Do you know a subordinating conjunction or a preposition?

[saaby93]

Argument going about whether an MP knows if in the sentence

'I went to the cinema after I’d eaten my dinner”

'after' is a subordinating conjunction or a preposition
and particularly should primary school kids know?

How many of us know?
Does it affect your every day life? How much do you worry about it?

Someone tell me that in every other country of the world primary kids ( or older) know the difference between a subordinating conjunction and a preposition.


http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/may/03/b...

[saaby93]

williamp said:

Romans they go the house?

As long as no one suggests their dinner may be fit for Jehova

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIAdHEwiAy8

Edited by saaby93 on Wednesday 4th May 00:09

[saaby93]

Bring on the clowns said:

The way in which children are often taught to recognise a subordinating conjunction (effectively) is to look for a subject and a verb following the cue, leading to a subordinate clause. Gibbs was right that after can be a preposition, but missed the trick here

When you say 'are often'
How often?
Do most kids in school know this today?

[saaby93]

Diderot said:

The problem is that we've had decades of apologists who have systematically dumbed down GCSEs and A Levels, decades of 'every one is a winner' and decades of 'don't worry about grammar or spelling or syntax, just express yourself' in schools. What this means is that when the little blighters get to University (that's nearly 50% of each cohort remember) so many of them are functionally illiterate and indeed barely numerate. The number of students who seriously cannot string two sentences together is alarming. ....

that maybe so but do you think scaring them with jargon is going to help them come around or do you think it will lead to further separation, those who can be bothered showing an interest in this type of thing, and those for which this is the final straw, who retreat further into the corner of the room to learn about the sticky effects of chewing gum?

[saaby93]

fblm said:

ATG said:

Can't see why we wouldn't want to teach kids English grammar.

Me neither, except that it looks excruciatingly tedious . Personally I've done ok without ever having formally learned the rules of grammar but thats no reason not to be taught it. Most people will never use maths beyond arithmetic either.

Another issue with all of this is whether youre testing whether the kids have good memories or whether theyre good at working out what to do.
If they're merely memorising that a word joining what would otherwise be two sentences is a subordinating conjunction or any other jargon word then you've just developed a memory test
If on the other hand youre teaching them how to string two sentences together that's great.

It's the same in any other field
You can get a set of people who get good marks because theyre good at memory.
Another set who may not get as good marks but can work out how things come together.

Same in PH. You'll often get the spelling pedants have a go at someone. But it may not be their spelling - they may be great at that. It's their typing skills.

[saaby93]

deadslow said:

folks can make all the excuses they like for why no-one needs to understand their own first language but just about every kid on the continent and loads of other places all over the world manage to understand and speak english to a high level as a second language. How can it be too hard for us to learn?

That was my earlier question
Do kids in other countries need to know what a subordinating conjunction is?

[saaby93]

Lucas CAV said:

17. Gibb said primary school children need 'grammar' so they can write essays at university. Could be taught when they're older, then!

Don't get me wrong. ;)
I'm in favour of grammar eg their there they're apostrophes who's whose
It also doesn't take much to realise that 'after' can be used to join two sentences together, probably not too long after learning to talk.
Oh dear what have I said there

[saaby93]

Einion Yrth said:

If kids were learning a second, or indeed third, language, this would likely be part of their curriculum anyway. It isn't difficult for most and for those for whom it is we need to be looking for another educational route.

ok if we talk welsh medium - what subordinating conjunctions are at the fore?

[saaby93]

Murph7355 said:

Lucas CAV said:

Well I don't know "this stuff" and I think my English is reasonable - so what's your point?

It's comforting to think that as a nation we are setting ourselves "reasonable" as a quality standard target.

If we're setting ourselves the same targets in mathematics, engineering, the sciences etc, our future is truly rosy.

I asked this too
If kids are to know about subordinating conjunctions should they know about unsprung mass, polar moment of inertia and Newton's apple? Maybe they do

[saaby93]

Beware those who throw the first stone
English isn't set in stone but a breathing language changing with current usage
Digress
If we're talking about the Beeb and moving to pronunciation, when did they decide not to pronounce 'the' as 'thee' in front of words beginning with a vowel?
Ten years at the outside?
/Digress

[saaby93]

Bring on the clowns said:

Interesting, you've also spotted one of my current bugbears, re 'the' or 'thee'. I discussed this with my brother last month and it is really starting to grate with him too. It makes the reading of some passages even on 'flagship' R4 programmes like Today sound so clipped, brutal and disjointed.

When I first noticed it I thought it was accidental or due to one broadcaster but now I'm convinced there's been an edict in the pronunciation dept to everyone not to use 'thee'