The KISS Grammar Site -- Main Page
KISS Grammar
Level 6.5 Statistical Stylistics:
Normative (Statistical) Stylistics & "Syntactic Maturity"
Free, from the KISS Grammar Web Site
© Ed Vavra
August, 2012
Contents
Preface 3
Statistical Exercises and KISS Grammar 3
Introduction 10
“Warm-up” Exercises for Analyzing Students’ Writing 13
“Squeaky and the Scare Box” (#1) 13
“Squeaky and the Scare Box” (#2) 15
The Opening Paragraph of “The Sleeping Beauty” 18
The Spring Beauty: An Ojibbeway Legend 21
The Poplar Tree, by Flora J. Cooke 23
The opening of “The Twelve Months” 25
Samples of Students’ Writing for Statistical Analysis 28
The Writing of Third Graders 28
My Porcelain Doll 29
My Friend 34
The Writing of Fourth Graders 37
My New Motor Scooter (Sample G 2) 38
Cooking Pancakes (Sample TA – 2) 42
The Writing of Fifth Graders 48
The Writing of Sixth Graders 48
The Writing of Seventh Graders 48
The Writing of Eighth Graders 48
The Writing of Ninth Graders 48
Suggestions about Graphing and Statistics: The “How” and the “What” 49
Submitted Projects on Statistical Stylistics 58
An Essay on Statistical Exercises and KISS Grammar 58
Preface
Although some readers may already be familiar with it, it may be best to start this book with the essay on this topic in the Background Essays:
|Ballet Dancers |[pic] |Statistical Exercises |
|in the Wings | |and KISS Grammar |
|(c. 1900) | | |
|by | | |
|Edgar Degas | | |
|(1834-1917) | | |
Although many English teachers are not enamored by statistics, statistical exercises are very important for two reasons. First, they can provide useful information about students’ writing, not only to teachers, but also to the students themselves. Second, used within the KISS framework, they can be a primary source of motivation for students.
Most of the research on natural syntactic development was based on statistical studies. In the 1960’s, Kellogg Hunt demonstrated that the average length of students’ main clauses (which he called “T-units”) naturally increases with age. Hunt called them “T-Units” because of the lack of a standard definition for “main clause.” Hunt’s “T-unit” is the same as the KISS definition of a main clause. Before Hunt’s work, researchers had been looking for a “yardstick” to measure “syntactic maturity”—the way and rate at which sentences naturally grow longer and more complex as people become more mature. Attempts to count words per sentence fail because third and fourth graders write long sentences by compounding main clauses, especially with “and.”
Hunt’s work was reinforced by the studies of Roy O’Donnell and of Walter Loban. In the following two tables, Loban’s data was taken from Language Development: Kindergarten through Grade Twelve. Urbana, IL.: NCTE. 1976. 32. Hunt’s and O’Donnell’s data is from Frank O’Hare’s Sentence Combining. Urbana, IL.: NCTE. 1971. p. 22.
Average Number of Words per Main Clause by Grade Level
|Grade Level |Loban’s Study |Hunt’s Study |O’Donnell’s Study |
|3 |7.60 | |7.67 |
|4 |8.02 |8.51 | |
|5 |8.76 | |9.34 |
|6 |9.04 | | |
|7 |8.94 | |9.99 |
|8 |10.37 |11.34 | |
|9 |10.05 | | |
|10 |11.79 | | |
|11 |10.69 | | |
|12 |13.27 |14.4 | |
|Professional Writers | |20.3 | |
The differences in the studies (such as O’Donnell’s showing 9.99 words/main clause for 7th grade students and Loban’s showing 8.94) should raise questions, but there is little doubt that the average number of words per main clause increases with age. Because a reader’s brain dumps to long-term memory at the end of main clauses, the clearing of STM creates a rhythm to the text. Even if readers can not identify main clauses, they can surely sense the difference in rhythm.
There are many questionable aspects to these studies. For example, what kind of writing did the student do? Narrative writing (stories), for example, almost certainly involve fewer cause/effect statements than do some expository topics. Then there are questions about the students’ preparation on the topic that they were asked to write about. Perhaps most important, exactly how were the writing samples analyzed—what counted for what? Sometimes, for example, students’ writing is illegible. How does one count what one cannot decipher? It was, I believe, Roy O’Donnell, who referred to these as “garbles.” Many of these studies simply omitted garbles from the text. But how many garbles were there in the samples?
I had the opportunity of meeting Roy O’Donnell at a national conference, and I asked him where the original samples were. His response was that they were probably in a box in someone’s garage. It is an understandable response—at that time, of course, there was no internet. If the samples of students’ writing were scanned and put on the internet (which is now easily possible), such studies would be much more valid. Statistical studies, however, are typically expensive and very time-consuming, and few, if any, such studies have been done to follow up on this work after the seventies. (That is why the KISS statistical studies section is called “Cobweb Corner.”)
All of these questions should make us cautious about how we use the results of such studies, but as general guidelines for what should be taught when, and as instructional exercises for students, these studies can be very helpful.
The studies that analyzed words per main clause, for example, also explored subordinate clauses per main clause:
Subordinate Clauses per Main Clause by Grade Level
|Grade Level |Loban’s Study |Hunt’s Study |O’Donnell’s Study |
|3 | | |.18 |
|4 |.19 |.29 | |
|5 |.21 | |.27 |
|6 |.29 | | |
|7 |.28 | |.30 |
|8 |.50 |.42 | |
|9 |.47 | | |
|10 |.52 | | |
|11 |.45 | | |
|12 |.60 |.68 | |
|Professional Writers | |.74 | |
The large increase between seventh and eighth grade led Hunt and some of his colleagues to conclude that subordinate clauses are mastered in seventh grade. This is an extremely provocative and complicated question that I cannot discuss here in detail. It is interesting to note, however, that in my experience seventh grade teachers are the ones who are most likely to complain about the comma-splices, run-ons, and fragments in their students’ writing. These are all clause-boundary errors that could be the result of their average and below-average students struggling to get subordinate clauses into their writing.
Also interesting and relevant here is O’Donnell’s concept of “formulas”—strings of words that children master as wholes without total mastery of the grammatical construction. By the time they enter school, for example, most children have used subordinate clauses as direct objects thousands of times after “formulas”” such as “Daddy said I could go.” Similarly, they may learn and use many adverbial clauses as strings—“When it gets dark, come home.” My point here is that if the results of these studies are valid, they pose a serious question about what we should expect from—and what grammar we should teach—to students before they enter seventh grade.
Unfortunately, the work of these researchers was abused as some educators began to assume that longer equals better. Thus, many of the studies that supposedly show that teaching grammar is useless (or even “harmful”) were based on sentence-combining exercises and then considered the longer sentences as simply better—even if they contained more errors.
The trend toward sentence-combining led to many teachers simply bringing sentence-combining exercises into their classrooms—for everyone to do. The teachers were almost always unaware that in the studies that claimed sentence-combining is better, errors in the students’ writing had been eliminated before the final results were tallied. In one study that I am aware of, the errors tripled in the writing of the students who did the sentence-combining.” And, as might have been expected, sentence-combining is most effective with those students who are already good at combining shorter sentences into longer ones. [1] When such exercises are brought into the classroom for everyone to do, they simply push all students into writing longer sentences, thereby, perhaps, pushing good writers into longer and weaker sentences.
The KISS Approach, of course, enables students to see what, how, and why when they are combining sentences so that errors will not increase, but statistical exercises in KISS grammar also enable students to see where they themselves are in relation to their classmates (and everyone else for that matter). If nothing else, students can be given the results of the studies by Hunt, O’Donnell, and Loban (above). Then, instead of an emphasis on longer, longer, and longer sentences, most students should be encouraged to aim for the average. If, for example, they are between eighth and eleventh grades, they (and their teachers) should be satisfied if they are averaging ten words per main clause. Instead of pushing for more length, the instructional emphasis should be on sentence variety, and control (i.e., avoiding errors.) With that control, they will progress, naturally, into longer main clauses.
In the KISS Approach, students can start doing such studies of their own writing as soon as they are fairly comfortable in KISS Level 3 (Clauses). In the approach, students put a vertical line at the end of each main clause. To arrive at a figure comparable to that in the studies, all they have to do is to count the words in the passage they wrote and are analyzing, and then divide that number by the number of vertical lines. Most students will find themselves pleasantly pleased. Some, however, will see for themselves that they are below the norm, and, human nature being what it is, they will probably want to catch up, especially since the KISS Approach can give them good, usable guidance for doing so.
