The Relation of Grammar to Critical Thinking: An argument for the reintroduction

of traditional grammar at all levels of education and for foreign language teaching
as well

Recognizing that a stance in favor of the teaching of traditional grammar is just recently
becoming popular again after forty years of disdain, this paper makes two arguments in
favor of the reintroduction of traditional grammar at all levels of education. The first
argument is from the value of a classical education and from the erroneous view that
grammar is somehow too difficult or too marginally valuable to play a role in any
standard curriculum, and the second is from recent studies in Critical Studies which can
be used to demonstrate the crucial role grammar plays in Critical Thinking. Traditional
grammar skills such as identifying parts of speech, parts of the sentence, and types of
sentences and clauses as well as parsing sentences and manipulating different
grammatical forms are core aspects of critical thinking and as such can serve a valuable
function if taught in elementary, secondary, and post-secondary schools.

The first argument, the reappraisal of grammar as an aspect of any classical education: 1)
because it is a part of classical education that goes back to the greeks romans and
Egyptians, 2) it is just not that difficult,. It should strike any reasonably intelligent
college graduate as patently absurd and shocking that any would entertain arguments
such as grammar doesn’t help writing, or it is not a real life skill. It is as if we had let the
rough kids smoking cigarettes on the far side of the playground set the curriculum as well
as the rationale for it. These are arguments you expect to hear from frustrated students
not from responsible educators. The 1993 statement by the NCTE should reconned as a
blackeye on American education and it should be recinded utterly, an apology offered,
and heads rolled (post mortem if necessary).

The second argument, based on research into Critical Thinking, demonstrates that the
core skills of traditional grammar are identical with the core skills of Critical Thinking.

PART 1: The Vilification of Grammar

Although the teaching of grammar has been ignored, vilified, and argued against for the
last forty years, there are still many who believe either intuitively or with their own
justifications that the study of grammar provides students with important thi nking and
analysis skills as well as a heightened awareness of their own language for writing and
thinking and for foreign languages they may study. There is also a recent and growing
movement that supports the study of grammar and recognizes its value both as an
important intellectual skill in itself and as a building block for or contributor to other
intellectual disciplines. The new SAT, to debut in 2005, will include a 25 minute written
essay and a 25 minute multiple choice test on grammar.

Studies which contradict these beliefs (Harris Hillock McQade Braddock, Lloyd-Jones,
and Schoer 1963) have done little to dissuade many though they have silenced some. The
underlying belief for all those who still support the teaching of grammar is that it is a core
aspect of critical thinking and as such cannot and should not be ignored in elementary,
secondary, or post-secondary schools. Many also believe that grammar should also play
a significant role in the teaching of foreign languages. The underlying conviction that the
value of learning traditional grammar has to do with its connection to critical thinking is
perhaps the most important factor. If it could be shown that teaching traditional grammar
(parts of speech, parts of the sentence, sentence types, and so on) perhaps even sentence
diagramming were closely linked to the development of critical thinking other
explanations would have to be found for the research results that led to the removal of
traditional grammar from many classrooms. Or at least new research would have to be
undertaken to determine what and how to teach traditional grammar in order to capitalize
on its role in framing and developing critical thinking.

The arguments against some forms of grammar teaching such as the memorization of
abstract rules divorced from a practical connection to the rules usefulness as well as
repetitive drills divorced from communicative relevance were well-founded. This
argument however popular it has been over the past forty years fails in significant ways to
be convincing, not the least of which is the unstated belief that the teaching of grammar is
such a burden on students that it is reasonable to drop it from the curriculum. The
vilification of grammar, whatever its excuses, simply does not hold up in the face of the
reality that grammar simply is not that difficult nor is it such a vast subject. Unlike
algebra, trigonometry, history, political science and so forth, grammar represents a small
body of knowledge with comparatively simple elements and rules. Eight parts of speech,
the parts of a sentence, sentence types, and sentence manipulations can be taught to
students in 3 hours a day in 10 days. This cannot be said of math, history, political
science or any other disciline in the entirety of the elementary, junior high school, and
high school curriculum. We can add dozens of rules like those below and still have a
mole hill in the face of the mountainous numbers of facts that are required for all other
subjects. Those five basic rules of grammar are followed by the five postulates of
Euclidian geometry.
1. A sentence must have a subject and a verb.
2. A verb must agree with its subject in person and number.
3. A pronoun must have a specific, stated antecedent.
4. An introductory prepositional phrase must refer to the subject of the clause which
contains the phrase.
5. A modifer must be placed as close as possible to the word it describes.

Euclid based his geometry on five fundamental assumptions which obviously represent a
larger intellectual challenge to student and teacher both:

Postulate I
For every point P and for every point Q not equal to P there exists a unique line
that passes through P and Q.
Postulate II
For every segment AB and for every segment CD there exists a unique point E
such that B is between A and E and segment CD is congruent to segment BE.
Postulate III
For every point O and every point A not equal to O there exists a circle with
center O and radius OA.
Postulate IV
 All right angles are congruent to each other.
Postulate V
If a straight line falling on two straight lines makes the interior angles on the same
side less than two right angles, the two straight lines, if produced indefinitely,
meet on that side on which the angles are less than two right angles.

Now someone might want to assert that the grammar rules described above were
somehow equivalent of more difficult than the Euclidian postulates that follow, but I
doubt that there would be much support for such a position. In the face of the difficulty
required to master math subjects, grammar must lower its head and slink off in
embarrassment if it had tried to pretend to complexity, obtuseness, or excessive difficulty.
It hardly places any demands on students for homework in comparison to the other
classes and does not require as much class time. In fact, it seems that grammar has to
play the role of scapegoat to those from math and writing classes who cannot do grammar
do not like it or merely want a target for their negativity other than their own discipline.
We could perhaps ask anyone who favored the vilification of grammar, what was it threw
you for a loop?. Was it the eight parts of speech? the parts of a sentence? or the sentence
types? I can teach those rather thoroughly in 25 - 30 hours of class with some lecture,
exercises, and group work and all with minimal homework. Perhaps changing active to
passive was difficult or changing sentences to questions. If you personally did not find it
difficult, do you have trouble teaching it? Perhaps if you are teaching sign language in a
gorilla cage the concepts of subject and object and noun and verb may be difficult, but I
am not sure if it has been tried. Perhaps we can find a vocabulary list for koko and check
what is there. Perhaps we can find an avid young behaviorist who wants to investigate
non-human primate ability to learn abstract concepts. Will they be able to handle noun
and subject, but not isosceles triangle? Any student who can learn high school algebra
can learn grammar. The reverse is not true. The failures that we experience in grammar
can only be explained by poor teaching or through the indulgence of whininess and
complaining of immature students and perhaps of immature educators. The magical
difficulty or wall between simply does not exist, some find it boring many do not. Many
find math boring but they are not induldged the way they are in grammar.

