldn't face starting both at once! :laugh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dana Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 It took me so long to figure out how to use WWW (which is going swimmningly now that I figured it out!) that I couldn't face starting both at once! :laugh: How did you decide to use WWW? We're still finishing up CE 2... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalis Academy Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 We're taking it slow - two weeks per lesson. Basically, the first week it is her job to learn the words, however she wants. She's been learning 6 per day, making herself flashcards. Then, the second week, we go through the lesson activities together orally, 2 or 3 per day, then she does the quiz. It's not exactly 10 days per lesson, because we throw spelling in there once a week, so more like 8 days per lesson. It's not rushed at all, just a few minutes a day to learn the words, and maybe 15 minutes together to do the activities. We're enjoying doing it this way, it's a nice step up in personal responsibility (learning the words on her own) but we still get the benefit of the oral study/discussion. And it means that I'm only "on" every other week, which is important - almost everything I use with both kids is pretty teacher-intensive, so I'm constantly scrambling. Having a few things she can just do on her own and check off is helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daijobu Posted February 11, 2014 Author Share Posted February 11, 2014 As long as I have your attention, we came across this sentence in ML1: Cassius, go you into the street. Is the word "go" in this sentence in third person or second person? (The book says it's third.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8filltheheart Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 As long as I have your attention, we came across this sentence in ML1: Cassius, go you into the street. Is the word "go" in this sentence in third person or second person? (The book says it's third.) That is incorrect. It is 2nd with a noun in direct address. You is the subject. It is simply inverse word order. Fwiw, I have never commented negatively about the grammar or vocab programs (other than the mistakes like above.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daijobu Posted February 11, 2014 Author Share Posted February 11, 2014 That is incorrect. It is 2nd with a noun in direct address. You is the subject. It is simply inverse word order. Fwiw, I have never commented negatively about the grammar or vocab programs (other than the mistakes like above.) Thank you. For newbies like me, this is what makes MCT a little, um, challenging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodland Mist Academy Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 No, you didn't misunderstand. I am so excited about MCT and so glad to hear that there is new material in every level (unlike in Voyage level grammar, which is apparently a repeat of Town). I can't wait until my kids are older and ready for upper level MCT (we are only in Town). I am intrigued by your comment that MCT "will do an excellent job synthesizing what we've been doing across several programs." I am hoping you can elaborate more on that comment. Most discussion on MCT seems to be about his lower level Gramnar books. I would love to hear more about the middle school levels. Oh, I see! I'll try to write more detail once I get my thoughts together. (Even then I don't promise coherency! :tongue_smilie: ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodland Mist Academy Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I've tried to decide the best way to put my thoughts into words. It's hard because so much of MCT is a feeling. (Part of me feels :ack2: to write that because it sounds so irrational, but it is what it is.) In the end, I'm sure there are many programs or unschooly ways to teach what MCT teaches--most of them have the benefit of being a good deal less expensive. What always keeps us coming back is that feeling, so I'll approach it from that angle. The MCT website has samples of the books from various levels to give you the specifics. I apologize in advance if this is no help whatsoever! We started on Grammar Island and fell in love with words, then we traveled to Grammar Town and fell in love with sentences. Next, we got lost on a Grammar Voyage and sailed around aimlessly...or did we? Maybe it was a gap year of sorts--travel, grow up a bit, do some review to keep information fresh.... We finally arrive at our destination and are given a Magic Lens. This time there are no talking fish, no curious ducks. This time it's serious. Thankfully, it's a gentle seriousness. The basics are inspected more closely and more is expected. The bar is set--we can see it in the distance. Looking ahead to the next levels...it seems the goal is to gather all the grammar, all the vocab, all the writing--not just from MCT, but from everywhere--because it's time. The tools you've gathered during your years of preparation are going to be put to the test. You'll be analyzing and seeking understanding in more difficult texts and crafting your own thoughts into rational, coherent, eloquent essays. MCT is a journey not everyone accepts because there are many alternate routes. Some people tire of the journey of the Grammar Voyage and jump ship, but a few stay aboard to see where the boat is going. The upper levels don't have us bursting with laughter, but they often leave us glowing with thought and determination. That too, has its place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daijobu Posted February 12, 2014 Author Share Posted February 12, 2014 Speaking of Magic Lens, we're still making our way through the verb exercises. Here's another one: If not, why then this parting was well made. (The bold is in the book, and indicates the verb being described.) Regarding whether "was made" in transitive or intransitive, the solution manual reads: "n/a." Looking back in the text, it says that "Linking verbs are neither transitive or intransitive; this does not apply to them." No other type of verb is mentioned for which transitive/intransitive is not applicable. Yet "was made" is labeled as an action verb, not linking. If "was made" is not a linking verb, then why is it (the transitive/intransitive distinction) not applicable? It's really hard to sort this out from the solution manual alone, as it offers no explanation, just the answer. ETA: I meant "action verb" not "active verb." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irishmommy Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Was made is a verb phrase, well being the "helping verb", made being the "main verb". Transitive/intransitive just refers to whether or not it has an object, right? I don't remember the rule for verb phrases. Dave threw the ball. The ball was thrown by Dave. Someone help me here?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8filltheheart Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Speaking of Magic Lens, we're still making our way through the verb exercises. Here's another one: If not, why then this parting was well made. (The bold is in the book, and indicates the verb being described.) Regarding whether "was made" in transitive or intransitive, the solution manual reads: "n/a." Looking back in the text, it says that "Linking verbs are neither transitive or intransitive; this does not apply to them." No other type of verb is mentioned for which transitive/intransitive is not applicable. Yet "was made" is labeled as an action verb, not linking. If "was made" is not a linking verb, then why is it (the transitive/intransitive distinction) not applicable? It's really hard to sort this out from the solution manual alone, as it offers no explanation, just the answer. ETA: I meant "action verb" not "active verb." W/o spending time really thinking about this, my initial thought is that made is actually an adj......the well made parting with is acting as a linking verb connecting the subject to the PA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuovonne Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 If not, why then this parting was well made. (The bold is in the book, and indicates the verb being described.) I'm no expert, but here's my attempt. "this parting" is the subject "was made" is the verb and it is an action verb "was" is the helping verb "made" is the main verb "well" is a adverb describing how it was made The verb "made" normally is transitive in the active voice, but it is in the passive voice in this sentence, and thus transitive / intransitive does not apply. If the clause were recast in the active voice, you would have *Someone* made this parting well. active voice: "this parting" is the direct object passive voice: "this parting" is the subject Usually sentences in the passive voice don't have objects because the object has been turned into the subject. (It is possible for a sentence in the passive voice to have a direct object, but it is uncommon.) It is also possible to think of sentences in the passive voice as linking verbs with a verbal phrase acting as an adjective. However, I find it much easier to think in terms of active/passive voice because you don't have to untangle the verbal separately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8filltheheart Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 A simple way of looking at this sentence is by conjugating the verb. If made is a verb, it is the past tense of make. I make..... I made.......I was making. Not---I was made. Make is also a transitive verb. I am not 100% positive that made is a predicate adj, but was made does not seem grammatically correct as a verb and it seems to fall under the adjectival definition of made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matryoshka Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 A simple way of looking at this sentence is by conjugating the verb. If made is a verb, it is the past tense of make. I make..... I made.......I was making. Not---I was made. Make is also a transitive verb. I am not 100% positive that made is a predicate adj, but was made does not seem grammatically correct as a verb and it seems to fall under the adjectival definition of made. No. You've conjugated it in the present, the past, and the present progressive of the active voice. This verb is in the passive voice, which is formed by conjugating the verb 'to be' (here 'was), and the past participle of the main verb (here 'made'). It is often hard to distinguish the passive voice from a linking verb and a predicate adjective. The question is the participle describing an action, who is doing it, and is there an object? Or is the subject simply being described? Here the action (making) is being performed on the subject (by an unknown agent - this is common in passive constructions; sometimes the agent is explicit as 'by Mary'), so it's passive voice. In a passive construction, one can rewrite the sentence in active voice with the subject now as the object. As a pp wrote: "Someone made this parting well." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irishmommy Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Yes, passive voice! That is what I was forgetting! I was trying to explain it the way Matryoshka explained it. Thank you. My mind was a fog! Random side note, Sparkly Unicorn, my kids think your dancing bacon is hilarious! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dana Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Stuff like this makes me mad! I wonder if there is a correction on the website. I checked all posts on their forum when I started the text last year and it wasn't. The yahoo group still exists and MCT still posts when there are questions, but I think RFWPs choice not to keep a list of errata on their site for users is incredibly stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodland Mist Academy Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 A thread regarding MCT would be incomplete without a discussion of errors, would it not? :nopity: I continue to be baffled by the errors and the choice to not keep an easily accessible list of errata. Many programs are able to do this. It is is beyond me why Royal Fireworks Press either can't manage it or can't be bothered to. (If I've missed a comprehensive list, please let me know!) When the new edition of WWW came out I was thrilled. That quickly changed for various reasons, but perhaps the most disconcerting was the steady flow of errors! How can it be so hard to miss typos? Sometimes the errors are mistakes, which are discussed on the RFP group and forum, but sometimes they are just simple typos! It's difficult to imagine that the books were edited by several people when many children on this board have caught some of the errors. (Lily is always conflicted when she finds one-- proud of herself, but dismayed with the program.) I will be among the first to sing praises, but will also join in with complaints! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8filltheheart Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 No. You've conjugated it in the present, the past, and the present progressive of the active voice. This verb is in the passive voice, which is formed by conjugating the verb 'to be' (here 'was), and the past participle of the main verb (here 'made'). It is often hard to distinguish the passive voice from a linking verb and a predicate adjective. The question is the participle describing an action, who is doing it, and is there an object? Or is the subject simply being described? Here the action (making) is being performed on the subject (by an unknown agent - this is common in passive constructions; sometimes the agent is explicit as 'by Mary'), so it's passive voice. In a passive construction, one can rewrite the sentence in active voice with the subject now as the object. As a pp wrote: "Someone made this parting well." Thanks for that explanation, Matryoshka. I was thinking about you last night when I posted thinking that you would know the answer. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8filltheheart Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 No. You've conjugated it in the present, the past, and the present progressive of the active voice. This verb is in the passive voice, which is formed by conjugating the verb 'to be' (here 'was), and the past participle of the main verb (here 'made'). It is often hard to distinguish the passive voice from a linking verb and a predicate adjective. The question is the participle describing an action, who is doing it, and is there an object? Or is the subject simply being described? Here the action (making) is being performed on the subject (by an unknown agent - this is common in passive constructions; sometimes the agent is explicit as 'by Mary'), so it's passive voice. In a passive construction, one can rewrite the sentence in active voice with the subject now as the object. As a pp wrote: "Someone made this parting well." OK, I went to read more about this (though whether this is worth thinking about is another matter b/c a couple of the sites I went to discussed that this a very grey area.) This site, however, has the best explanation I could find: http://www.german-latin-english.com/grammarparticiple.htm In case anyone else wants to understand this better, these seem to be the key pts: 9. In particular cases, it can be difficult to differentiate between participles and mere adjectives. One of the criteria is the consensus of dictionaries. If most dictionaries show hurt, for example, as an adjective, then it is an adjective in a sentence like He is hurt. Of course, it is a participle when used as part of the passive voice, e.g., Ten firemen were hurt when the roof collapsed. Another criterion is replaceability: If tired in a sentence like We are tired can be replaced by another adjective of the same meaning, then it is an adjective; it can, in fact, be replaced by weary, a pure adjective. Tired in We are tired is an adjective. 10. All true passive-voice forms have a functioning past participle as a component. A static (or false) passive, on the other hand, includes a past participle that functions as a simple adjective. Notice the use of the word closed in the following sentences: 1) At the beginning of the period, the classroom door is closed by the teacher; 2) The door is closed until the end of the period. The first closed is a true participle, part of the present passive is closed. The second closed is a predicate adjective after the linking verb is. It is important to keep in mind that in the passive voice something is happening. Nothing is happening in the sentence The door is closed until the end of the period. ETA: Ok.....I can't say I actually do understand. Is "If not, why then this parting was well made," actually the equivalent of "If not, why then this parting was good." vs a parting in the process of being made? My 15 yr old dd says she now has a headache from thinking about this. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.