The students that find themselves well above the norm raise some additional questions. The first two are How much above the norm are they, and how error-free is their writing? If their writing is basically error-free, and they are not much above the norm for professional writers (20 words per main clause), then they are fine. If their writing contains numerous errors, they should be encouraged to simplify and gain control.
My college Freshmen often did such a study. As a class, they always averaged between 14.9 and 15.5 words per main clause. But I usually had three or four students who average close to 25 words per main clause. These students are, I firmly believe, hurting themselves. The KISS psycholinguistic model helps students understand how and why. The model suggests that we process incoming information in a very tight, seven-slot, working memory. Within those seven slots, we probably handle not just the syntactic “chunking” of the sentence, but also some global questions—such as the point of the entire paper, the topic sentences, etc. Any crash in the processing may therefore cause a reader to lose track of important points of the paper. And the longer the main clauses are, the more likely it will be that some readers will have trouble processing them. An error that might be minor in a short main clause can cause a major crash in a 30-word main clause. Students understand this, and thus statistical exercises can put a brake on the push for more and more length. And, of course, the KISS Approach includes exercises in de-combining as well as sentence-combining.
The National Council of Teachers of English has often claimed that students have a right to their own language, but that right is meaningless unless students have some perspective on how their language, their writing, compares with everyone else’s. Statistical exercises can give students that perspective.
Kellogg Hunt raised another very interesting point in his “Early Blooming and Late Blooming Syntactic Structures.” [2] In essence, he claimed that most high school students use few, if any, appositives or gerundives. Both of these constructions can be seen as reductions of subordinate clauses.
Subordinate Clause: Martha, who is a high school senior, wrote an excellent paper on nuclear physics.
Appositive: Martha, a high school senior, wrote an excellent paper on nuclear physics.
Subordinate Clause: For a long time he struggled, as he tried to get the egg to go through the neck of the bottle.
Gerundive: For a long time he struggled, trying to get the egg to go through the neck of the bottle.
In an introduction to statistical studies, I cannot get into all the questionable aspects of this study, but my own research supports it as does developmental theory—students cannot very well master the reduction of subordinate clauses before they master subordinate clauses themselves.
Hunt’s essay is one of the primary reasons for KISS focusing on clauses in Level 3, and leaving gerundives (and other verbals) to Level 4. Appositives are in Level 5. (The other primary reason is that almost any text will include more clauses than it will gerundives or appositives.) Another nice aspect of Hunt’s idea of “late blooming” constructions is that it enables teachers to praise the “advanced” constructions that do occasionally appear in the writing of even the weakest student writers.
For students, the value of doing a statistical analysis of their own writing probably cannot be overstated, especially if it is done in the context of their classmates’ writing, or, if that is not possible, in the context of the research studies discussed above. One advantage is that counting constructions makes them look at the syntax of their own writing much more closely than they normally would. For example, once they learn how to identify prepositional phrases, students can place them in parentheses almost without thinking about them. Counting the prepositional phrases, however, requires more time, but also provides a different perspective—how many do they actually use? This becomes even more interesting if they can compare the number they use to what their classmates are doing. In other words, let the students analyze their own writing and then compare it to a norm.
I used to have my college Freshmen analyze a sample of their own writing for words per main clause and for subordinate clauses per main clause. One class period was spent in small-group work with the students checking each others’ analyses and statistics. In was not unusual for a student to bring her or his paper to me and say, “Doctor Vavra, I don’t have any subordinate clauses.” A quick check verified that, and I suggested sentence-combining exercises from the KISS site. The students appeared to take the problem and the suggestion seriously, especially since they could see for themselves, from what was going on in the class, that most of their peers had at least a few subordinate clauses in their samples.
They could also see that other students were coming up to me to ask, “I have a subordinate clause within a subordinate clause that is itself within a subordinate clause. Is that o.k.?” In such cases, my answer was usually, “Yes, but you might want to consider some de-combining exercises.” It was, I knew, near the end of the semester and most of these students would never have formal work on grammar again. Few of them probably used my suggestions. But the point is that these students were beginning to see and understand some basic aspects of their own writing styles in the context of the writing of their peers. Students should probably do at least one such statistical analysis of their own writing every year. And these studies should be kept so that the students can see for themselves how their writing styles change as they grow older.
Perhaps an even more important example is a retired gentleman who was in an advanced essay course that I was teaching many years ago. He wanted to write a book, but he said that first he needed to improve his writing. The class met once a week, and after most classes, he and I would chat about his writing. I couldn’t find any problems with it, and I kept probing to see what he thought his problem was. Finally, he stated that one of his teachers had told him that his sentences were too long. As soon as he said that, I knew what to do.
We took several samples of his writing and simply counted the number of words per main clause. We then compared the result (21 words per main clause) with those of Hunt, O’Donnell, and Loban. There was, in essence, nothing “long” about this gentleman’s sentences. But a subjective comment by one of his teachers resulted in his feeling insecure about his writing not only throughout the rest of his education, but also throughout his entire professional career! Teachers, often without thinking, can do that. I have often heard teachers refer to sentences as being “short and choppy,” although I myself have no idea of what they mean by “choppy.” Subjective comments can hurt students, often seriously.
Statistical research, done by students on their own writing, and done in the context of that by Hunt, etc. (and of some on this site) eliminates the subjectivity. And, as noted above, the objective of the project is not only to enable students to see how their writing matches the “norm,” but also to keep their writing within a reasonable range of that norm.
[pic]
1. See “Words Enough and Time: Syntax and Error One Year After,” by Elaine P. Maimon and Barbara F. Nodine. and “Sentence Expanding: Not Can, or How, but When,” by Rosemary Hake and Joseph M. Williams in Daiker, Donald A., Andrew Kerek, & Max Morenberg, eds. Sentence Combining and the Teaching of Writing: Selected Papers from the Miami University Conference, Oxford, Ohio, October 27 & 28, 1978. The Departments of English, University of Akron and the University of Central Arkansas, 1979.
2. “Early Blooming and Late Blooming Syntactic Structures.” In C.R. Cooper & L. Odell (eds.) Evaluating Writing: Describing, Measuring, and Judging. Urbana: NCTE, 1977. 91-104.
Introduction
Victor Shklovsky, a famous Russian literary critic, claimed that the purpose of literature is to make a “stone stony.” In other words, we see stones every day. Most of us see them so often that we really never look at them. We do not see their “stoniness.” Shklovsky’s point was that literature makes life strange. We see the world around us so often that we fail to notice what we see. Literature, according to Shklovsky, makes us look at life and think about it. His idea is very applicable to language.
Having been working within the KISS sequence, people will be able to identify subjects, verbs, clauses, etc. very quickly—almost without thinking about them. Statistical analysis slows us down—it forces us to look at various aspects of sentences in ways that we otherwise would not. How many words are in the average written sentence? When is a sentence too long? Too short? What makes adults’ sentences longer and more sophisticated than those of fourth graders? If students do several statistical analyses of their own writing and compare their results with those of their classmates, they can see for themselves that their sentences are short—or long—or, as Goldilocks preferred, “just right.”
Statistical stylistics, of course, involves the counting (and graphing or averaging) of various grammatical constructions in different texts, and then comparing the differences in those texts. This can be very time-consuming, not only in the analysis, but even more so in the presentation of the data. For classroom purposes, however, statistical projects can range from the relatively simple to the extremely (almost professionally) complex.
A relatively simple project, for example, can be to have students who have been working at KISS Level 3 analyze a short text and then count the words in it, the number of main clauses, the number of subordinate clauses, and then calculate both the number of words per main clause and the number of subordinate clauses per main clause. Counting the words in a page or less of text does not take all that long, and if students are writing on a computer, the “Word Count” function can simply give them the number of words in the text. Because they have analyzed the text (which they are often expected to do in KISS exercises), they can get the number of main clauses simply by counting the number of vertical lines that they have put at the end of each main clause. For the number of subordinate clauses, all they have to do is to count the number of the opening brackets that identify the beginnings of subordinate clauses. Divide the number of words by the number of main clauses, they have the number of words per main clause (Hunt’s “T-unit”).
If they are analyzing a selection of their own writing, the students can then decide for themselves if their sentences are “too long” or “too short,” or “just right.” They can also decide whether or not their sentences are varied in length, or too similar (and monotonous). Statistical analysis gives students informed freedom. No longer can someone tell them that their sentences are too long or too short.