Naturally, students will balk, but this s

Here is a copy of what geometry students are expected to know from just one chapter of
their book

After completing Chapter 11 the student should be able to:

1) describe the historical evolution and origins of the axiomatic approach to geometry and
the power as well as the limitations of the axioms of Euclid’s Elements.
2) identify and use the axioms for incidence and betweenness in Euclidean geometry, and
show examples of other geometries that satisfy these axioms.
3) apply the congruence axioms and explain why these axioms, together with the axioms for
incidence and betweenness, are not sufficient to completely describe Euclidean
geometry.
4) explain the roles of the continuity and parallel axioms in Euclidean geometry, including
the identification of properties dependent on, or equivalent to these axioms.
 5) explain why the Cartesian coordinate plane provides a model for the axiom system for
Euclidean geometry constructed in the text, and use this Cartesian model to deduce
theorems of Euclidean geometry.
6) explain what is meant by a categorical set of axioms for a mathematical system, and
what that term means specifically for Euclidean geometry.

Just looking at this list I am rather convinced that grammar has been used as a scapegoat
to distract curriculum directors from looking at the demands of mathematics while getting
them rabid about the imagined problems, difficulty, and uselessness of grammar. I even
half suspect that out of work math teachers, quickly boned up on their grammar, became
grammar teachers and now spend the rest of their lives doing what they could to bolster
math. Rather than asking for school directors and curriculum developers to be cutting
grammar, perhaps we should be insisting on the inclusion of teaching the history
grammar as well on a parallel with geometry. This again is far more complex than
finding subject verb agreement and the antecedents of pronouns. There is no sane
conclusion concerning the vilification of grammar other than an indulgent attitude of
teacher’s in the face of students complaints and whines.

It seems the key to this has been focusing the discussion on the usefulness of grammar for
writing. The second section of this paper demonstrates more clearly the value of
grammar not only for writing but for all aspects of critical thinking but for now, we have
to look at this parallel. The value of algebra for calculus and trigonometry are clear but
what about

Others, such as the knowledge of parts of speech, parts of the sentence and the ability to
manipulate related forms (changing actives to passives, questions to statements and so
forth) are perhaps more valuable.

Compare these with the definitions required for one semester of geometry. There are only eight
presented here as there are only eight parts of speech to be learned. Comparatively, the parts of
speech are far easier. There is nothing in grammar that matches the complexity of “the line
passing through the vertex of the parabola on which it can be folded to have the two sides
coincide.”

The First element, or x-coordinate, of an

Abscissa
ordered pair.
Acute angle An angle that has a measure between 0o and 90o
Acute triangle A triangle that has three acute angles.
Two angles that share a common side but do not
Adjacent angles
overlap each other.
The union of two non-collinear rays with a
Angle
common endpoint.
The angle formed by the horizontal and the line
Angle of depression
of sight to an object below the horizontal
Angle of elevation The angle formed by the horizontal and the line
 of sight to an object above the horizontal
The line passing through the vertex of the
Axis of symmetry parabola on which it can be folded to have the
two halves coincide
http://www.infomath.com/html/geometryglossary1.asp

On the home page of the National Council of Teacher’s of Math offers instructions that
let you “Explore incoming calculus students’ understanding of the Cartesian connection
and the graphical representation of functions.” Are these the same high school students
who would be hard pressed to understand noun, verb, adjective or subject, object, and
prepositional phrase? Granted calculus is not for every high school student but the same
web site gives the following for expectations for all high school math students.

In secondary school, all students should learn an ambitious common foundation of

mathematical ideas and applications. This shared mathematical understanding is
as important for students who will enter the workplace as it is for those who will
pursue further study in mathematics and science. All students should study
mathematics in each of the four years that they are enrolled in high school.

Because students' interests and aspirations may change during and after high
school, their mathematics education should guarantee access to a broad spectrum
of career and educational options. They should experience the interplay of
algebra, geometry, statistics, probability, and discrete mathematics. They need to
understand the fundamental mathematical concepts of function and relation,
invariance, and transformation. They should be adept at visualizing, describing,
and analyzing situations in mathematical terms. And they need to be able to
justify and prove mathematically based ideas. P. 2???

TRANSITIONHowever, rather than throwing out the baby with the bath water, new
methods of teaching grammar should have been found instead. In fact, in 1963 the
National Council of English Teachers even withdrew its support for the teaching of
grammar in the face of studies which seemed to indicate that teaching grammar had either
no effect or a negative effect on students writing. This naturally informs us that there are
some forms of sharpening the mind that can have no effect or a negative effect on ones
writing. Given this insight we should naturally design studies to investigate which other
forms of sharpening the mind might have similar effects: geometry, and . This proposal
sounds preposterous as should the first upon which it is based. Hillocks (1986) states the
general feeling on this matter,

If schools insist upon teaching the identification of parts of speech, the parsing or
diagramming of sentences, or other concepts of traditional grammar (as many
still do), they cannot defend it as a means of improving the quality of writing
(Hillocks, 1986).

As recently as 1995, the NCTE in a fact sheet for teachers stated,

 The most common reason for teaching grammar as a system for analyzing and
labeling sentences has been to accomplish some practical aim or aims, typically
the improvement of writing. For decades, however, research has shown that the
teaching of grammar rarely accomplishes such practical aims. Relatively few
students learn grammar well, fewer retain it, and still fewer transfer the grammar
they have learned to improving or editing their writing. NCTE (1995).

So, assuming for a moment that the teaching of grammar could actually have no positive effect on
a student’s writing, could we say there was no other practical aim or aims for the teaching of the
parts of speech and the parts of the sentence.

