When you're teaching grammar and they look at you with glazed eyes...

[mykidsrmyjoy]

...what do you do? My DD is doing CLE Language Arts 500, and while she can easily spot a noun, pronoun, verb, etc. she has great difficulty figuring out whether a noun is a subject, direct object, indirect object, etc. or if a verb is a helping, linking, or being verb. Any advice on a better explanation for her to really understand? I don't want to move ahead without her comprehending, but I also know that she'll study this again in later grades. 

[BakersDozen]

I might find something animated and fun on YouTube, I would do some diagramming, but honestly, then I'd move on. My dc have not had to know a linking verb vs. being verb at any point that I can remember in later grades/years. Same with direct/indirect object. They might encounter it in their foreign language but they always pick up easily on the grammar. To me, grammar (specifically parts of speech) isn't a hill worth dying on past the basics.

[HomeAgain]

We have adapted a Montessori method to enhance lessons.  We started with Grammarland and matching paper characters to give each part of speech a personality, and now he uses colored pencils to draw above each word in the sentence.  From there, it's a game of detective.  Who dunnit?  What did they do?  Ah!  TWO verbs in a row!  Which one is helping the other?!  Which ones are states of being?

It's a slower method, but it's a lot more playful than just reading the book and following the instructions to circle, underline, write abbreviations...

[knitgrl]

We are taking a month off from grammar, or maybe the rest of the year.....

[maize]

Personally I don't think a lot of formal grammar is needed in elementary. Knowing the basic parts of speech is enough.

[Ellie]

Easy Grammar. 🙂

[Lori D.]

Similar to HomeAgain, we talked it through. Joyce Herzog's 6 Weeks to Understanding Grammar is really good at modeling this. I got to hear her at a homeschool convention many years ago, and she makes the abstract ideas of Grammar very "concrete" and simple to understand. She starts you off by looking for the 2-3 words that make the "simple sentence" of the subject and simple predicate and then look for how each of the other words/phrases "add on".

We also used Winston Grammar which is more hands-on with "clue cards" to help students think through the function of each word. We actually didn't end up needing those, as instead, we would write out the sentences on a white board and use arrows to show the connections of the words/phrases and talk it through ala Joyce Herzog. I love HomeAgain's "whodunnit" style of questions/talking it through. (:D

I would assume that DD is 5th grade since she's doing CLE500? That's a great age to either take a break from Grammar (like Knitgrl above) to have some more time to develop the abstract thinking portions of the brain develop, or take a side-step in Grammar to some other program to get a new perspective or new type of explanation that might "click" better for DD and solidify the foundations of Grammar. BEST of luck in finding what works best! Warmest regards, Lori D.

Edited December 29, 2018 by Lori D.

[Farrar]

Give up?

Honestly, past the very basics, I don't think it benefits kids much until they're much further into the weeds with their own writing skills.

[hollyhock2]

I think I would try a different approach or a different program. It seems that some kids just don't really get grammar. If all else fails, I give up in about 8th grade. Before that, if grammar is difficult for them, I choose English programs that are grammar-light (LLATL is one). Even kids who don't really get grammar can learn to write well, which should be the end goal of doing grammar anyway, so taking it light or taking some time off isn't really that detrimental.

[forty-two]

This might not be your problem, but *my* problem is that I simply don't know grammar well enough myself.  I don't feel the differences in my bones, I don't have enough of an intuitive sense of the *reality* of what's going on, I don't myself really *feel* the reality that a given definition is describing.  In short, I myself can't connect the study of grammar to reality terribly well, so I'm unable to do the same for my dd.

I have finally understood enough of the point of grammar to grasp the power and potential of grammar study, though, so I do know what I'm aiming at, even if I can't do it at the moment.  All those fine grammar distinctions exist because people found it useful to notice those distinctions in dealing with *reality*, and so we find it useful to be able to indicate those distinctions in our language as well, so that we can more accurately describe reality.  So the study of grammar isn't just about being able to make distinctions in our use of language, but to learn to make those distinctions in our dealing with reality, as well as to be able to accurately convey those distinctions to others through our use of language.  Studying grammar helps one study *reality*; learning to make ever finer grammar distinctions teaches one to make ever finer distinctions in *reality* - and teaches how to explicitly *put those distinctions into words*.