Can third and fourth graders, for example, do a statistical analysis? This is an essential question. Within the KISS framework, there are so many possibilities that the specific answer will depend on the interests and skill of the teachers or parents. Suggestions are offered below in “Some Suggestions about Graphing and Statistics.” The other primary practical question is, How are statistical exercises used in KISS Grammar?
Why does KISS use writing prompts and samples from various state Department of Education assessment documents? For one, they are (or are supposed to be) unedited samples of the writing of students in specific grade levels. It is very important for parents, and especially for the students themselves, to see the range of writing done by students in specific grade levels. Some of the samples are atrocious. And some are surprisingly good. Second, the state Departments of Education assess each sample, not just for grammar, but also for such things as focus, organization, and content. Including all of that assessment in this section is not possible, but the on-line materials include links to each set of prompts, samples, assessment criteria, and assessments. If you are interested, in other words, you can find that material on this site, share the assessment criteria with your students, and have your students assess each sample for those criteria. This is not just grammar -- it is total writing instruction.
Note that the process of statistical analysis may be more important than the numerical results. This is especially true if students work in small groups to check their analyses of their own writing. During such small group work I have occasionally had students come up to me and say “I can’t find -- my group can’t find -- any subordinate clauses in my writing.” There were none. Most of the students in the class, of course, did have lots of subordinate clauses in their writing. This student, therefore, clearly discovered on his own that his writing was somewhat lacking. He was much more motivated to learn how to analyze sentences -- and to do some sentence-combining exercises on subordinate clauses.
At the other end, I have been asked, “Can a subordinate clause be in a subordinate clause that is in a subordinate clause that is in a subordinate clause?” The answer to that question is “Yes,” but professional writers rarely embed clauses that deeply because such deep embedding makes sentences more difficult to understand. In this case, the student became interested in the de-combining exercises.
The process may be more important than the results, but my students are interested in the norms. To give students a context for their results, you can use the data in KISS’s “Cobweb Corner.” As some people are aware, however, statistical studies can be very suspect. Sample size, sample selection, what is being counted, how, and how it is being reported are all complex questions. In “Cobweb Corner,” you will find several studies done within the KISS framework, but you will also find references to, and data from, several major studies done in the 1960’s and 70’s on the natural syntactic development of school children. (The dates suggest why “Cobweb Corner” is so named. In those two decades, statistical analysis was widely discussed; since then, it has been largely ignored.) When one steps back and looks at the overall picture, these studies show definite trends in such things as words per main clause, the frequency with which subordinate clauses are used, the use of appositives, etc.
For more on the history and purpose of statistical stylistics, see the “Essay on Statistical Exercises and KISS Grammar.” Most importantly, don’t become obsessive about the results. Enjoy watching the students learn for themselves that their sentences are too short, too long, or “just right.” Ultimately, after all, the length (or shortness) of their sentences should be should be their decision. Our job is to give them tools that they can use to see their writing in the context of the world in which they live.
“Warm-up” Exercises for Analyzing Students’ Writing
Every “Practice/Application” exercises includes space for two samples of the writing of students at a specific grade level. Just before these exercises, students are given one of the following “Warm-up” exercises to go over the method of analysis.
|“Squeaky and the Scare Box” (#1) |[pic] |
|I. Directions: | |
|1. Place parentheses ( ) around each prepositional phrase. | |
|2. Underline verbs twice, their subjects once, and label complements (“PA,” “PN,” “IO,” or “DO”). | |
|3. Place a vertical line after each main clause. | |
|4. Label each interjection (“Inj”), each noun used as an adverb (“NuA”), and each example of direct address| |
|(“DirA”). | |
1. There was a father mouse, there was a mother mouse, and there were three little baby mice.
2. One little mouse had sharp bright eyes, and he could see everything, even in the darkest holes.
3. The little mice obeyed their mother, and they were happy in their home in the pantry wall.
4. I could not tell you about all of these, but I am going to tell you about their Christmas party.
5. The stockings hung by the chimney, and the tall tree was standing in the parlor.
6. The children were asleep, and the father and mother had gone upstairs to bed.
II. Using the graph sheet, make a graph of the number of words in each main clause. In the graph, each row equals one main clause. Each column (after the yellow column) equals one word. Unless your teacher gives you other directions, shade in one square for each word in each main clause. If the clause is a compound, put a “C” in the yellow column.
Graphing Words per Main Clause
Based on sentences from "Squeaky and the Scare Box" (#1)
Analysis Key
1. There was a father mouse (PN), | there was a mother mouse (PN), | and there were three little baby mice (PN). |
2. One little mouse had sharp bright eyes (DO), | and he could see everything (DO), even {in the darkest holes}. |
3. The little mice obeyed their mother (DO), | and they were happy (PA) {in their home} {in the pantry wall}. |
4. I could not tell you (IO) {about all} {of these}, | but I am going to tell you (IO) {about their Christmas party}. |
5. The stockings hung {by the chimney}, | and the tall tree was standing {in the parlor}. |
6. The children were asleep, | and the father and mother had gone upstairs {to bed}. |
II. The color version of the graph:
[pic]
|“Squeaky and the Scare Box” (#2) |[pic] |
|I. Directions: | |
|1. Place parentheses ( ) around each prepositional phrase. | |
|2. Underline verbs twice, their subjects once, and label complements (“PA,” “PN,” “IO,” or “DO”). | |
|3. Place a vertical line after each main clause. | |
|4. Label each interjection (“Inj”), each noun used as an adverb (“NuA”), and each example of direct address| |
|(“DirA”). | |
1. The children have talked about the Christmas tree for days, and we have never seen one.
2. I found a little popcorn on the pantry floor, and I want some more.
3. The cat is not near; come and see the tree.
4. They nibbled the popcorn; they nibbled the candy; they nibbled the nuts; and they nibbled the cakes.
5. The door was opened, and the lights were turned on.
6. With a squeak, the mice scampered down from the tree; then they ran along the hall, through the pantry, and back to their home.
7. I am in a trap, but there isn't even a bit of cheese in it.
II. Using the graph sheet, make a graph of the number of words in each main clause. In the graph, each row equals one main clause. Each column (after the yellow column) equals one word. Unless your teacher gives you other directions, shade in one square for each word in each main clause. If the clause is a compound, put a “C” in the yellow column.
Graphing Words per Main Clause
# 2 Based on sentences from "Squeaky and the Scare Box"
Analysis Key
Suggestion: Consider using the fourth sentence as a writing model -- four main clauses all based on the same verb. Expand vocabulary -- see how many different verbs the students can find that will make sense in this exercise.
1. The children have talked {about the Christmas tree} {for days}, | and we have never seen one (DO). |
2. I found a little [#1] popcorn (DO) {on the pantry floor}, | and I want some more (DO). |
3. The cat is not near; | *You* come and see the tree (DO). |
4. They nibbled the popcorn (DO); | they nibbled the candy (DO); | they nibbled the nuts (DO); | and they nibbled the cakes (DO). |
5. The door was opened (P), | and the lights were turned on (P). |
6. {With a squeak}, the mice scampered down {from the tree}; | then they ran {along the hall}, {through the pantry}, and back {to their home}. |
7. I am {in a trap}, | but there isn't even a bit (PN) {of cheese} {in it}. |
Note
1. Note the ellipsis involved here -- it does not mean that the popcorn was little. It means "a little *bit of* popcorn." But at the same time, it means "I found popcorn." Thus the ellipsis slides into the direct object.
II. The color version of the graph:
[pic]
|[pic] |The Opening Paragraph of “The Sleeping Beauty” |
| |from The Child's World --Third Reader, |
| |by Hetty S. Browne, Sarah Withers, and W. K. Tate |
| |I. Directions: |
| |1. Place parentheses ( ) around each prepositional phrase. |
| |2. Underline verbs twice, their subjects once, and label complements (“PA,” “PN,” “IO,” or “DO”). |
| |3. Place a vertical line after each main clause. |
| |4. Label each interjection (“Inj”), each noun used as an adverb (“NuA”), and each example of direct |
| |address (“DirA”). |
Note: Your teacher will tell you which version to analyze.
Adapted:
Once upon a time there lived a king and queen. They were very unhappy. They had no children. But at last a little daughter was born, and their sorrow was turned to joy. All the bells in the land were rung to tell the glad tidings.
