why is this sentence diagrammed this way?

[mazakaal]

We're in Analytical Grammar, Unit 7, Exercise 3, Number 5.

 

The sentence is:

 

His classmates in grammar school elected him class poet.

 

The answer key has the 'him' as an indirect object under the verb and 'poet' as the direct object after the verb.

 

My son put the 'him' as the direct object because when you ask, "Classmates elected who or what?" the answer is, "The classmates elected him."

 

I know that the instructions in the lesson say that if you have three nouns left over, the first is the subject, the second is the indirect object, and the third is the direct object, but it still feels like 'him' should be the direct object because he is getting elected.

[Saille]

I think it's because the office being elected was that of class poet. They weren't electing a "him"; they were electing a "poet".

[mrsrevmeg]

I think it's because the office being elected was that of class poet. They weren't electing a "him"; they were electing a "poet".

:iagree:

[Capt_Uhura]

:iagree: poet is the direct object and passing the action to "him" the indirect object.

[HootyTooty]

I think it's because the office being elected was that of class poet. They weren't electing a "him"; they were electing a "poet".

:iagree:

[Ester Maria]

Your son is right, regardless of what the grammars say, when it comes to the logical functions within the sentence. God how I dislike traditional grammars. But okay, here's the logical diagramming, I did it on Italian too because the logical functions are transparent in both, so you can see clearly what's what:

 

They elected him the poet.

L'hanno eletto il poeta.

LO (him) = oggetto diretto (direct object)

hanno eletto ((they) elected) = verbo (verb)

il poeta (the poet) = complemento predicativo dell'oggetto (something like, "predicative supplement of the object")

 

The problem is in the lack of distinction between the object and the 'complemento' of the object. That's ONLY ONE of the problems of traditional grammars.

[LizzyBee]

My schools taught that for a word to be an IO, you have to be able to rearrange the sentence to S-V-DO-to IO. In the OP's sentence, you wouldn't say: His classmates in grammar school elected class poet to him. I agree with the OP that him is the DO.

[Capt_Uhura]

Yes, you can rewrite the sentence so that the indirect object is now the object of a preposition. It changes the emphasis of the sentence. I like the trick of changing it to see if the sentence still makes sense!

[ekarl2]

Megan,

 

At this point in AG, we're dealing with the sentence patterns. That is a pattern three sentence and the parts go in this order: Sub-v-ido-do.

 

If you want to get very specific, it's not ido-do, it's an objective complement. Mom chose not to discuss the difference since it has absolutely no bearing on usage or punctuation. We teach 5 pattern, others teach 7 (objective complements). Remember, her goal was to write a thorough, mastery-level program that covered what was necessary to allow the student to punctuate and use the language correctly. That's why AG is a faster program; there are a lot of minor things about English grammar that might be "interesting" to know, but they don't serve a larger purpose.

 

I think it's fine to analyze it and break it down, but at this early stage of the game in AG, it really helps if the student just follows the patterns as we teach them. After those are mastered, it's very easy to discuss other things like this, and it takes a mere moment for the child to understand the difference since he has mastered the other stuff already.

[mazakaal]

Thanks, Erin.

 

I was almost more confused by the replies I got than I was when I asked the question. :001_smile: Thank you to everyone who replied, though. It just shows my grammar ignorance to not have any idea what an objective complement is.

 

By the way, Erin, my son is doing MUCH better with the program since we spoke on the phone. He is understanding everything (well, except this question) and getting almost every answer correct. Thanks so much for taking the time on the phone with me.

 

Megan

[ekarl2]

Thanks, Erin.

 

I was almost more confused by the replies I got than I was when I asked the question. :001_smile: Thank you to everyone who replied, though. It just shows my grammar ignorance to not have any idea what an objective complement is.

 

By the way, Erin, my son is doing MUCH better with the program since we spoke on the phone. He is understanding everything (well, except this question) and getting almost every answer correct. Thanks so much for taking the time on the phone with me.

 

Megan

 

 

It's my pleasure.

 

I'm not in the classroom any more, so answering questions on the phone is the closest I get! :tongue_smilie::tongue_smilie: I really enjoy it!

 

I think the thing to take away from this conversation is that mom tried to simplify things that could be simplified without taking away from the goal of mastering mechanics (punct and usage). Don't worry about the terms I used. Just following the sentence patterns as their taught and know that we teach them that way for a reason.

 

Warmest blessings,