And so it means that a huge chunk of learning grammar is learning to understand *what those distinctions mean in the real world*, just like a huge chunk of learning math is learning *what it means to add/sub/mult/div, etc.".  That's what keeps both grammar and math from becoming mere rote memorization: learning the *reality* those definitions describe, connecting one's intuitive sense of reality with the formal definitions, learning how to formally describe one's intuitions with accurate words.

I kind of ruined English grammar study for my oldest by too much curricula skipping.  I took a break, finally figured out the *point* of grammar study, and we are now haphazardly hitting grammar through Latin study.  On the plus side, dd12 gets the reason for grammar study now.  She's on board now.  And the grammar in our Latin studies is helping me fill in some intuitive gaps in my grammar.  I'm *feeling* it more, which is at least the foundation of figuring out how to explain it to dd.  I'm going to look into the methods and resources HomeAgain and Lori D. talked about - that sounded really great for learning to *feel* what those definitions mean.  Keep walking through sentences where you intuitively know the difference, and learn how the formal definition describes that difference, how the formal definition provides the words to say what you already noticed but didn't know how to describe.

I think it's fine to take a formal grammar break, though, especially at 5th grade.  I'm finding that 7th is a good age for really transitioning from grammar-stage "get a good intuitive sense of reality" to logic-stage "learn to explicitly and formally put that intuitive sense of reality into words".  I've noticed this year that we're really moving from "learn about things and how to do things" to "learn *what* those things are and *why* they work as they do".  I mean, this year the transition from "just read the thing or do the thing with understanding" to "formally and explicitly *explain* your understanding" really hit in all our core subjects.  And formal grammar study for me is really in the "formally and explicitly *explain* your intuitive understanding" camp - "you intuitively know what the sentence means, now it's time to learn how all the words work together to convey that meaning, and how to describe to others how they work together".  (I think grammar-stage grammar study is more "learning to explicitly name this intuitive meaning" without necessarily using the formal definition to explicitly *explain* the meaning.)

 

ETA: On subjects where I'm rock-solid, but I keep getting glazed eyes (fractions, I'm looking at you), I start trying to explain it in different ways.  I haul out manipulatives, I haul out the whiteboard, I work examples in as many different ways as I can think of.  (HomeAgain and Lori D's suggestions sound great for that.)  If we don't crack it in about a week or so, then I kind of separate out the trouble area from the rest of the subject.  I keep moving on in the subject, to non-trouble areas, so that we aren't just stuck on that one topic.  And I also alternate between taking a break from the trouble spot and explicitly working on the trouble spot, separately from the rest of the subject.  I bring in other resources and curricula, I read up on better ways to teach it, and generally just keep hacking away, with the occasional break as needed, till we get there.

Edited December 29, 2018 by forty-two

[forty-two]

18 hours ago, mykidsrmyjoy said:

...what do you do? My DD is doing CLE Language Arts 500, and while she can easily spot a noun, pronoun, verb, etc. she has great difficulty figuring out whether a noun is a subject, direct object, indirect object, etc. or if a verb is a helping, linking, or being verb. Any advice on a better explanation for her to really understand? I don't want to move ahead without her comprehending, but I also know that she'll study this again in later grades. 

Can your dd state the definition of a subject, DO, IO, etc.?  When I'm working through sentences with dd12 and she doesn't know what a given word is doing, I first ask her to give me the definition of the various choices.  Usually she can't - it's not just that she doesn't understand or can't apply the definition, it's that she doesn't actually *know* the definitions in the first place.  So I'm adding in an English grammar recitation period to our Latin recitation.