The Original:
Once upon a time there lived a king and queen who were very unhappy because they had no children. But at last a little daughter was born, and their sorrow was turned to joy. All the bells in the land were rung to tell the glad tidings.
II. Using the graph sheet, make a graph of the number of words in each main clause. In the graph, each row equals one main clause. Each column (after the yellow column) equals one word. Unless your teacher gives you other directions, shade in one square for each word in each main clause. If the clause is a compound, put a “C” in the yellow column.
The Opening Paragraph of "The Sleeping Beauty"
Analysis Key
Note: Because third graders have not yet studied adjectival and adverbial clauses, the "adapted" version reduces these to main clauses. Thus you may want to have the students just do the adapted version, or you may want to present them the challenge of the original.
Remember that the primary objectives of this type of assignment for third graders are to offer a change of pace (and a connection to math), to accustom them to the idea of graphing, and to prepare them for the analysis of the writing of their peers.
Adapted:
Once {upon a time} there [#1] lived a king (PN) and queen (PN). | They were very unhappy (PA). | They had no children (DO). | But {at last} a little daughter was born (P), | and their sorrow was turned (P) {to joy}. | All the bells {in the land} were rung (P) to tell the glad tidings [#2]. |
The Original:
Once {upon a time} there [#1] lived a king (PN) and queen (PN) [Adj. to "king" and "queen" who were very unhappy (PA) [Adv. to "were" because they had no children (DO)]]. | But {at last} a little daughter was born (P), | and their sorrow was turned (P) {to joy}. | All the bells {in the land} were rung (P) to tell the glad tidings [#2]. |
Notes
1. The normal KISS explanation here is to consider "There" the subject in a palimpsest pattern with "lived" written over "were." Alternatively, "There" can be explained as an adverb, or as an expletive.
2. "Tidings" is the direct object of the verbal (infinitive) "to tell." The infinitive functions as an adverb of purpose to "were rung."
II. The graphs:
Although third graders might not be able to see it (since they probably will not be doing both options), teachers might note the stylistic difference reflected in these two simple graphs. Our psycholinguistic model suggests that we chunk all the words in a main clause together in short-term memory and then dump to LTM at the end of main clauses. This dumping gives a basic rhythm to the text. In the original, the first main clause contains two subordinate clauses for a total of nineteen words. And it is not just a matter of words—in that clause the reader holds three S/V/C patterns in STM before dumping.
Adapted:
[pic]
Original:
[pic]
|The Spring Beauty: An Ojibbeway Legend |[pic] |
|by Henry R. Schoolcraft (Adapted) | |
|Ex # 3 - Statistical Analysis | |
Directions: First,
1. Place parentheses ( ) around each prepositional phrase.
2. Underline verbs twice, their subjects once, and label complements (“PA,” “PN,” “IO,” or “DO”).
3. Place a vertical line after each main clause.
4. Label each interjection (“Inj”), each noun used as an adverb (“NuA”), and each example of direct address (“DirA”).
An old man was sitting in his lodge, by the side of a frozen stream. It was the end of winter, the air was not so cold, and his fire was nearly out. He was old and alone. His locks were white with age, and he trembled in every joint. Day after day passed, and he heard nothing but the sound of the storm sweeping before it the new-fallen snow.
Second: Graphing Words per Main Clause
This selection has nine main clauses. Some of the main clauses are in compound sentences. Use the table to make a graph of the number of words in each main clause. Use one column for each main clause. If a sentence has one main clause, or if the main clause is the first in a sentence, for each word in the clause color one block in its column blue. If a main clause is the second (or later) in a compound sentence, color the blocks light blue.
The Spring Beauty: An Ojibbeway Legend
Analysis Key
An old man was sitting {in his lodge}, {by the side} {of a frozen stream}. | It was the end (PN) {of winter}, | the air was not so cold (PA), | and his fire was nearly out. | He was old (PA) and alone (PA) [#1]. | His locks were white (PA) {with age}, | and he trembled {in every joint}. | Day {after day} [#2] passed, | and he heard nothing (DO) {but the sound} {of the storm} sweeping {before it} the new-fallen snow [#3]. |
Notes
1. Alternatively, "alone" can be explained as an adverb.
2. Alternatively, "after day" can be described as an adverb to "passed."
3. "Snow" is the direct object of the gerundive "sweeping." The gerundive phrase modifies "storm."
Second: Title of the Work: The Opening of "The Spring Beauty"
|Graph of Words Per Main Clause |
| |
|17 |
|17 |
|17 |
|17 |
|17 |
|17 |
|17 |
|17 |
|17 |
|17 |
|17 |
|17 |
| |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
| |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
| |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
| |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
| |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
| |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
| |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
| |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
| |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
| |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
| |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
| |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
| |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
| |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
| |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
| |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
| |
|MC 1 |
|MC 2 |
|MC 3 |
|MC 4 |
|MC 5 |
|MC 6 |
|MC 7 |
|MC 8 |
|MC 9 |
|MC 10 |
|MC 11 |
|MC 12 |
| |
|[pic] |The Poplar Tree, by Flora J. Cooke |
| |From The Child's World --Third Reader |
| |by Hetty S. Browne, Sarah Withers, and W. K. Tate |
I. Directions:
1. Place parentheses ( ) around each prepositional phrase.
2. Underline verbs twice, their subjects once, and label complements (“PA,” “PN,” “IO,” or “DO”).
3. Place a vertical line after each main clause.
4. Label each interjection (“Inj”), each noun used as an adverb (“NuA”), and each example of direct address (“DirA”).
Long ago the poplar used to hold out its branches like other trees. It tried to see how far it could spread them.
Once at sunset an old man came through the forest where the poplar trees lived. The trees were going to sleep, and it was growing dark.
Second: Graphing Words per Main Clause
This selection has five main clauses. Some of the main clauses are in compound sentences. Use the table to make a graph of the number of words in each main clause. Use one column for each main clause. If a sentence has one main clause, or if the main clause is the first in a sentence, for each word in the clause color one block in its column blue. If a main clause is the second (or later) in a compound sentence, color the blocks light blue.
The Poplar Tree
Analysis Key
Long ago the poplar used to hold out its branches (DO) {like other trees}. | It tried to see [#1] [DO how [#2] far it could spread them (DO)]. |
Once {at sunset} an old man came {through the forest} [Adj. to "forest" where the poplar trees lived]. | The trees were going to sleep, | and it was growing dark (PA). |
Notes
1. At this KISS level, students may explain "tried to see" as the finite verb. After they learn about verbals as direct objects, they can explain "to see" as a verbal (infinitive) that functions as the direct object of "tried."
2. "How" here functions as both the subordinating conjunction and as an adverb to "far."
Second: Title of the Work: The Poplar Tree
|Graph of Words Per Main Clause |
| |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
|16 |
| |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
|15 |
| |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
|14 |
| |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
|13 |
| |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
|12 |
| |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
|11 |
| |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
|10 |
| |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
|9 |
| |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
|8 |
| |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
|7 |
| |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
|6 |
| |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
|5 |
| |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
|4 |
| |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
|3 |
| |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
|2 |
| |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
|1 |
| |
|MC 1 |
|MC 2 |
|MC 3 |
|MC 4 |
|MC 5 |
|MC 6 |
|MC 7 |
|MC 8 |
|MC 9 |
|MC 10 |
|MC 11 |
|MC 12 |
| |
|The opening of “The Twelve Months” |[pic] |
|A Slav Legend by Alexander Chodzko | |
|I. Directions: First, | |
|1. Place parentheses ( ) around each prepositional phrase. | |
|2. Underline verbs twice, their subjects once, and label complements (“PA,” “PN,” “IO,” or “DO”). | |
|3. Place brackets [ ] around each adverbial clause and draw an arrow from the opening bracket to the word that the | |
|clause modifies. | |
|4. Place a vertical line after each main clause. | |
|5. Label each interjection (“Inj”), each noun used as an adverb (“NuA”), and each example of direct address (“DirA”). | |
There was once a widow who had two daughters, Helen, her own child by her dead husband, and Marouckla, his daughter by his first wife. She loved Helen, but hated the poor orphan because she was far prettier than her own daughter.
Marouckla did not think about her good looks, and could not understand why her stepmother should be angry at the sight of her. The hardest work fell to her share. She cleaned out the rooms, cooked, washed, sewed, spun, wove, brought in the hay, milked the cow, and all this without any help.
Second: Graphing Words per Main Clause [Click here for the table.]