Rather than the 1993 statement by NCTE admonishing teachers to not teach grammar, the
following would be a more appropriate response. This is also taken from the National
Council of

The Standards for high school students are ambitious. The demands made on high
school teachers in achieving the Standards will require extended and sustained
professional development and a large degree of administrative support.

The justification for this heavy load of math is the students often change their career
goals and life directions after high school and they should be prepared for such a need.
Similar arguments should be advanced for the teaching of traditional grammar.

The number and operations standard alone for high schoolers far exceed anything that
would be required for the teaching of grammar even if it were decided we would teach it
all in high school alone.

Instructional programs In grades 9–12 all students should—

from prekindergarten
through grade 12 should
enable all students to—

Understand numbers, ways • develop a deeper understanding of very large and

of representing numbers,
relationships among
numbers, and number
systems
very small numbers and of various representations of
them;
• compare and contrast the properties of numbers and
number systems, including the rational and real
numbers, and understand complex numbers as
solutions to quadratic equations that do not have
real solutions;
• understand vectors and matrices as systems that
have some of the properties of the real-number
system;
• use number-theory arguments to justify relationships
involving whole numbers.

Understand meanings of • judge the effects of such operations as

operations and how they multiplication, division, and computing powers and
relate to one another roots on the magnitudes of quantities;
• develop an understanding of properties of, and
 representations for, the addition and multiplication of
vectors and matrices;
• develop an understanding of permutations and
combinations as counting techniques.

Compute fluently and make
reasonable estimates
• develop fluency in operations with real numbers,
vectors, and matrices, using mental computation or
paper-and-pencil calculations for simple cases and
technology for more-complicated cases.
• judge the reasonableness of numerical computations
and their results.

http://standards.nctm.org/document/chapter7/numb.htm
Fortunately, the last forty years has also seen an increase in the research into critical
thinking, the results of which can now be used to demonstrate beyond a doubt that
grammar is indeed a fundamental aspect of human thinking and can and should be
brought back to the table. In fact, it is possible to demonstrate (as is done in the second
part of this paper) that grammar is in fact the mold and the model for all critical thinking
and as such is crucial to the preparation of students, business men, and professionals for
school and work life. It is to critical thinking what molecual chemistry is to chemistry.;
Thus, we can now adduce to arguments for the reemphasis of grammar at all levels of
education: 1) because it is a part of classical education that goes back to the greeks
romans and Egyptians, 2) it is just not that difficult, and 3) it is closely connected to
critical thinking skills.

As demonstrated below, the skills of grammar comprehension and analysis such as

identification of parts of speech and parts of a sentence, manipulation of grammatical
patterns, and identification of types of sentence, and so on are models of core skills of
critical thinking.

This paper argues that grammar is not only a good tool to train critical thinking but that
grammar is the initial mold and the model for all critical thinking. It further demonstrates
the value of teaching grammar for the improvement of critical thinking. The core skills
which comprise Critical Thinking (CT) are those of good grammar. In fact, grammar
serves as a model of just those skills.

he real question for grammar teachers is not how do we make it acceptable or how do we
make it palatable or how do we make it easier or what do we remove from the
curriculum. The one and only real question in this debate is how do we stop the whining?
You could fit the entirety of grammatical studies into one chapter of a typical geometry or
math book if you made a comparison of relative difficulty. The only real problem is that
we allow people to whine and complain and grouse and we cater to a mentality that
constantly lowers the bar in grammar but this is simply not allowed in those areas where
the complaining and whining is more to be expected (though again not indulged). If we
allowed this in geometry or algebra we would Questions of real life relevance for algebra
and geometry come up all the time and often we simply do not entertain them. These are
skills that are expected of high school grads. If it were shown the geometry had no value
for learning algebra or algebra had no value for learning geometry we would not decide
to throw one of them out. If we found that only 10% of the students ever used geometry
or math skills in the real world, again we would not through either of them out. We
would simply assert that the students were benefited through the added intellectual
flexibility and depth and through their membership with others who had studied the same
things. In a similar manner we would not want to pass on the rights, benefits and
obligations of a high school diploma if these skills were not attained. Exactly the same
arguments apply to grammar. Whether real world value is found or not whether a
connection to writing is found or not, the fact remains that teaching grammar is a
valuable and important skill and needs to be maintained in the curriculum at all levels of
education. Later we may ask whether or not it plays a role in the second language
classroom but once the students know it and know it well they will gross as loudly at its
absence in the second language classroom. This will undoubtedly result in fewer foreign
language teachers who do not know their grammar, but as this is not a difficult study (as
compared to math, history, or political science) it is not serious to ask language teachers
to learn it.

We may reasonably argue that there is more than enough going on algebra and geometry
classes and we could save a little for college by putting the grammar back in the
classroom But allowing the vilification of grammar merely as a means to bring in more
math is simply not professional and in no way does it constitute an argument for math or
against grammar. It is mere political expeditiousness on the parts of those who want
more math and fewer grammar classes. The benefit for the student or for the culture has
been thrown out the window. And rather than a burden this would be more like a respite
for the students. Subjects must agree with their verbs. A pronoun must have an
antecedent. There is no rocket science here. As a matter of fact there is no algebra, no
geometry, and when you think about it, no basic math either. None of the arguments that
we have tolerated for forty years for lowering the bar in grammar classes would have
ever have been tolerated in math. History, geography, political science – all of these pose
greater problems than learning grammar does. But still there are those who would argue
that grammar (and in some cases math, algebra, ancient history) is irrelevant or that it has
no demonstrable value for the improvement of writing skills, or that they have no clear
value in the real world but these arguments are not tolerated in any subjects other than
math. An effort to make mathematicians prove that algebra must have a demonstrated
value for geometry of vice versa would be justifiably met with derision. So should tests
that pretend to investigate whether grammar skills detract or do nothing for writing skills.
Send them back to the drawing board without the courtesy of a review: they have landed
a ufo in our laps. We can no more tolerate that than we can tolerate the removal of math
from our schools because it has not demonstrable value.