If she can state the definition, but is still having problems applying it, then next I'd try to see if she *understands* the definition, what that definition *means* in the real world.  (This is where I have problems.  I have an intuitive sense of DO/IO in that I can reliably identify them, but I can't really connect the formal definition to my intuitive sense - I can't really *explain* what they mean.  IDK if I just need to work through examples till something clicks or what.  Seeing them as verb complements, and compare/contrasting them to subject complements, is helping.  The idea of a complement *completing* the sense of a verb or subject - that's a definition with some connecting power for me.  I also keep thinking there's something in the definitions of subject/object, and the compare/contrast between the two, that would unlock a lot of the meaning, but it hasn't clicked yet.)

If she can state the formal definition, and can indicate that she understands said definition, whether by putting it in her own words or by explaining it to you or by giving examples of it, then I think it's just a matter of lots of practice, of walking her through each word/phrase, and asking, "Is it a subject?  Does it tell who or what the sentence is about?  Is it a DO?  Does it receive the action of the verb, does it answer the question what or whom after an action verb?  Is it an IO?  Does it precede the direct object and tell to whom or for whom the action of the verb is done?"

I think learning to understand the definition and learning to apply the definition can kind of intertwine - that applying can build understanding as much as understanding enables application.  Sometimes seeing a lot of examples is the best way to flesh out what the definition means. 

But I do think you need *some* hint of understanding as a base - that when you say, "that thing is a direct object", she has an intuitive sense of what "that thing" is, even if she doesn't really get what the formal definition has to do with her intuitive sense of what it is.  Mainly, that at some level, when you say "direct object", she has a glimmer of a clue what you are talking about.  (Like, I just told my dd to "put the thing down".  First she said, "what thing?" followed quickly by, "Oh, *that* thing."  That's what I mean - that when you explain "direct object", she's not stuck at, "what thing?", but instead is with you, "oh, *that* thing".)

[mykidsrmyjoy]

14 hours ago, HomeAgain said:

We have adapted a Montessori method to enhance lessons.  We started with Grammarland and matching paper characters to give each part of speech a personality, and now he uses colored pencils to draw above each word in the sentence.  From there, it's a game of detective.  Who dunnit?  What did they do?  Ah!  TWO verbs in a row!  Which one is helping the other?!  Which ones are states of being?

It's a slower method, but it's a lot more playful than just reading the book and following the instructions to circle, underline, write abbreviations...

I love this and think DD would too. 

I don't think DD has any intuitive sense of grammar at all. She reads very, very well, communicates well and has an advanced vocabulary, but also tends to shut down when faced with new, or in her mind, challenging, material. But I know, grammar is challenging! I guess I just want to make sure I'm doing my best to present it in an understandable way. Does anyone have any suggestions for games or supplements that would help? 

[HomeAgain]

7 hours ago, mykidsrmyjoy said:

 Does anyone have any suggestions for games or supplements that would help? 

We have an old Mad Libs card game here that actually helps a lot.  It's played a bit like Rummy - each player gets 11 cards and you have to make sentences of progressively longer lengths with them.  We start with a 2 card sentence: Subject/predicate.  Once that reminder is down, we can build up. I keep a list of simple sentence rules in the game box - things like the 2 card rule, which verbs can be helping verbs, adjective/adverb rules..when I had him on a different writing program I would include the cards as part of his language arts -they were great for stretching his vocabulary.
Grammar Land by Nesbitt is a free ebook, I believe.  If you haven't read it together, I bet she would get a kick out of it.  Each chapter has little exercises at the end to reinforce the micro-lesson.  It's basic, but really cute and has some great memory tricks.

[maize]

3 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Yeah, same. We're not doing formal grammar aside from parts of speech for now (my daughter is 6.) I'm not sure I plan to tackle it at all in elementary, frankly.  

I might be prejudiced, though: I moved to an English-speaking country at age 11, past the age when kids focus on grammar, and I can't say that it has hampered me in any way. 

Most elementary schools in the US don't do intensive grammar at all.

I think most kids will benefit more from being read to than from diagramming sentences.

[HomeAgain]

2 hours ago, square_25 said:

Yeah, same. We're not doing formal grammar aside from parts of speech for now (my daughter is 6.) I'm not sure I plan to tackle it at all in elementary, frankly.  

