Poor grammar in The Magic Tree House series

[CourtneySue]

Has anyone else noticed this? A friend of mine said something to me about it the other day. I picked one up and it took about 2 seconds for me to find a "sentence" that had no subject. How do you have a sentence with no subject?

 

My DS4 is just beginning to read, but I'm glad she alerted me to this fact before I bought any.

[EKS]

Magic Tree House books are filled with sentence fragments. I think this is how they get the reading level down in the 2nd grade range.

[Matryoshka]

That really bugged me too. Periods just seem to be randomly inserted in the middle of sentences. I think they want the sentences short to make the reading level "easier", so they just plop them in there every which way. I think it's much worse in the earlier books in the series.

 

One of my dds loved these and they really got her reading. My other two really didn't care for them, and I certainly didn't insist on them!

[jenL]

My son LOVES these, but the sentence fragments and poor grammar drive me nuts!

[Mommy2BeautifulGirls]

I think the intent is more to get children to practice their reading rather than to be a great piece of literature to be used for illustrative grammar purposes. They're a step up from Frog & Toad and Little Bear. At least that's how I see them.

[patchfire]

It drove me so crazy when I picked up one to preview it, I quickly decided to make them read-aloud books and not something dd would read by herself. YMMV.

[Rhondabee]

Has anyone else noticed this? A friend of mine said something to me about it the other day. I picked one up and it took about 2 seconds for me to find a "sentence" that had no subject. How do you have a sentence with no subject?

 

My DS4 is just beginning to read, but I'm glad she alerted me to this fact before I bought any.

 

My boys are past their Magic Tree House days, and dd is still too young, and I really wasn't that concerned with the grammar presented in the books, just glad my boys had *something* they liked to read.

 

So...I may be way off base, but maybe the sentence without a subject didn't *need* a subject because the subject was already understood by the reader. If so, it's not technically a sentence fragment, but an elliptical sentence (per R&S-8). Even Tolkien and the great writers include elliptical sentences in their works, as they sound more natural. Or, less like a Dick and Jane reader, if that makes sense.

 

Now, in expository and formal writing, you are correct. I never accept elliptical sentences in my dc's reports. But, MTH is fiction, and fiction does have different rules & standards.

 

Now I *do* wish our music minister would stop saying, "Me and (insert name)..." every week - LOL!

[Ellie]

Magic Tree House books are filled with sentence fragments. I think this is how they get the reading level down in the 2nd grade range.

If that's the reason, then there are flaws in their reasoning. Even Dick and Jane readers managed complete sentences in their 2nd grade readers.:confused:

[Gretchen in NJ]

There were not on our list to read. Both of my girls did not care for them. I am finding that the older the book then the better it is for my girls.;)

[Carol in Cal.]

The only reason we used them is that they were good support for DD when she was an emerging reader. When she really took off into reading on her own, she read a bunch of these in a row, and then dropped them completely to move on to tougher books. I never read her any of them before that, just used them for fluency support when she was consolidating her reading skills. They were great for that, and also did contain some interesting historical information, but I would not use them much more than that.

 

Junie B. Jones might be another one to avoid. Bad grammar pervades these, and also the main character is pretty poorly behaved...not a great example for an impressionable child.

[razorbackmama]

I've seen adult books written this same way. I can understand the occasional sentence fragment written for emphasis reasons or something like that, but this particular author has a tendency to write in fragments.

 

All the time.

 

;)

 

In fact, entire paragraphs will consist of a short fragment.

 

Often.

 

;)

 

DRIVES ME BONKERS. The occasional use doesn't bother me, but when it's overdone...ugh ugh ugh.

[JudyJudyJudy]

It doesn't bother me when authors of adult books do that for emphasis. However, I think it's especially important for young children to read sentences that are written correctly.

[razorbackmama]

It doesn't bother me when authors of adult books do that for emphasis. However, I think it's especially important for young children to read sentences that are written correctly.

 

Totally agree! And I can handle adult books to a point. But when the majority of the text is fragments...ugh. But yes, it should be nearly non-existent in children's books!:iagree:

[PeterPan]

I might not be in love with them, but my dd enjoyed them. Actually, she had one of them out today as bedtime reading, lol. All things in moderation. If they read those and move onto something better, it's ok. If they read those and never move on, it's a problem. :)

[Mesa]

I agree with you. I wish these books were written better. I do have to say though.... I had a very reluctant reader until he got his hands on a MTH book. Now he is an avid reader. I credit the "spark" to these books.

I was willing to try ANYTHING to get this kid to read.

[razorbackmama]

My dd loves them. Since she reads other things too, I'm not concerned.

 

And...truth be told, I've seen errors even in "great" children's literature. I go to give a dictation sentence and notice that yikes, this sentence wasn't punctuated correctly!:tongue_smilie:

[lilbean05]

We aren't huge fans either, HOWEVER, we have decided to view it as "artistic expression" or "literary license". Poetry is often done this way, so while we don't think it is the best form of writing, we aren't going to prohibit the books because of it.