Who dreamed up this entire anti-grammar attitude in the first place? Was it perhaps
inspired by jealous math teachers who wanted extra hours of classroom time? Was it
math teachers who wanted to deflect students attention from the realities and the miseries
of learning math? Was it just bitterness due to unresolved whining around grammar? My
unresolved bitterness toward math has not been pandered to in this way, by the way. If
we bring the entirety of the curriculum of grammar that existed before the war against
grammar began we would lose nothing. There is no need to respond at all to the whining,
beligerant, self-indulgent carping and childishness that constitutes this movement. We
should no more induldge it or publish papers about it than we should do so to a similar
movement about geometry or algebra. What deep rooted low self esteem must exist
among the cadre of the last forty years of English teachers that they could not stave off
this loss of valuable ground (and not valuable for them but valuable for the students). We
merely tell the students that grammar is good for their speech, their reading, their writing,
as well as their foreign language study and we don’t feed their attempts to wheedle cajole
or even coerce arguemtns that allow them back into the math class, the study hall or the
playground.

Part II. Grammar and Critical Thinking.

The importance of critical thinking cannot be underestimated for adults in any society
and even less so in military, professional, and business environments. It is only the skills
of critical thinking that will guarantee successal evaluation and implementation of
situations and plans. Without these skills the individual is adrift like an animal,
dependent on instinct and environment with no choice except to try and align himself
with the herd and the environment in order to stave off fear, minimize stress and distress
and participate as best he can in an average way with all other members of his
community.

Grammar, the organizational principles of human language, is itself the result of critical
thinking and a presentation of critical thinking in a rather native form. In perceiving the
world and after discovering the possibility of vocalization the world is first ANALYZED
into its component parts and the early human responds and tries to identify objects
(nouns), actions (verbs), qualities and quantities (adjectives and adverbs); these are
complemented by relational principles such as before after from to between and so on
(prepositions or case markers); and make phrases possible. Once phrases are recognized
they can be strung together (see Bickerton ) made they can be further INTERPRETED as
phrases, SUBJECTS, OBJECTS, and so forth. More abstract notions such as and or if
and because past present and future fill out the set of and so on then make more complex
sentences possible.

In the last x years research into critical thinking has been advanced to a degree. It has
taken prominence. This paper draws heavily on the work of Peter A. Facione (200 200
200 ) in his role as the chief researcher for the American Philosophical Association’s
research report on CT.

What is Clinical Thinking?

The goal of this paper is not so much to contribute to the field of Critical Thinking or to
make any advances in that area. Rather the goal is to use the state of the art of Critical
Thinking to determine whether or not traditional grammar is in indeed an aspect of that
important life skill. For this reason, this paper draws heavily on work by the American
Philosophical Asspociation, which, using a panel of 46 recognized experts in the field of
Critical Thinking, provide a consenus opinion of what constitutes critical thinking. In
addition, this paper also uses work by the same group to determine the disposition ot use
critical thinking.

A panel of 46 experts in the area of CT in the Delphi report using consensus to make
decisions to determine the core skills of CT.

They identified the following six sub-classifications. Each of which were further sub-
classified to

What is a Disposition to Critical Thinking

Facione, 2004 has divided the core Critical Thinking (CT) skills into the following:
interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation. Each of
these skills are an aspect of grammatical awareness and analysis. More importantly, as
these skills are represented in our linguistic knowledge, the linguistic knowledge, the
basis of human separation from animals and the basis of all our critical thinking
development is actually

Facione 200 4 also points out that those with a disposition to critical thinking are:
inquisitive, systematic, judicious, analytical, truth-seeking, open-minded, and confident
in reasoning. These are qualities that are valued in all apects of a mature adult’s life.

Language learning skills in the acquisition stage but more so in the learning stage are
precisely those of critical thinking, and therefore any language learning study, whether it
be on one’s first language or on a second will enhance ones critical thinking.

All aspects of the CT can be found in the parsing of a sentence. This same procedure
exists in automechanics and chemistry as much as it does in grammar, but in grammar it
is harder to see. A good writer doesn’t have to be a good grammarian any more than a
good race car driver has to be a good mechanic. However, a good critical thinker needs
these skills and to apply them to language
IT SEEMS THAT CRITICAL THINKING CAN BE DIVIDED INTO TWO CRUCIAL
STEPS ONE EARLIER AND MORE BASIC AND THE OTHER “HIGHER LEVEL”

The first or lower level form of critical thinking is more fundamental and perhaps
requires a different sort of thinking. It is seminal or deep level. It has to do with the
identification of core concepts in a sphere of investigation. The higher level thinking has
to do with the presentation of arguments and evidence in favor or against particular
implementations of the field that has been discovered through this. Let’s use
automechanics and chemistry as examples. Before we can write papers about excessive
pollution or noise or about the values of the use of particular cars; before we can talk
about
Critical thinking should be divided into two subfields: definitions of a sphere of
investigation. Applications of that sphere of investigation to the larger world. The first
has far fewer ethical and social implications. It is merely a matter of describing the field.
The latter brings in the higher order sciences and ethics and morals. It is in that first
division that we find grammar.

In the lower lever we have early steps of a scientific investigation: find the component
parts of what we are investigating; analyze the component parts into meaningful
groupings, describe the relation of the groupings one to the other. Draw both deductive
and inductive conclusions about the material at hand and

Most abstract is naturally the least corporeal. There are no physical models at this point,
no reference whatsoever to any five senses measurable reality. It is the basis of all mental
functioning. Pure philosophy as well as the tools of philosophy are all built on this
model. Once this work is done we can apply it to other areas

analysis into objects actions/states qualifiers and quantifiers

evaluation into meaningful groupings subjects objects locations
interpretation: something to do, a query about something
explanation: can’t be known, can be done, is being done

And it is precisely at this lower level of cognition that grammar operates as the model and
mold of all such thinking.