I might be prejudiced, though: I moved to an English-speaking country at age 11, past the age when kids focus on grammar, and I can't say that it has hampered me in any way. 

I find this so interesting, mostly because I think of diagramming and parsing as the logical, mathematical part of a language.  It's actually soothing, especially when faced with a long, complex sentence from literature or a textbook.  I think that's why my youngest likes it so much, too.  He's not the best creative writer, but the study of language?  He's fascinated by it.  I can definitely say it has made his transition to Latin that much easier, too, and other languages with different grammar than English.  Once he understands how it should be, he's able to do more with it.

[Garga]

With CLE we just kept plugging along.  It takes some time, but eventually it just clicks.  When we first started CLE for math, I had come from a mastery curric and when my son didn’t understand something in CLE, I’d stop and beat the issue to death trying to explain it to him.  But I learned that the best way to handle CLE is to just keep moving forward.  After the huge amount of review, it will click.  The child doesn’t need to remember it right away.

For grammar, sometimes we’d work on something for months before it finally was solid in my son’s brain—especially what you wrote about in the OP—how to recognize the job each noun or verb is doing (acting as a subject or direct object, etc.)

I would even warn my guy, “Ok, you know the drill.  This might take some time to cement in your brain, but you’ll get it eventually.  Meanwhile, let’s review...”

[Garga]

I helped a 40-odd year old friend this summer prepare for a test to try to enter nursing school.  There was a LOT of grammar on the test—and not just the basics.  It was the stuff beyond noun-verb.  It went into predicate nominatives and things like that.   There was so much grammar that in the end, she couldn’t learn it all in time and she didn’t get a high enough score to enter nursing school.  She’s having to figure out a new path for herself.

That experience was a cold dash of reality.  I’m glad I didn’t skimp on grammar in elementary/middle school for my kids, and I sorta wish we were doing more in high school for my oldest.  A lack of grammar can come back and bite you later.  I am of the opinion that it’s important to start learning it in late elementary at the latest (4th or 5th), and to devote time to it every week for five or so years.    

[mykidsrmyjoy]

17 minutes ago, Garga said:

With CLE we just kept plugging along.  It takes some time, but eventually it just clicks.  When we first started CLE for math, I had come from a mastery curric and when my son didn’t understand something in CLE, I’d stop and beat the issue to death trying to explain it to him.  But I learned that the best way to handle CLE is to just keep moving forward.  After the huge amount of review, it will click.  The child doesn’t need to remember it right away.

For grammar, sometimes we’d work on something for months before it finally was solid in my son’s brain—especially what you wrote about in the OP—how to recognize the job each noun or verb is doing (acting as a subject or direct object, etc.)

I would even warn my guy, “Ok, you know the drill.  This might take some time to cement in your brain, but you’ll get it eventually.  Meanwhile, let’s review...”

Thank you for this reminder. 

[Garga]

On 12/29/2018 at 7:14 PM, forty-two said:

Can your dd state the definition of a subject, DO, IO, etc.?  When I'm working through sentences with dd12 and she doesn't know what a given word is doing, I first ask her to give me the definition of the various choices.  Usually she can't - it's not just that she doesn't understand or can't apply the definition, it's that she doesn't actually *know* the definitions in the first place.  So I'm adding in an English grammar recitation period to our Latin recitation.

If she can state the definition, but is still having problems applying it, then next I'd try to see if she *understands* the definition, what that definition *means* in the real world.  (This is where I have problems.  I have an intuitive sense of DO/IO in that I can reliably identify them, but I can't really connect the formal definition to my intuitive sense - I can't really *explain* what they mean.  IDK if I just need to work through examples till something clicks or what.  Seeing them as verb complements, and compare/contrasting them to subject complements, is helping.  The idea of a complement *completing* the sense of a verb or subject - that's a definition with some connecting power for me.  I also keep thinking there's something in the definitions of subject/object, and the compare/contrast between the two, that would unlock a lot of the meaning, but it hasn't clicked yet.)