[Evergreen Academy]

We have found that with this series and with many other popular children's books. I might let the kids read them, but only after they've read their assigned, well written books. Truthfully I've found this problem in many adult works of fiction as well. I have picked up many books, some NYT best-sellers, with such terrible sentence structure and grammar that I can't bring myself to finish reading. I have heard that the average book written to adults today is written at about a 6th grade level - which isn't surprising. Sad and not surprising...

Blessings,

Aimee

Mom to 6 great kids ages 6-18, schooling grades 1, 3, 3 and 6

[Mom0012]

I think the intent is more to get children to practice their reading rather than to be a great piece of literature to be used for illustrative grammar purposes. They're a step up from Frog & Toad and Little Bear. At least that's how I see them.

 

I agree! This really helped my son take off with his reading. He enjoyed reading all 30 of them and they really helped him build fluency and confidence.

 

Lisa

[Carol in Cal.]

We have found that with this series and with many other popular children's books. I might let the kids read them, but only after they've read their assigned, well written books.

 

I have largely been able to avoid this problem by primarily using children's books that were written by 1975 or so, or by authors who had started publishing by then. The 'bad grammar and sentence fragments' trend seems to have started subsequently.

[CourtneySue]

I guess my main concern has more to do with the fact that these books are written for children who are still learning proper grammar.

 

I do understand appreciating these books if it is what gets your child to read. I remember reading The Read Aloud Handbook by Jim Trelease and he wrote that teachers of ESL classes would use books like Sweet Valley High to improve reading skills--and it worked! I know Charlotte Mason is against "twaddle", which I agree with in principle, but, sometimes, if a little twaddle gets someone reading than I think there's a place for it. IMHO

[PeterPan]

I understand your concern, but my dd was a HUGE buff of them (loved the history, the themes, the humor) and didn't have a problem with it carrying over into her speech or writing. I think it's a matter of balance. If they're getting lots of language input in the home, talking with their parents, listening to read alouds, enjoying books on tape, hearing talk radio on the car, etc., I don't think one thing, even a poorly/incorrectly written potato-chip thing, is going to hurt them. But if they don't get talked to a lot in the home, have little language input other than texting and the fragments of tv speech, and then read junk (whether it's MTH or TEXTBOOKS), it's going to be a problem. There the junk is such a huge portion of their input that it actually forms their patterns. I really and truly think this happens with some kids and results in their poor writing, short sentences, etc. They're a reflection of their input over the years. But when the proportion is largely toward mature speech, where you are reading them EXCELLENT read alouds with complex sentence pattern, when they are hearing good english all around them, a little bit here or there just isn't going to be a problem. They're going to laugh at it and recognize it for what it is, just like your dc did.

[silvermine]

I found them a little formulaic and such, but when ds was too young for SOTW, we read them to get him started on understanding something about history. You know, just a little something to think about so he can make more sense of SOTW when he gets there.

 

I would much rather read them than the "Secrets of Droon" series, which my ds loves, and I find to be so horribly written I can hardly stand it.

[Guest]

My little guy really enjoys them, they're the only chapter books he'll really listen to yet. I've resorted to kind of re-phrasing the books as I read them. I kind of skim the words to come and make it sound a little more proper. :D

 

I love that we can study history with them, though, so I am willing to do that.

[PeterPan]

Oh PLEASE find something better to use as read alouds, mercy... Have you tried your library for books on tape/cd/download? My dd at that age LOVED:

 

The Chronicles of Narnia (unabridged, Harper Audio)

Charlotte's Web (read by E.B. White with all the voices, hilarious)

Uncle Remus, Old Mother West Wind, and anything in that vein

the Little House series

 

There might be other, more boy-specific or boy-friendly titles you could find.

 

Just turn it on while they play. That way they can get their wiggles and still get good language in. MTH is NOT good language and I wouldn't use it as a read aloud, bleh. The goal is to read them stuff that stretches them, books that build their vocabulary, things they won't be able to read themselves for many more years. MTH is an early reader series, something he'll be able to read for himself in a year or two if you just wait. Spend your time on the meaty stuff. He doesn't have to listen, just have him in the room and he can learn by osmosis. You could also put them on in the car.

 

BTW, my new ds is a real wiggler, and the only way to get him still for books is to nurse him. Even then he has arms flailing, body twisting, and is generally all over the place. I'm guessing he's gonna be osmosis boy with books, not sitting still to listen to chapter books either, haha. But he'll have no choice. He'll play and they'll be on. :) I know it works, because I see what it did for my dd. I always read her real books, things like the Lang Fairy Tales, Little House series, etc., when she was that age. When she started to read, her reading TOOK OFF, and I think it was because she literally just knew the words. You want to read them lots of real books, things that expand their vocabulary, sentence structure, etc. so they're prepared to read those things when they come to them.

[momof8]

I found the same thing in the Junie B. Jones series. It had bad grammar and bad spelling. Yikes!

[Mommy22alyns]

They are actually more annoying as read-alouds. I let the girls read them independently for the "extra" information in the books. They're a fun supplement for history and science at this age and I don't pretend they're great literature. I reserve read-aloud time for things that are more complex that they can't read on their own.