The language is the model of critical thinking and as such understanding it will enhance
all understanding it is the prime from which all other critical thinking is derived. We
organize into the smallest component parts ANALYZE, then evaluate into meaningful
parts that comprise a recognizable entitity or proposed entity EVALUATE. We decide
what sort of response is required: an answer, carry out a command etcINTER; deduce
induce

Grammar is the mold, the prime, and the example, out of which ALL critical thinking is
formed. The better we understand and relate to our grammar the better will be our ability
to do all critical thinking:
1Analysis into Core Categories
2Evaluation of the relations between those core categories in particular cases
3Interpretation of particular arrangements of those core categories in different ways
4Explanation of the understanding of each of those MAKE DEDUCTIONS
5 MAKE INDUCTIONS
6SELF REGULATION SYLLOGISTIC COMBINATIONS OF INDUCTION AND
DEDUCTION Checking ones logic.
The core skills of grammar analysis are presented in the table 1:
Table 1: Universal Grammar

Parts of Parts of the Sentence Types Variations on or

Speech Sentence Manipulation of
Sentences
Nouns Subject Declarative Passive/Active
Verbs Object of Verb Interrogative (yes/no & Direct Quotes
(Direct and Indirect) question word)
Adjectives Complement Imperative Indirect Quotes
(Subjective and
Objective)
Adverbs Object of Preposition Exclamatory Subjunctives/conditionals
Prepositions Adjective Clause Simple Making relative clauses
Conjunctions Adverb Clause Compound Making yes/no questions
Noun Clause Complex Making question word questions
Possessives
Compound/Complex Requests/suggestions/invitations

The Delphi report agreed upon 6 core skills and several sub-skills each for. The Delphi
report skills and Sub skills are presented in table 2. An abbreviated form of these skills
and subskills is presented in table 3 which compares them with the core grammar skills
just described.
Table 2: CT Skills and Sub-Skills
CT SKILLS CT SUB-SKILLS
Interpretation Categorization
Decoding Significance
Clarifying Meaning
Analysis Examining Ideas
Identifying Arguments
Analyzing Arguments
Evaluation Assessing Claims
Assessing Arguments
Inference Querying Evidence
Conjecturing Alternatives
Drawing Conclusions
Explanation Stating Results
Justifying Procedures
Presenting Arguments
Self-Regulation Self-Examination
Self-Correction

Table 3: Comparison of CT and Grammar Skills

CT SKILLS CT SUB-SKILLS GRAMMAR
EQUIVALENTS
interpretation categorization analysis into parts of speech
analysis identifying arguments Analysis into parts of sentence
(sometimes called arguments) /
clauses
Evaluation assessing arguments analysis of sentence types; e.g.
simple/compound;
declarative/interrogative
inference querying evidence/conjecturing making statements from
alternatives questions, questions from
 statements; active from passive
paraphrasing, etc.
explanation stating results/presenting answering questions/responding
arguments to statements commands, etc
self-regulation self-examination, self correction rephrase, edit, error check, etc.

I address each of these in turn:

1. Interpretation – Identifying Arguments – Analysis into Parts of Speech.

2. Analysis – Identifying Arguments – Analysis into part of speech / clauses

3. Evaluation – Assessing Arguments – Analysis of Sentence Types

4. Inference – Querying Evidence, Conjecturing Alternatives – Paraphrasing etc.

5. Explanation – Stating Results / Presenting Arguments – Answering,

Responding

6. Self-regulation – Self-examination, Self-correction – Rephrase, Edit, etc.

This near exact correspondence is no coincidence and confirms to what many believe
intuitively, that grammar is a form of CT. More importantly, as a reflection of the core
organizational principles of human cognition, this correspondence of the APA Delphi
report skills lends evidence to their validity. Had there been no correspondence or little
correspondence it would be better to reject the CT schema as flawed rather than try to
indict grammar for not being a human CT skill.

INTERPRETATION INTO PARTS OF SPEECH

They are CATEGORIZED into the parts of speech which naturally further clarifies their
role and their significance and the meaning is further clarified through a more direct
conscious look at the word (rather than just responding intuitively and spontaneously as
in a casual conversation).

ANALASYS INTO PARTS OF SENTENCE

The phrases are identified in the examining of ideas and then in recognizing them as
arguments (phrases conjoined to form complex phrases) and then analyzing those
arguments in the sentence as subjects objects and so forth. Clauses are identified at this
point as well. Incidentally, the parts of the sentence such are subject and object are
referred to as “arguments” of the verb in formal linguistics following XYZ.

EVALUATION OF SENTENCE TYPES

In the phase of assessing arguments the sentences are identified as declarative,
imperative, interrogative, or exclamatory , and also as simple, compound, complex, and
compound complex. These relations between these sentences can be further determined
through the use of punctuation at this point.
INFERENTIAL ANALYSIS
In querrying the evidence tests such as changing active, passive, statements to questions
and questions to statements can be applied to see if there are any confusions or problems
If all these tests are possible the sentence has been properly analyzed. Making
paraphrases and inferences are also possible at this point.

EXPLANATION (DEDUCTIVE ANALYSIS)

Here EXPLANATION entails answering questions, responding to statements as
appropriate and deciding whether or not to act on commands. Views as to whether or not
questions are answerable, or commands can be carried out would also occur at this point.
For example, a command to visit the present king of France could not be followed and
would be noted at this point.

SELF-REGULATION
SELF-REGULATION finally allows the speaker/listener to respond, rephrase, defer, pass
his turn, take his turn, request another to speak, begin anew and so forth.

In a discourse such evaluation would take place for each individual sentence but also
such evaluation could be begun again on elements of the paragraph to evaluate the
sentences as items in logic. It is reasonable that the same CT methods would then be
applied in a cycle manner through each of the following operations except the final one,
taking action/modifying belief which is the end result.

Grammar
Logic
Rhetoric
Critical Thinking
Problem Solving
Taking Action or Modifying/confirming belief

As a mold it is the first iteration of the cyclic activity and forms the basis of the structured
device (language) the we will use for all successive iterations. There could be no
accurate description of CT that did not include grammar as grammar is our first and most
important application of this skill.

As model: whether intuitively accessed or accessed through a conscious awareness of the

principles of grammar, grammar is the model for all critical thinking. Language was there
before Socrates, before the Greeks and the Romans before the Sumerians and the
Egyptians the criticl thinking that went into the creation of grammar was the first the
article states that people may not be able to describe their critical thinking skills but they
are able to access them intuitively. This is not unlike saying that people do and can
respond to grammar intuitively but often do not do so overtly.