If she can state the formal definition, and can indicate that she understands said definition, whether by putting it in her own words or by explaining it to you or by giving examples of it, then I think it's just a matter of lots of practice, of walking her through each word/phrase, and asking, "Is it a subject?  Does it tell who or what the sentence is about?  Is it a DO?  Does it receive the action of the verb, does it answer the question what or whom after an action verb?  Is it an IO?  Does it precede the direct object and tell to whom or for whom the action of the verb is done?"

I think learning to understand the definition and learning to apply the definition can kind of intertwine - that applying can build understanding as much as understanding enables application.  Sometimes seeing a lot of examples is the best way to flesh out what the definition means. 

But I do think you need *some* hint of understanding as a base - that when you say, "that thing is a direct object", she has an intuitive sense of what "that thing" is, even if she doesn't really get what the formal definition has to do with her intuitive sense of what it is.  Mainly, that at some level, when you say "direct object", she has a glimmer of a clue what you are talking about.  (Like, I just told my dd to "put the thing down".  First she said, "what thing?" followed quickly by, "Oh, *that* thing."  That's what I mean - that when you explain "direct object", she's not stuck at, "what thing?", but instead is with you, "oh, *that* thing".)

All of this.

[Garga]

Also, OP, I think formal study of grammar is important, but we do CLE in half time.  We do half the level per year and skip a level from time to time.  For example, we might do CLE 500 in 5th and 6th, then jump to CLE 700 for 7th and 8th.  

[Junie]

Making a flow chart might help.

Is it a noun?  Yes! ---> Does it follow a linking verb? ----> Yes!  ----> It is a predicate nominative!

You can probably find a ready-made flowchart somewhere on the internet, but it might be better to make your own so that the terms are the same that CLE uses.  (Some books use predicate nominative, others use predicate noun, etc.)

Here are a couple of examples that I found with a really quick google search.  They're not exactly what you want, but they may give you some ideas.

example 1 and example 2

 

[Earthmerlin]

23 hours ago, HomeAgain said:

We have an old Mad Libs card game here that actually helps a lot.  It's played a bit like Rummy - each player gets 11 cards and you have to make sentences of progressively longer lengths with them.  We start with a 2 card sentence: Subject/predicate.  Once that reminder is down, we can build up. I keep a list of simple sentence rules in the game box - things like the 2 card rule, which verbs can be helping verbs, adjective/adverb rules..when I had him on a different writing program I would include the cards as part of his language arts -they were great for stretching his vocabulary.
Grammar Land by Nesbitt is a free ebook, I believe.  If you haven't read it together, I bet she would get a kick out of it.  Each chapter has little exercises at the end to reinforce the micro-lesson.  It's basic, but really cute and has some great memory tricks.

Is it possible for you to link that Mad Libs card game? It sounds fun but I couldn't find it on Amazon. Thanks!

[HomeAgain]

1 hour ago, Earthmerlin said:

Is it possible for you to link that Mad Libs card game? It sounds fun but I couldn't find it on Amazon. Thanks!

Ours is so old I didn't know if they still made it, but I found it!  Mad Libs Card Game.  It was a thrift store find several years ago for us.  I want to say it only contains nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs..maybe one more? 

[Garga]

8 hours ago, square_25 said:

 

Interesting! That's kind of surprising, honestly. I know I've taken the SAT and the GRE and never needed it. And one doesn't need it for university, or for most graduate programs either, as far as I know. Perhaps if I did graduate school in a non-STEM field, I'd have needed to brush up on grammar for the subject tests? I can't be sure, since I never took that path. 

I know! I was pretty horrified for my friend. There was just no way for her to have time to learn everything she needed to know for the test.  I tried, but the volume was too much.  I thought it was the most bizarre thing that there was so much grammar on a test for nursing.  I mean, maybe for some sort of writing job, but nursing?  

[Skippy]

On 12/28/2018 at 10:43 PM, mykidsrmyjoy said:

...but I also know that she'll study this again in later grades. 

This is the key here. She will study this again. Grammar really builds on itself, and she will comprehend it better as she reviews and extends her knowledge each year. Kids really get bogged down with all of the terminology in grammar. I wouldn't stress or spend any more time on it this year.