 

I haven't noticed any ill effects on their grammar either. :)

[Guest QueBelle]

One of my pet peeves is bad grammar. And speling. Don't know if we'll continue this serees.

[Tranquility7]

YES! The sentence fragments and overall poor writing drives me crazy. I really wanted to like MTH - lots of friends do - but I just cannot bear the thought of letting DS read poor grammar and writing when there is plenty of better stuff out there.

[Khselee]

Oh, the Junie B. Jones series drove me absolutely batty. I'd take MTH over JBJ any day of the week. When he read through Junie B. my then 5 year old kept stopping to ask if she was using real or pretend words.

[anneofalamo]

We loved them!

An enjoyable time was had by all as they were read.

My now (He read them at age 6 or 7?) 13 year old son, was enticed into History on his own after Volcano at Noon? I think that was the title? He researched the real story of Mt. Vesuvius. He now devours any book about History for fun.

 

Then, I am the run-on queen, had to take Easy Grammar 3rd grade first by myself so I could teach what a verb and preposition was to my children. English was never my forte'! ha ha :lol: and I home-school!

[Tonia]

They're not great literature but do serve a purpose - a bit of "chapter book transition" for those who aren't quite ready to read full chapter books. But I would make sure it wasn't the only thing my child was reading. I highly doubt the few my daughter have read will affect her grammar/writing skills when she's older.

 

I wouldn't be using them for read-alouds. There are just too many good books out there to read books meant for children learning to read.

[Cassy]

We loved them!

An enjoyable time was had by all as they were read.

 

Same here. DS7 is half way through the series just now. He was/is very slow to learn to read, but has really enjoyed The Magic Tree House, and his reading has improved out of all recognition as a result.

 

I must say, the grammar irritated me intensely at first, but overall they've been such a success here that I completely overlook it now (also, I think I've rather got used to it now :001_smile:).

 

Best wishes

 

Cassy

[Aurelia]

The sentence fragments drive me nuts, too. My eye twitches every time Ariel gets to sentences like "There he was. In the hall. Alone." It makes me want to edit the entire thing so it's less painful when she reads. But, as painful as that is, I think it would be even more torturous to read them to her.

[5LittleMonkeys]

Dd8 just put all ours into the library donation box. I realized she was actually learning all the things I've been teaching her about grammar and writing when she couldn't get through a page without telling me how the sentences should have been arranged.:lol: Their actually great tools for discussing bad writing.

[Caribbean Queen]

We don't read them because they are so poorly written.

[JenninMN]

My pet peeve with the books was shined. "Jack shined his flashlight all around the room." I thought it was shone. I thought shined was not a word. I finally checked R & S 5 and shined was not correct. But I googled it and shined came up as an alternate to shone. Am I totally wrong, or is this an instance of usage that has changed over the years?

[Haiku]

My DS4 is just beginning to read, but I'm glad she alerted me to this fact before I bought any.

 

People discuss this frequently and get all upset by it. My kids have read all the Jack and Annie books multiple times. The science and history they have learned from them far outweigh that fact that the sentences are watered down to reach a targeted reading level. My advice is don't worry about it at all. What your son remembers from Jack and Annie as he grows up won't be the grammar.

 

Tara

[Maus]

I have made it all the way through the series with my kids.

 

The first ”set” -- 1-28 -- are definitely full of those annoying sentence fragments. Starting with 29 -- the first ”Merlin mission” -- the writing jumps at least two grade levels and the sentences are much the same as any serial chapter book.

 

They got my kids interested in being read to* and in reading on their own, so I'm not going to diss them.

 

 

*I should clarify that. My kids have always loved being read to, in a cuddle on your lap and look at the pretty pictures kind of way. Magic Tree House got them interested in following plot without pictures -- their first chapter books. The first books where I could send them to bed and sit on their floor and read, instead of them fighting to be the one who sat on my lap.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Maus
Typing on phone sometimes yields weird results

[Aurelia]

My pet peeve with the books was shined. "Jack shined his flashlight all around the room." I thought it was shone. I thought shined was not a word. I finally checked R & S 5 and shined was not correct. But I googled it and shined came up as an alternate to shone. Am I totally wrong, or is this an instance of usage that has changed over the years?

 

 

It's a usage change. I'm ok with shined in that context, as long as the phrase "it's itching me" never becomes acceptable. :tongue_smilie:

[...................]

TO me, The Magic Tree House has one purpose only: to convince fledgling readers that reading is fun. Aside from that, I am not thrilled with them. I would NEVER use them for a read aloud, and I would try to find anything else to read, for my kids, if I could.

 

I skipped the magic heavy books, but even still, I found Annie to be such a foolish and annoying character, that I skipped this series altogether for my dd, who was associating with the Annie character, when she read two of the books.

 

That said, these were the ONE SERIES, that took my son from annoyed with bothering to read, to reading, reading, reading all day long. Thankfully he associated with the more mature, wise boy character though. :)

 

I totally recommend them if you have a little boy especially who is just getting off the ground reading, sick of Dr. Seuss, read through all of Nate the Great, Tired of the "Level 1 Readers" and not interested in the pathway readers!