Knowing grammar is knowing this moldz: we organize our automechanics and our
chemistry according to the core elements (the nouns) their states and actions (verbs) their
qualities and quantives (verbs and adverbs) and then we look at the way they combine
and relate via prepositions (peptides and amino acids lubricants and screws)

Our speech reflects this in our grammar and our grammar is reflected in everything else.
Without the mold of speech no science or categorization is possible and without grammar
– if we use grammar as a model in our approach to anything we can say we need to look
at categories of building blocks activitites/states and qualities and quantities and then how
they are related. We can use our prepositions to remind us and to check if we are
thorouogh enough. We can use types of adjectives to determine if we have been thorough
enough: did we look for demonstrative, qualitative, numerative, and distributative
relationships? Did we check locations to from between and around? Did we check time
before after and during? The knowledge of grammar is the best possible tool to approach
science, critical thinking and so on. The more succinct and pithy our knowledge of
grammar, the more rapid and efficient will be our application of critical thinking to knew
areas of our lifes.

Without grammar we must intuit all

With a knowledge of grammar but without a particular knowledge of its usefulness as a
critical thinking menmonic our thinking is improved but it has not gone as far as it good.

With a sound awareness of grammar and an awareness of the use of grammar as a criticl
thinking mnemonic we have arrived at the pinnacle of CT and of Grammar and we notice
how they are identical.

1. Analysis: break down of a sentence into its SMALLEST component parts as

parts of speech
2. Evaluation: noting the connections of the parts of speech in the sentence and
their relations within a larger whole (the sentence)
3. Interpretation: has to do with the meaning of the sentence and an assessment of
its truth value. All the words are understood, underlying premises are discerned:
does it ask a question make a statement, expect a response or express an attitude.,
4. explanation: to make deductive conclusions in paraphrases from the meaning
discovered
5. Inference: is draw inductive conclusions from the meaning discovered
6. Self-regulation: has to do with the “checking back” with oneself on successive
interpretations and evaluations until the sentence is understood sufficiently for a
given task or for the satisfaction of the learner.

The application of these skills to grammar is a difficult task as the concepts are purely
abstract: noun-ness, verb-ness, subject-ness, and so on do not and could never have any
measurable, five senses reality that a student can hold on to or look at. It is a purely
mental exercise. However, in spite of their purely abstract nature, it is possible to do
analysis and evaluation of them and of the hierarchical structures for which the serve as
building blocks. But unlike mental exercises like poetry, literture, or philosophy, this
study has a far more discorable and predictable regularity and logic. It is indisputably an
excellent way to develop ones critical thinking abilities.
With auto mechanics we can see a similar sort of application of critical thinking, but in
the case of auto mechanics, drawing, photos, and actual engines are more concrete and
limit the “pure” development of critical thinking that is seen in grammar study.
1. Analysis: break down of an engine into its component parts as parts
4. Evaluation: noting the connections of the parts of the engine as carburator,
transimission, and so forth
5. Interpretation: note their function and their interconnections
4. explanation: decide how to recreate the engine and how to use it
6. Inference: note the value of using an automation to other modes of transportation
and perhaps discover possible innovations for the future.
2. Self-regulation: learn from ones mistakes in the process

Nouns: the core elements or building blocks of our sphere of investigation (drive
shaft, gears, steering wheel)
Verbs: the activities and states within that sphere (running, off, idle)
Adjectives: numerative:
qualitative:

Adverbs: manner:
location:
Frequency:

Prepositons: How are other of the core elements (nouns) related to the current actions
or states (verbs)
locations:
time:

Nominal
Morphology
case
gender
person
number
Verbal
Morphology tense
progressive aspect
perfective aspect
Comparison: comparitve
Superlative
Conjunctions: coordinate
And
But
So
Subordinate
Phrasal analysis: done in conjunction with PARTS OF SENTENCE ANALYSIS

By familiarizing themselves with the core structure of critical thinking, students will
naturally improve in that ability. They may not be aware of the
improvement and initial forays into critical thinking may cause some
confusion as students over apply or get lost in this organizational structure,
but in the long run, the training will be of value. They will be more aware
of the core categories, their subcategories and the way things fit together.
This can only be an aid to all their reading, writing, discourse and study
skills.

Pronouns express our ability to create variables and classes1

Given the above discription, this should be falsifiable via an experiment. We merely test
the critical thinking abilities of students before taking a grammar course and then
measure them again after the course to see if their critical thinking skills have improved.
If there is no visible improvement in the short period of time they can be tested again 2 or
more months later to see if there has been any improvement.

Compare against those who do well on an English grammar test and those who do not do
well on the English grammar test.

Test 1 first time: before the grammar course

Test 1 second time: after the grammar course

Test 2 first time: AFTER TWO MONTHS IN THE LANGUAGE CLASS

Test 2 second time: AFTER FOUR MONTHS IN THE LANGUAGE CLASS

take students who have successfully completed a grammar course and then

The ability to abstract is the main ability in all thinking processes. Animals respond to
their world directly and to some degree to their imagination of the world (the dog at the
door expecting his owner to return), but they do not create hypothetical situations or less
corporeal (= more abstract) situations from which to learn and make decisions. To create
1
You could also include the syntactic notion of empty category here as well as perhaps the most abstract of
all concepts in our grammar. It is not even represented as a pause, they merely exist where there is missing
material for which an interpretation can be found. However, as I am providing an account of traditional
grammar, this will not be discussed any further.
a model and that model can be successively less corporeal and in that more or less
representative of essential features of what is being studied. In corporeality we respond
with our senses to the sensed world in abstraction we respond with our cognitive
functions to imaginal or linguistic representations of items in our world. The abstraction
can begin with the images of the phenomenal world dreams and fantasies without speech
 words and images of the phenomenal world dreams and fantasies with speech, poetry,
song  just words of the phenomenal world speech about speech discussion of the
words of the phenomenal world

The discussion of the words of the world has two parts: 1) the discussion of grammar, 2)
the discussion of propositions and arguments. Rhetoric (pervasiveness) Then what
follows is critical thinking then problem solving and so on.

So then how is it that we understand studies that led to the NCET decision? The research
on dispositon to use critical thinking provides one possible explanation, one that is better
than trying to claim that grammar study could in some way damage critical thinking or
writing ability. If this were the case we would have to begin evaluating, math,
engineering, and science to see which of those had a negative affect on writing ability.