This selection has five main clauses. Use the table to make a graph of the number of words in each main clause. Use one column for each main clause. For each word in the clause color one block in its column blue. Some of these main clauses are long. In a sentence or two, explain what grammatical constructions make them so long.
From The Twelve Months -- A Slav Legend, by Alexander Chodzko
Analysis Key
There was once a widow (PN) [Adj. to "widow" who had two daughters (DO), Helen, [#1] her own child {by her dead husband}, and Marouckla, his daughter {by his first wife}.] | She loved Helen (DO), but hated the poor orphan (DO) [Adv. to "hated" because she was far prettier (PA) {than [#2] her own daughter}.] |
Marouckla did not think {about her good looks}, and could not understand [DO. of "could not understand" why her stepmother should be angry (PA) {at the sight} {of her}.] | The hardest work fell {to her share}. | She cleaned out the rooms (DO), cooked, washed, sewed, spun, wove, brought in the hay (DO), milked the cow (DO), and *did* all this (DO) {without any help}. |
Notes
1. "Helen," "child," "Marouckla," and "daughter" are all appositives to "daughters."
2. Traditionalists usually prefer to consider this "than" as a subordinate conjunction in a partially ellipsed clause -- "than her own daughter *was pretty*."
Title of the Work The Twelve Months -- A Slav Legend, by Alexander Chodzko
|Graph of Words Per Main Clause |
|26 |26 |
|Words per Main Clause: |Words per Main Clause (Colored): |
|[pic] |[pic] |
Additional Notes for Sample # 1 "My Porcelain Doll"
The 2001 Student Guide for Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards (November 2001), from which this third grade sample is taken, includes the following evaluation (p. 21):
|This sample is an ACCEPTABLE response. |
|Note: The underlined sentences are taken directly from the student scoring guide in Appendix B. |
|Ideas and Content: This paper scores a 4 in ideas. The writing is clear and sticks to the topic. The writer has chosen details that help |
|explain the main idea. The writer explains what the doll looks like, but does not tell much about why it is special. |
|Organization: This paper scores a 4 in organization. The writing has a clear beginning, middle and end. Details fit where placed and help the |
|reader understand the message. |
|Voice: This paper scores a 4 in voice. The writer speaks to the reader and the paper shows honesty and sincerity. I hope I get to keep it for |
|my hole life. She is the most beautiful thing I've ever had. |
|Word Choice: This paper scores a 4 in word choice. The word choices work to make the message clear, but there is not much variety; the writer |
|uses mostly color words. Her skirt is pink...her white blows...her shoes are pink...her hair is blondish brown...her lips are rosie pink...she|
|has blue eyes. |
|Sentence Fluency: This paper scores a 4 in fluency. Sentences make sense and flow from one to the other. Although the writer does repeat the |
|same sentence patterns, (her hair...her lips...her shoes...her skirt...) there is control of simple sentences and some control of more complex|
|sentences. |
|Conventions: This paper scores a 3 in conventions. There are a variety of errors in spelling, capitalization, and end punctuation. |
Because there are no examples of samples with scores of five or six, it is difficult to comment on these scores. The only thing that is troublesome in this evaluation is the reference (under "Conventions") about errors in end punctuation. The only such error that I can find in the transcribed version is the subordinate clause fragment in the first sentence -- "When it was my birthday and I was turning eight. I got a porcelain doll from by Grandma." If the evaluators are going to count such things as errors, they should also explain how third graders can be taught to avoid them. Too many educational "experts" will simply claim that third graders should be taught to understand clauses, but thus far no one has proposed an effective way of doing this. Note too that the frequent advice to students that they should put a period after a long pause would not help this student. Third graders are entering the world of writing from the world of oral communication that they have already mastered. And in that oral world, we speak in fragments much of the time.
We should also probably consider the probable cause of this single end punctuation error in this student's writing. If we eliminate the first (corrected) sentence from consideration, the remaining text consists of 100 words in 15 main clauses. That averages out to 6.7 words per main clause. If we look at this in the framework of the research on natural syntactic development, and in view of the KISS psycholinguistic model, it suggests that this student can juggle, on average, seven words in short-term memory before having to, so to speak, "dump" to the paper, i.e., end the sentence. The corrected version of the first sentence, however, is an eighteen-word main clause, almost three times this student's average. Simply put, this sentence simply overloaded this student's processing ability, especially since this sentence involves three clauses, two of which would be subordinate. Thus, having gotten ten words into the sentence, the student put down a period, cleared short term memory, and started the rest as a new sentence. Note that the next longest main clauses in this passage are the two nine-word main clauses at the end of the passage. Expecting third graders not to make this type of error is therefore comparable to expecting pre-schoolers never to say "I cutted the paper," or "Daddy readed the book to me." The error is probably an expected stage in natural syntactic development.
Perhaps the best way to help this student is to take a longer perspective. As noted above, this student averages slightly below seven words per main clause. That is below the 7.6 words per main clause reported by Loban for third graders, and below the 7.67 reported by O'Donnell. Careful, gentle work with sentence-combining exercises could help this student increase the normal length of her main clauses, thereby bringing the longer clauses that result from subordinate clauses (like the first in this passage) into her range of competence. Such exercises would also address the evaluators' comments about the repetition of simple sentence patterns. These exercises should go beyond the typical textbook sentences such that students, even third graders, are encouraged to "revise" what they have written by, in some cases, combining sentences:
|It is a ballet dancer. Her hair is braided. |It is a ballet dancer with braided hair. |
|She has roses in her headband. She has a rose on her white|She has roses in her headband and a rose on her white |
|blouse. |blouse. |
|She has blue eyes. Her hair is blondish brown. |She has blue eyes and blondish brown hair. |
Another type of stylistic revision exercise would be to ask the students to move prepositional phrases within a sentence:
|She has roses in her headband. |In her headband she has roses. |
|She has a rose on her white blouse. |On her white blouse, she has a rose. |
|She has a beautiful pink bow on the edge of her sleeves.|On the edge of her sleeves she has a beautiful pink |
| |bow. |
My Friend
Directions:
First
1. Place parentheses ( ) around each prepositional phrase.
2. Underline verbs twice, their subjects once, and label complements (PA, PN, IO, or DO).
3. Place brackets [ ] around each subordinate clause that functions as a direct object and write "DO" over the opening bracket.
4. Place a vertical line after each main clause.
5. Label each interjection ("Inj"), each noun used as an adverb ("NuA"), and each example of direct address ("DirA").
My friend is nice to me, and I am nice to him, and his name is Jereme. Jereme is nice to me, and I am nice to him, and he is nice to me, and I like him.
Second: Graphing Words per Main Clause
Make a graph of the number of words in each of the first twenty main clauses. Use one row for each main clause and color in one cell for each word. If a main clause is the second or later in a compound sentence, put a "C" in the yellow cell for that row. If the sentence is a fragment (an incomplete sentence), put an "F" in the yellow cell. [There is a link to version 2 of the graphs presented below.]
My Friend
Analysis Keys
My friend is nice (PA) {to me}, | and I am nice (PA) {to him}, | and his name is Jereme (PN). | Jereme is nice (PA) {to me}, | and I am nice (PA) {to him}, | and he is nice (PA) {to me}, | and I like him (DO). |
Graphs:
5.4 w/mc
|Words per Sentence: | |
|[pic] | |
|Words per Main Clause: |Words per Main Clause (Colored): |
|[pic] |[pic] |
Additional Notes for Sample # 4 "My Friend"
The 2001 Student Guide for Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards (November 2001), from which this third grade sample is taken, includes the following evaluation (p. 27):
|This is NOT an acceptable response. |
|Note: The underlined sentences are taken directly from the student scoring guide in Appendix B. |
|Ideas and Content: This paper scores a 2 in ideas. The writer repeats the same idea (I am nicece to him and he is nicece to me). There is |
|limited support and details. |
|Organization: This paper scores a 1 in organization. There is no clear beginning or ending. Ideas and details are not tied together. |
|Voice: This paper scores a 2 in voice. The writer shows little involvement with the topic, purpose or audience. |
|Word Choice: This paper scores a 2 in word choice. Frequent repetition of a limited number of words although they are used correctly. |
|Sentence Fluency: This paper scores a 2 in fluency. It is a rambling sentence with no stops. Simple sentences are linked together with "and". |
|Conventions: This paper scores a 2 in conventions. A variety of errors include spelling, punctuation, and capitalization. |
After looking at the samples from Pennsylvania sixth graders, a member of the KISS List wondered about how many students each of the various evaluations represented. It is a good question that is relevant here. (It is possible that Arizona reports that somewhere on their web site, but I have not found it.) In any case, the absence in this set of papers that score five or six suggests that there are more students at this end of the scale than there are at the upper end. And, if we are to leave no student behind, we need to be focusing on students who write like this. Once again I would suggest that the best exercise/instruction for students who write like this would be to analyze and discuss better samples of the writing of third graders.
