The Alternative Story (TAS) - Discussion

[The Alternative Story]

Hi ridcully and urbanemale,


Thank you for your feedback. Your points are duly noted.

Anyway, just to highlight for the question "It was a neat little house"

The verb in this sentence is ‘was’. It is a linking verb. Its purpose is
to link a subject and an object together.

For this question, the ‘it’ is the subject pronoun. It is used to rename
the subject.

Egs:

Ans: It could have been a knife

The question to this answer could be:

Qn: What was the murder weapon?

"It" is used to replace the words "the murder weapon".
"a knife" is the object.

TAS

[Lynn2]

Hi TAS,


Is your latest vocab book out already?thanks

Rgds
Lynn2

[Laurenwkids]

Yes, it is unnecessary to go to such length. It seems as though great delight was taken

in attacking another person or business. TAS probably should have proof read more but to take issue with almost everything they say and to make personal attacks is uncalled for.

[Kayelinht]

I have yet to enroll my child in TAS. Timing still does not work but I have benefitted a lot from their postings when they answer parents’ questions.


I choose to focus on how they have helped me rather than to nit pick at their mistakes.

[smurfette3]

Hi TAS,


Do you have any classes for K2? My nephew just came back from China after his dad was sent there for work. He needs a lot of help for his English. I know you have a Tuesday class at AMK and a Sat class at Payar Lebar but any plans to start anymore classes?

[ridcully]

The Alternative Story:

Anyway, just to highlight for the question \"It was a neat little house\"

The verb in this sentence is 'was'. It is a linking verb. Its purpose is
to link a subject and an object together.

For this question, the 'it' is the subject pronoun. It is used to rename
the subject.

No, you are wrong. My primary purpose in posting was to correct you. If you purport to teach English, then you should not be confused over what linking verbs and false subjects are.

The purpose of a linking verb is not to link a subject and an object together: Its purpose is to join a subject to its complement.

For example, if I say:
I am happy

'happy' is not an object; it is a complement. An object receives the action of a verb whereas a complement provides further information about the subject. 'Happy' is not receiving the action of 'am'!

Swot up on 'false subject', 'object', 'linking verb' and 'complement'. Accept the correction; do not dig your hole further.

If you cannot accept the correction after swotting up, then it is to the disadvantage of your students.

Rgds
R

[ridcully]

markfch:

Granted, coming from a language tutor, it is not impressive to be caught writing less than stellar English.


However, there's no need to gloat with glee like some of the people are doing here.

I find this practice totally unnecessary and quite uncharitable.

I think it is necessary if people purport to teach English. In fact, I do not mind less than stellar English, but I do expect a certain minimum. The poster's reply was so riddled with mistakes that it deserved attention. Don't forget: The poster was responding to a parent querying whether the standard of English was up to scratch at TAS!

I accept that the manner could be interpreted as somewhat uncharitable. Hopefully, the uncharitable approach will help ensure greater accuracy from the original poster in future, but alas I see from the poster's reply that that might not be the case.

Rgds
R

[antebellum]

ridcully,

I am impressed. It is refreshing to find someone who speaks frankly in this forum.

Are you an English teacher ? Just curious.

I have a question. Is it necessary for a child to understand all these terms like subjects, false subjects, etc if her ambition is not to be an English teacher ? Is it possible for a child to do very well in creative writing if she does not know how to explain all these terms ?

[ridcully]

antebellum:

ridcully,

I am impressed. It is refreshing to find someone who speaks frankly in this forum.

Are you an English teacher ? Just curious.

I have a question. Is it necessary for a child to understand all these terms like subjects, false subjects, etc if her ambition is not to be an English teacher ? Is it possible for a child to do very well in creative writing if she does not know how to explain all these terms ?

Possibly too frankly at times. I hope my sincere message in improving people's English is not spoilt by my giving offence.

For my sins, I am an English teacher with over thirty years' experience.

Well, that's a very interesting question about whether it is necessary for a child to understand all these terms like subjects etc. I would have to say no. Writing expressively requires style and content substance rather than grammatical exactitude. However, most parents want their children to write decent compositions for school examinations, especially the PSLE; therefore, grammatical exactitude, together with extensive vocabulary, is indeed necessary. The PSLE compo paper is not creative writing.

Notwithstanding my initial 'no', I would say though that stylish writing requires a feel for the language and clarity of thought. These, in my experience, are greatly assisted by having a technical command of the language. There are some children who are natural writers, but a little bit of grammatical polish does not harm. On the other hand, a lot of children will not be stylish writers; they should at least not burden the reader with a double whammy of poor style and inexactitude.

:salute:
R

[markfch]

ridcully:

I accept that the manner could be interpreted as somewhat uncharitable. Hopefully, the uncharitable approach will help ensure greater accuracy from the original poster in future, but alas I see from the poster's reply that that might not be the case.

Even if your intention is good, there is no need to dish out the kind of sarcasm you did in the last few posts.

I think everyone here is free to interprete the motivation for your posts.