Abstraction
Going from the corporeal to the incorporeal

Analytical Global/Intuitive
Language and image as distinct Language and Image as inseperable
Grammar Visual art / cave painting, sculpture
Logic Chant/ritual gesture
Rhetoric Music/dance
Critical Thinking poetry
Problem Solving song
Establishment of belief or taking action Opera/ballet/theater
There is a hierarchical relation between all the items in the analytical column. Though they are
all independent enough to be done without the previous. That is problem solving can occur
without an awareness of critical thinking but it is not as good. Critical Thinking can occur
without rhetoric, but it is not as pervasive. Rhetoric can occur without a study of logic but it will
be less effective and more prone to error. Logic can be studied without grammar but it will not
be as precise. Many people have studied critical thinking without studying logic, many have
studied problem solving without a formal understanding of any of the previous skill but a formal
understanding of any one of them increases ones informal ability in all of them. To ignore
anyone of them as has been done with grammar for the last 40 years is foolish. The benefits that
are provided to all the others are unmistakeably clear. The farther down on the list you go, the
more fundamental and the more abstract is the study. Grammar has no formal propositions or
arguments. It is thinking stripped to its barest elements. It is likely that these skills are learned
in reverse order each one motivated by a desire to better at the previous. COULD THERE BE A
BENEFIT TO ALL AREAS THROUGH STUDYING ANY ONE? YES. WOULD STUDYING
GRAMMAR NECESSARILY BE OF VALUE TO ALL THE OTHERS? YES. GOING THAT
DIRECTION ON THE HEIRARCHY WOULD IMPLY THAT THOUGH THERE MIGHT BE
SOME TIME LAG AND IT MIGHT BE NECESSARY FOR SOMEONE TO POINT OUT
HOW GRAMMAR SKILLS HELP LOGIC HOW LOGIC HELPS RHETORIC HOW
CRITICAL THINKNIG HELPS PROBLEM SOLVING TO GET THAT THROUGH.

The more familiar one is with the various steps on the hierarchy the shaper will be his
intellectual skills and the more able will he be to avail himself of any of the skills as necessary to
solve problems. The more abstract the problem the more he is going to need to consult the
higher levels of the hierarchy. The more concrete the skill the more he can rely on the lower
levels.

A pun such as Karl Marx has no class requires little thinking to be enjoyed, but if one puts into
an argument grammatical, and logical knowledge is required to arrive at a proper assessment.

If Karl Marx has no class, then he is likely to be seen with his shirt tail hanging out.

What is the relation of grammar to the rest of these skills:

Column A begins with no images and preceeds to problem solving where there are real world
images as conveyed through linguistic representations. Conversely Column B begin with out
any words and moves to a point where words and images are mixed as spiritual or psychological
rather than real world problems. Column B can be analyzed by column a because A is focused
on a distinction between language and the images being viewed. Column b cannot because
Column A is deductive and consciousn, Column B is inductive and intuitive.

Due to the level of abstraction required for grammatical analysis, its role as a good tool for
sharpening critical thinking is apparent: critical thinking in fact is of progressively less value the
more concrete is the evidence and situation in which one must work. If A then B, B. Requires
more critical judgment if that orange is not taken, I will eat it. The orange is not spoken for.
Critical thinking is a skill that is called for to sort through the implications, ambiguities, and
similarities of complex abstract principles, concepts, ideas and so forth. It is not much required
in “watch your step, there is ice all over the walk.”

WE can conclude then that any work with grammar is of value because it sharpens critical
thinking skills. Whether or not it sharpens or dulls the DISPOSITION to use such skills is
another matter. In fact, if grammar work was presented in such a way as to cause students to
dislike all critical thinking results such as those of the NCET 1963 report could be understood.
Perhaps too the study of grammar had resulted in more active, but immature critical thinking
which appeared as a loss in writing skills. In any case, to conclude that teaching grammar
damages writing skills is much like concluding some forms of sharpening analytical thinking are
deleterious to writing while others are not. Such a conclusion opens the door to testing whether
not math, science or legal thinking improves or lessens ones writing abilities.

It is also not surprising that a team of experts focusing on the core tenets of critical thinking
arrived at a description that conforms to basic grammatical analysis.

APPENDIX 2: REQUIREMENTS OF BASIC GEOMETRY

NCTE 1995 Slate Starter Sheet.

 A sentence must have a subject and a verb.

 A verb must agree with its subject in person and number.
 A pronoun must have a specific, stated antecedent.
 An introductory prepositional phrase must refer to the subject of the clause which contains the
phrase.
 A modifer must be placed as close as possible to the word it describes.

Euclid based his geometry on five fundamental assumptions:

Postulate I
For every point P and for every point Q not equal to P there exists a unique line that
passes through P and Q.
Postulate II
For every segment AB and for every segment CD there exists a unique point E such that
B is between A and E and segment CD is congruent to segment BE.
Postulate III
For every point O and every point A not equal to O there exists a circle with center O
and radius OA.
Postulate IV
All right angles are congruent to each other.
Postulate V
If a straight line falling on two straight lines makes the interior angles on the same side
less than two right angles, the two straight lines, if produced indefinitely, meet on that
side on which the angles are less than two right angles.
No one seemed to like this Fifth Postulate, possibly not even Euclid himself--he did not use it
until Proposition 29. The reason that this statement seems out of place is that the first 4
postulates seem to follow from experience--try to draw more than one line through 2 different
points. The Fifth Postulate is unintuitive. It does come from the study of parallel lines, though.
Equivalent to this postulate is :

Playfair's Postulate
Given a line and a point not on that line, there exists one and only one line through that
point parallel to the given line.
Euclid's

Ptolemy followed with a proof that used the following assumption:

For every line and every point P not on , there exists at most one line m through
P such that m is parallel to .