But I would also note that evaluated samples like this one are important and probably should be shared with third graders. The student who wrote this probably does not even remember that he did so. Thus, he will not be embarrassed. And my experience with weak samples is that average, or even weak writers look at the "bad" samples and almost immediately realize that they can write better than that. This realization gives them confidence, so they start putting in a little effort and thus improve their writing skills.
The Writing of Fourth Graders
From the 19 Samples of Fourth Graders' Writing in The 2004 North Carolina Writing Assessment Grades 4, 7, and 10 Trainer Manual (Summer, 2004).
Average words per main clause = 9.9
Average subordinate clauses per main clause = .50
From what I have seen, these numbers seem high. For more on this, see the Summary of Statistics in "Cobweb Corner."
My New Motor Scooter (Sample G 2)
Directions:
First:
1. Place parentheses ( ) around each prepositional phrase.
2. Underline finite verbs twice, their subjects once, and label complements (PA, PN, IO, or DO).
3. Place brackets [ ] around each subordinate clause. Draw an arrow from the opening bracket of adverbial and adjectival clauses to the word that the clause modifies. Label the function of noun clauses.
4. Place a vertical line after each main clause.
5. Label each interjection ("Inj"), each noun used as an adverb ("NuA"), and each example of direct address ("DirA").
Rrrrzoomrrrr, I was testing out my new motor scooter. I very much liked it. Ever since my grandmother had said "Motor scooter," I've been wanting one. So I was going home to charge it. But I went to Jimmy's. I told him to get his bike. Instead he walked. We decided to ride around the block a couple of times.
After that I charged my battery. I had to wait three hours for it to charge. Once it was charged I rode it some more. Jimmy called and asked if he could come over and play. We ended up riding bikes. And I had a big grin on my face.
Later we went back to my house to have some fun. We jumped on my trampoline and played my Nintendo Sixty-four. Jimmy kept beating me in Wave Race.
Second: Graphing Words per Main Clause [There is a link to version 2 of the graphs presented below.]
Use the table to make a graph of the number of words in each of the first thirteen main clauses. Use one column for each main clause. If a sentence has one main clause, or if the main clause is the first in a sentence, for each word in the clause color one block in its column blue. If a main clause is the second (or later) in a compound sentence, color the blocks light blue.
Sample G 2 - My New Motor Scooter
Analysis Key
Rrrrzoomrrrr [NuA], [#1] I was testing out [#2] my new motor scooter (DO). | I very much liked it (DO). | Ever [#3] [Adv. to "have been wanting" since my grandmother had said "Motor scooter," (DO)] I've been wanting one (DO). |
So I was going home [NuA] to charge it [#6]. | But I went {to Jimmy's}. | I told him (IO) to get his bike (DO) [#7]. | Instead he walked. | We decided to ride (DO) [#8] {around the block} a couple [NuA] {of times}. |
{After that} I charged my battery (DO). | I had to wait three hours [NuA] {for it} to charge [#9]. | [Adv. to "rode" Once it was charged (P) ] I rode it (DO) some more [#4]. | Jimmy called and asked [DO if he could come over and play]. | We ended up riding bikes [#10]. | And I had a big grin (DO) {on my face}. |
Later we went back {to my house} to have some fun [#11]. | We jumped {on my trampoline} and played my Nintendo Sixty-four [#12] (DO). | Jimmy kept beating [#5] me (DO) {in Wave Race}. |
Notes
1. A period would also be acceptable here.
2. "Out: can also be considered part of the finite verb.
3. "Ever" functions as an adverb to the adverbial clause. [I doubt that you will find this "Ever" explained in any grammar textbook.]
4. An adjective ("some") modifying an adverb ("more") appears strange and is nowhere, in what I have seen, described in grammar textbooks. The technical explanation is that "more" is a pronoun (and thus it is modified by an adjective), but it functions as a "Noun Used as an Adverb." I would not, by the way, explain any of this in a fourth grade classroom unless a student asked.
5. "Beating" can also be explained as a gerund that functions as the direct object of "kept," but there is no reason not to accept it as part of the finite verb, and there is no reason for confusing fourth graders with "gerunds."
Notes for Levels Four and Five
6. "It" is the direct object of the infinitive "to charge." The infinitive phrase functions as an adverb (of purpose) to "was going."
7. "Bike" is the direct object of the infinitive "to get." The infinitive phrase functions as the direct object of "told." Note that "him" functions both as the indirect object of "told" and as the subject of the infinitive.
8. The infinitive "to ride" is the direct object of "decided."
9. The infinitive "to charge," with its subject "it," is the object of the preposition "for." We probably should not expect fourth graders to get this.
10. "Bikes" is the direct object of "riding." Within KISS, "riding" can be explained in two ways. For one, it can be considered a gerund that functions as a noun used as an adverb. Or it can be explained as a gerundive to "We."
11. "Fun" is the direct object of the infinitive "to have." The infinitive phrase functions as an adverb (of purpose) to "went."
12. Someone is going to write to say that "four" in "Sixty-four" "must be capitalized." My response will be "Says who?"
|Evaluations from the Trainer Manual |
|1/1 |
|CONTENT - The subject of this response is unclear. While riding moterscooter is stated as the new experience, the response fails to focus on|
|that topic. The elaboration and events included are unrelated to the motor scooter; rather, the response focuses on what the writer did |
|instead of ride the motor scooter. (I told him to get his bike. Instead he walked. , , , We ended up playing bikes. . . we jumped on my |
|trampoline. And played my nintendo. . .). The unclear focus, random organization, sparse details, and imprecise vocabulary result in an |
|incomplete response. Score 1. |
| |
|CONVENTIONS - This response demonstrates minimal control of conventions. Most of the simple sentences are formed correctly, with only one |
|fragment (And played my nintendo sixty-four.). There is only one usage error in verb tense (had said. . . I'v been. . . .), and a few |
|mechanical errors such as misspellings (moter, sence, beeting), and capitalization (nintendo, wave race). Score 1. |
Second Part:
|Content = 1 |Conventions = 1 |W/MC = (138/17) = 8.1 |SC/MC = (3/17) = .18 |
|Graph of Words Per Main Clause |
|26 |
Second Part:
|Content = 2 |Conventions = 1 |W/MC = (344/33) = 10.4 |SC/MC = (18/33) = .55 |
|Graph of Words Per Main Clause |
|26 |26 |
|2. Total Number of Main clauses | |
|Count the number of vertical lines in the analysis. | |
|3. Words per Main Clause | |
|Divide # 1 by # 2. | |
|4. Longest Main Clause | |
|Find the main clause with the biggest number of words, and put that number here. | |
|5. Shortest Main Clause | |
|Find the main clause with the fewest words, and put that number here. | |
|6. Subordinate Clauses Per Main Clause | |
|Count the number of opening brackets and divide it by the number of main clauses (# 2). | |
|7. % of words in Prepositional Phrases | |
|Count the number of words in prepositional phrases (the words you placed in parentheses). Divide it by the total number of | |
|words in the selection (#1). | |
|8. Infinitives per Main Clause | |
|Count the number of infinitives and divide it by the number of main clauses (# 2). | |
|9. Gerunds per Main Clause | |
|Count the number of gerunds and divide it by the number of main clauses (# 2). | |
|10. Gerundives per Main Clause | |
|Count the number of gerundives and divide it by the number of main clauses (# 2). | |
|11. Appositives per Main Clause | |
|Count the number of appositives and divide it by the number of main clauses (# 2). | |
Some Notes on What to Look At
Once one gets into statistical analysis of sentence structure, one can find an almost infinite number of things to count. But the more constructions you add to a statistical study, the more time it takes to do, and the more cumbersome it becomes to some students. The following are suggested because they involve either stylistic questions or questions of syntactic growth.
For KISS Levels One and Two
In addition to what was suggested above, you might want to have students make graphs or produce statistics on the following.
Sentence Openers -- Prepositional Phrases and/or "But." Some students begin almost all of their sentences with the grammatical subject (perhaps modified by adjectives). Some teachers try to get students to vary their sentence openers. At KISS levels one and two, students will not be able to identify subordinate clauses or verbal as sentence openers, but they should be able to recognize prepositional phrases. Using the same format, students can explore that "rule" about not beginning a sentence with "But."
Format: Have the students look at the first ten sentences in ten texts. The texts should be from different things that they are reading, but one text should be something that they themselves wrote. Count the number of sentences that begin with a prepositional phrase, or with "But." The results can be reported as statistics (3 of 10, or 30% begin with "But") or on graphs. (Ten columns represent the ten texts, ten rows, the sentences. Red blocks represent prepositional phrases; green block, "But").
In a classroom situation, you can have the students all looking at different texts. For example, one student might work exclusively with E. B. White's The Trumpet of the Swan. Nine of her columns would represent the first ten sentences in the first nine chapters of that book. She would report on the extent to which White, in that book, began sentences with a prepositional phrase or with "But."
Compounds. Compounding is introduced in KISS Level 1.4. Once you start looking at sentences from the KISS perspective (once you can identify the grammatical constructions from which the sentences are constructed and you start using that ability to analyze style), you will probably agree that compounding is a very important aspect of style. KISS Level One teaches students to identify subjects, verbs, and complements, and the compounding of these three constructions is itself stylistically significant.
If students are analyzing randomly selected texts, they may have some trouble with this. They will be confused by verbals (verbs that function as nouns, adjectives, or adverbs). Distinguishing finite verbs from verbals is the focus of KISS Level 2.1.6, but even after they have studied that, students may still have trouble mastering it. Thus they may need some help with the analysis. In most sentences, however, the subjects, finite verbs, and complements are relatively easy to identify.
Format: You can basically use the same format as that suggested for sentence-openers, but you may want to have students make three graphs based on the same texts, one for compound subjects, one for compound (finite) verbs, and one for compound complements. For subjects, have them count the first ten subjects (not sentences) and note the number of them that are in compounds. The same is true for finite verbs. Complements present a complication. Some of E. B. White's verbs, for example, have more than a dozen complements. Thus if one is counting the first ten complements, one has only one S/V/C pattern, or, in terms of our graphs, only one column. Instead of counting the first ten complements, therefore, you might want to have students count, for the columns, the first ten verbs that have complements. The rows can then represent the number of complements that each of these verbs has.
For KISS Levels Three (Clauses) and Up
Once students get to KISS Level Three, the most important statistics are words per main clause and subordinate clauses per main clause. The following project should be relatively easy and fruitful.
Words per Main Clause. This can be calculated by counting the number of words in a passage and counting the number of vertical lines in the analyzed passage. (In KISS analyses, vertical lines indicate the end of a main clause.) As noted previously, words per main clause is a primary measure of syntactic maturity.
Format: The format you want to use here really depends on what you want students to see. Simple statistical averages are helpful in suggesting norms. My college Freshmen, for example, average between 14.5 and 15.5 words per main clause. When these students analyze their own writing, the numbers give them a frame of reference against which they can make some tentative judgments about their own writing -- too short, too long, or "just right." Averages, however, hide the variety in main clause length.
You may, therefore, want to have students make graphs of the number of words in the first ten main clauses in two or more selections, one of which should be their own writing. The problem with graphs here is that writers don't always write sentences that fit within the graphs. Suppose, for example, you make a graph on which ten columns represent the first ten main clauses. And, to be "safe," your graph has thirty rows to represent words per each main clause. Sooner or later you will find a passage that has some main clauses that are thirty (or fifty) words long. This is not a serious problem. Students can simply write the number of words in that main clause at the top of the column. (I'm just sharing my experience, and letting you know what to expect.
Words per Main Clause and Compound Main Clauses. As previously noted, words per main clause is a fundamental yardstick of syntactic maturity. Stylistically, however, you will probably be surprised by the frequency with which professional writers compound main clauses.
Format: You can have students count compounds as a percentage of total main clauses. Or you can have them use graphs (as in the preceding suggestion) and color code for compounds. For example, they can color the blocks for words in the first main clause in a sentence blue. If the next clause is a compound, color the blocks that represent it yellow (or whatever color they prefer).
Subordinate Clauses per Main Clause. These projects may be interesting for students who are working at KISS Levels 3.1 and 3.2. The research of Hunt, Loban, and O'Donnell suggests that subordinate clauses "blossom" around seventh grade. Of course, younger writes do use them, but O'Donnell in particular would probably argue that their clauses are "formulas" -- set strings of words that are learned as a whole. For example, "When we get home, ask mother what you should do." Children, according to O'Donnell, pick up the strings, learn how to replace words in them, and produce more advanced syntactic structures without real mastery of the underlying constructions.
Formats: Younger students who cannot calculate statistical averages can represent subordinate clauses per main clause graphically simply by having every column in the graph represent a main clause. The rows then represent subordinate clauses. Having analyzed a text, they can go, main clause by main clause, filling in a block in a column for each subordinate clause in its main clauses. (Even most professional sentences rarely have more than five subordinate clauses in a main clause, so this type of graph does not run into the problem of having sentences overflow the graph format, which will happen if every block represents a word in a sentence.) Although these graphs are extremely simply, they may become very informative for students if, for example, every student in a class (or small groups of students) analyze the first ten (or twenty) sentences in texts by different writers (professional as well as student). They can then compare the graphs and see one aspect of how different writers use subordinate clauses differently.
For students who can identify subordinate clauses and do the math, statistical averages are fairly easy. In KISS, we place brackets [ ] around subordinate clauses and vertical lines at the end of main clauses. To calculate subordinate clauses per main clause, students simply need to count the opening brackets in an analyzed passage and divide that number by the number of vertical lines.
These statistics (and even more so the graphs) become interesting when used to compare different writers or groups of writers. Imagine, for example, a graph in which the columns represent ten (or more) different writers, and the columns represent the average number of subordinate clauses per main clause used by each writer. My "educated" guess is that some professionals would use very few, whereas others would use quite a few. The graph would clearly show students that the use of subordinate clauses can vary -- it is not a matter of right or wrong, but rather a matter of style.
Embedded Subordinate Clauses per Main Clause. I noted in the introduction to this section that a student asked, "Can a subordinate clause be in a subordinate clause that is in a subordinate clause that is in a subordinate clause?" Students who study Level 3.1 of the KISS Approach will automatically learn the answer to that question, but the answer raises two more -- how often should this occur, and how deeply should clauses be embedded? One of the major problems, particularly of my weaker adult writers, is that they write extremely long sentences, with very heavy embedding of clauses, and they lose control. "Cobweb Corner" has a summary page on the "Type and Embedded Level of Subordinate Clauses." Again, let me note that those statistics are very tentative in that many more samples need to be studied, but your students can do such studies themselves.
Format: A very simple study for a single text is to have the columns represent main clauses, and the rows represent subordinate clauses. Color code the embedding levels. For example, Level One = blue; Level Two = yellow; Level Three = green; Level Four = red, etc. Then simply go through the text, main clause by main clause, and fill in the blocks. Graphs of texts by different writers would probably be more interesting in terms of stylistic differences.
Other Constructions of Stylistic Interest. Any grammatical construction can be studied stylistically, but for purposes of natural syntactic development (the natural increase in sentence length and complexity) and for purposes of style, consider gerundives, appositives, and noun absolutes that function as adverbs. Each of these can be fairly easily counted (and graphed) "per main clause" in ways noted above. The professional studies that I have seen simply count these as individual constructions, but you may find it more interesting to also calculate the average number of words per construction. Young writers, for example, may use these constructions, but the constructions are very short:
Walking home, we saw an accident.
Older writers are more likely to elaborate the construction:
Walking home because it was such a beautiful day,
we saw an accident.
The gerundive phrase in the first example consists of two words -- an "average" of two words per gerundive. In the second example, that same phrase has been modified by a seven-word subordinate clause, thereby creating a nine-word gerundive phrase. Averaged together, the two examples are 5.5 words per gerundive phrase. Researchers who simply count the appearance of these construction miss, I would suggest, an important aspect of stylistic and syntactic development.
Submitted Projects on Statistical Stylistics
As noted in the introduction, you are invited to share your students’ projects with others interested in the KISS Approach. Please send them to me (evavra@pct.edu) as one MS Word (or pdf) file, and I will put them on the site and link to them from here. Note that such studies should explain what was being analyzed. For example, if the students analyzed passages from ten different writers, which passages were they?
An Essay on Statistical Exercises and KISS Grammar
[Note: The on-line version includes several links to the source information that is referred to in this essay.]
Although many English teachers are not enamored of statistics, statistical exercises are very important for two reasons. First, they can provide useful information about students' writing, not only to teachers, but also to the students themselves. Second, if they are used within the KISS framework, they can be a primary source of motivation for students.
Most of the research on natural syntactic development was based on statistical studies. In the 1960's, Kellogg Hunt demonstrated that the average length of students' main clauses (which he called "T-units") naturally increases with age. Hunt's work was reinforced by the studies of Roy O'Donnell and of Walter Loban. The following tables are compilations of several studies:
Average Number of Words per Main Clause by Grade Level
|Grade |Loban's |Hunt's |O'Donnell's |
|Level |Study |Study |Study |
|3 |7.60 | |7.67 |
|4 |8.02 |8.51 | |
|5 |8.76 | |9.34 |
|6 |9.04 | | |
|7 |8.94 | |9.99 |
|8 |10.37 |11.34 | |
|9 |10.05 | | |
|10 |11.79 | | |
|11 |10.69 | | |
|12 |13.27 |14.4 | |
|Professional | |20.3 | |
|Writers | | | |
|Loban's data taken from Language Development: Kindergarten through Grade |
|Twelve. Urbana, IL.: NCTE. 1976. 32. Hunt's and O'Donnell's data taken from the |
|summary in Frank O'Hare, Sentence Combining. Urbana, IL.: NCTE. 1971. 22. |
The differences in the studies (such as O'Donnell's showing 9.99 words/main clause for 7th grade students and Loban's showing 8.94) should raise questions, but there is little doubt that the average number of words per main clause increases with age. Because a reader's brain dumps to long-term memory at the end of main clauses, the clearing of STM creates a rhythm to the text. Even if readers can not identify main clauses, they can surely sense the different between the following examples.
The studies that analyzed words per main clause also evaluated subordinate clauses per main clause:
Subordinate Clauses per Main Clause by Grade Level
|Grade |Loban's |Hunt's |O'Donnell's |
|Level |Study |Study |Study |
|3 | | |.18 |
|4 |.19 |.29 | |
|5 |.21 | |.27 |
|6 |.29 | | |
|7 |.28 | |.30 |
|8 |.50 |.42 | |
|9 |.47 | | |
|10 |.52 | | |
|11 |.45 | | |
|12 |.60 |.68 | |
|Professional | |.74 | |
|Writers | | | |
|Loban's data taken from Language Development: Kindergarten through Grade |
|Twelve. Urbana, IL.: NCTE. 1976. 40. Hunt's and O'Donnell's data taken from the |
|summary in Frank O'Hare, Sentence Combining. Urbana, IL.: NCTE. 1971. 22. |
Unfortunately, the work of these researchers was abused as some educators began to assume that longer equals better. Thus, many of the studies that supposedly show that teaching grammar is useless (or even "harmful") were based on sentence-combining exercises and then considered the longer sentences as simply better.
The trend toward sentence-combining led to many teachers, in blissful ignorance, simply bringing sentence-combining exercises into their classrooms -- for everyone to do. The teachers were almost always unaware that in the studies that claimed sentence-combining is better, errors in the students' writing had been eliminated before the final results were tallied. In one study that I am aware of, the errors tripled in the writing of the students who did the sentence-combining." See "Words Enough and Time: Syntax and Error One Year After," by Elaine P. Maimon and Barbara F. Nodine.) And, as we might have expected, sentence-combining is most effective with those students who are already good at combining shorter sentences into longer ones. (See Hake and Williams.) When such exercises are brought into the classroom for everyone to do, they simply push all students into writing longer sentences, thereby, perhaps, pushing good writers into longer and weaker sentences.
The KISS Approach, of course, enables students to see what, how, and why when they are combining sentences so that errors will not increase, but statistical exercises in KISS grammar also enable students to see where they themselves are in relation to their classmates (and everyone else for that matter). If nothing else, students can be given the results of the studies by Hunt, O'Donnell, and Loban. (See the Tables.) Then, instead of an emphasis on longer, longer, and longer sentences, most students should be encouraged to aim for the average. If, for example, they are between eighth and eleventh grades, they (and their teachers) should be satisfied if they are averaging ten words per main clause. Instead of pushing for more length, the instructional emphasis should be on sentence variety, and control (i.e., avoiding errors.) With that control, they will progress, naturally, into longer main clauses.
In the KISS Approach, students can start doing such studies of their own writing as early as seventh grade, when they begin to learn to identify clauses. In the approach, students put a vertical line at the end of each main clause. To arrive at a figure comparable to that in the studies, all they have to do is to count the words in the passage they wrote and are analyzing, and then divide that number by the number of vertical lines. Most students will find themselves pleasantly pleased. Some, however, will see for themselves that they are below the norm, and, human nature being what it is, they will probably want to improve, especially since the KISS Approach can give them good, usable guidance for doing so.
The students that find themselves well above the norm raise some additional questions. The first two are How much above the norm are they, and how error-free is their writing? If their writing is basically error-free, and they are not much above the norm for professional writers (20 words per main clause), then they are fine. If their writing contains numerous errors, they should be encouraged to simplify and gain control. If they are much above the norm for professional writers, then they need to study and think about the KISS psycholinguistic model of how the human brain processes language.
Almost every semester my college Freshmen do such a study. As a class, they have always averaged between 14.9 and 15.5 words per main clause. But I usually have three or four students who average close to 25 words per main clause. These students are, I firmly believe, hurting themselves. The psycholinguistic model helps students understand how and why. The model suggests that we process incoming information in a very tight, seven-slot, working memory. Within those seven slots, we probably handle not just the syntactic "chunking" of the sentence, but also some global questions -- such as the point of the entire paper, the topic sentences, etc. Any crash in the processing may therefore cause a reader to lose track of important points of the paper. And the longer the main clauses are, the more likely it will be that some readers will have trouble processing them. An error that might be minor in a short main clause can cause a major crash in a 30-word main clause. My students at least appear to understand me when I talk about this, and thus statistical exercises can put a brake on the push for more and more length. And, of course, the KISS Approach includes exercises in de-combining as well as sentence-combining.
NCTE has often claimed that students have a right to their own language, but that right is meaningless unless students have some perspective on how their language, their writing, compares with everyone else's. Statistical exercises can give students that perspective.
The importance of these projects, especially from seventh grade up, probably cannot be overstated. Many years ago, a retired gentleman was in an advanced essay course that I was teaching. He wanted to write a book, but he said that first he needed to improve his writing. The class met once a week, and after most classes he and I would chat about his writing. I couldn't find any problems with it, and I kept probing to see what he thought his problem was. Finally, he stated that one of his teachers had told him that his sentences were too long. As soon as he said that, I knew what to do.
We took several samples of his writing and simply counted the number of words per main clause. We then compared the result (21 words per main clause) with the widely accepted statistical research of Kellogg Hunt, Roy O'Donnell, and Walter Loban. They generally agree that professionals average between twenty and twenty-one words per main clause. There was, in essence, nothing "long" about this gentleman's sentences. But a subjective comment by one of his teachers resulted in his feeling insecure about his writing not only throughout the rest of his education, but also throughout his entire professional career! Teachers, often without thinking, can do that. I have often heard teachers refer to sentences as being "short and choppy," although I myself have no idea of what they mean by "choppy." Subjective comments can hurt students, often seriously.
Statistical research, done by the student on the student's own writing, and done in the context of that by Hunt, etc. (and of some on this site) eliminates the subjectivity. And, as noted above, the objective of the project is not only to enable students to see how their writing matches the "norm," but also to keep their writing within a reasonable range of that norm.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- the kiss grammar site main page
- loudoun county public schools high school honors english
- pace university in new york pace university
- blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
- public health department policy procedure manual example
- california state university northridge
- lone star college start close go far
- barbara kohl walker elementary la cima middle school
Related searches
- kiss because i m a girl
- describe a kiss in words
- describing a kiss in writing
- the basic grammar in english
- describe a kiss in detail
- correct the sentence grammar worksheet
- the crucible act 1 main characters
- the best grammar book
- describe a kiss scene
- the main function of the digestive system
- the breast cancer site store
- the best grammar books