We will show at a later date that this statement is equivalent to Euclid V, and therefore this did
not constitute a proof of Euclid V.

http://www.math.uncc.edu/~droyster/math3181/notes/hyprgeom/node4.html

Axiomatics and Euclidean Geometry

Objectives

After completing Chapter 11 the student should be able to:

 describe the historical evolution and origins of the axiomatic approach to

geometry and the power as well as the limitations of the axioms of Euclid’s
Elements.
 identify and use the axioms for incidence and betweenness in Euclidean
geometry, and show examples of other geometries that satisfy these axioms.
 apply the congruence axioms and explain why these axioms, together with the
axioms for incidence and betweenness, are not sufficient to completely describe
Euclidean geometry.
 explain the roles of the continuity and parallel axioms in Euclidean geometry,
including the identification of properties dependent on, or equivalent to these
axioms.
 explain why the Cartesian coordinate plane provides a model for the axiom
system for Euclidean geometry constructed in the text, and use this Cartesian
model to deduce theorems of Euclidean geometry.
 explain what is meant by a categorical set of axioms for a mathematical system,
and what that term means specifically for Euclidean geometry.

http://wps.prenhall.com/esm_usiskin_mathhstch_1/0%2C6625%2C488291-%2C00.html
The Axioms of Incidence
The following axioms set out the basic incidence relations between lines, points and planes. They
also characterise the concept of ``dimension'' that we associate with these notions.
1. Incidence between points and lines:
1. There are at least two distinct points.
2. There is one and only one line that contains two distinct points.
3. Every line contains at least two distinct points.
2. Incidence between points and planes:
1. There are three points that do not all lie on the same line.
2. For any three points that do not lie on the same line there is a one and only one
plane that contains them.
3. Any plane contains at least three points.
3. Incidence between lines and planes:
1. If a line lies on a plane then every point contained in the line lies on that plane.
2. If a line contains two points which lie on a plane then the line lies on the plane.
4. Dimensionality of space:
1. If two planes both contain a point then they also contain a line.
2. There are at least four points that do not all lie on the same plane.

The first four axioms (which do not refer to planes) are called the plane geometry axioms, while
the remaining are the space axioms. Out of the various Theorems that can be proved we note

Theorem 1 Given a line and a point not on it there is one and only one plane that contains the
line and the point.
Theorem 2 Given a pair of lines which meet in a point there is one and only one plane that
contains the lines.
Theorem 3 Given four points that do not all lie on a plane, there is no line containing three of
these points.
Exercise 1 There is a ``geometry'' consisting of 4 points, 6 lines and 4 planes that satisfies these
axioms.
Exercise 2 Which of the above axioms can be omitted? For those that are necessary construct a
``geometry'' that satisfies the chosen axiom and defies the others.

Axioms of Order
These axioms were almost ignored by Euclid except the second one below. Their importance was
noticed by M. Pasch who saw how they were implicitly being used in many proofs. This is one
problem with ``evident truths''; we often forget to state some of the axioms and then the
geometry is incomplete without them. The following axioms make clear the notion of a point
lying between two other points.
1. When B is between A and C then, A, B and C are distinct points lying on a line and B is
between C and A.
2. Given a pair of points A and B there is a point C so that B is between A and C.
3. If B lies between A and C then A does not lie between B and C.
 4. Let A, B and C be three points on a plane and a be a line on that does not contain
any one of these points. If there is a point D on a that is between A and B then either a
contains a point between A and C or a contains a point between B and C.

The Line l contains a point on one of the other two sides

The first three axioms allow us to introduce the notion of a half-line or ray. Given a pair of points
A and B the half ray starting at B and pointing away from A consists of all points C so that B is
between A and C. Similarly, the last axiom allows us to introduce the notion of a half plane.
Given a point A and a line a the half-plane bounded by a and opposite to A consist of all points B
so that a contains a point lying between A and B.

In spite of the axioms of order being ignored for so many hundreds of years they are so important
that one can entirely replace the axioms of incidence by giving an extended set of axioms of
order. Think of it this way. If a straight line is to be the shortest path from a point to another then
we must at least be able to say what are the points ``on the way'' or in-between.

The following theorems can be deduced from the axioms of Incidence and Order.

Theorem 4 Given any two point A and B there is a point C that lies between A and B.
Theorem 5 Given three points A, B and C that lie one a line exactly one point that lies between
the other two.
Theorem 6 Given four points on a line they can be labelled A, B, C and D so that B is between
A and C and between A and D and C is between B and D and between A and D.
Theorem 7 Given any finite set of points on a line they can be labelled A1, A2, ..., An so that the
points are in that order.
An important theorem that can be deduced from the order axioms was first discovered by G.
Desargues:
Theorem 8 Given points A, B, C, A', B' and C' so that the lines AA', BB' and CC' all pass
through a point O. Further, let AB and A'B' meet in a point C'', AC and A'C' meet in a point B'',
BC and B'C' meet in a point A''; moreover, let us assume that the 10 points considered are
distinct. Then the points A'', B'' and C'' all lie on a line.
Proof. In case the plane containing the points A, B and C does not contain all of the points A',
B' and C' then the line containing the points A'', B'' and C'' is just the line of intersection of
with the plane determined by A', B' and C'. Thus, the theorem needs only to be proved under
the assumption that all the points lie in a plane. In this case we shall show how to construct A''',
B''' and C''' that do not lie in the plane and so that the points A, B, C, A''', B''' and C''' also satisfy
the hypothesis of the theorem. Moreover, A''', B''' and C'' are collinear and so on cyclically. Thus,
the planar version will then follow from the non-planar version.

Axiom of Parallels
The axiom in this section caused the most controversy and confusion of all. The axioms of
parallels (which is also an incidence axiom) is
Axiom of Parallels
Given a line and a point outside it there is exactly one line through the given point which
lies in the plane of the given line and point so that the two lines do not meet.
Note that, while asserting that there is a line through the given point that doesn't meet the given
line, it also says there is only one such line. In other words, it also asserts that all the ``other''
lines co-planar with the given line meet that line. This motivates the introduction of the
following (stronger and stranger) version of the Axiom of Parallels:
Projective Axiom of Parallels
Any pair of lines that lie in the same plane meet.
The idea behind this axiom is that even (apparently) parallel lines appear to meet at the horizon.
We can demonstrate that this axiom is consistent with the axioms of Incidence by means of
Linear Algebra as in the examples below.

APPENDIX 2: A Curriculum for High School Algebra

Browse High School Basic Algebra

Stars indicate particularly interesting answers or good places to begin browsing.

Selected answers to common questions:

Solving simple linear equations.
Positive/negative integer rules.
Mixture problems.
Quadratic equations.
Absolute value.
Completing the square.
Direct and indirect variation.
Inequalities and negative numbers.

Acid Concentration, Heating Bill [7/6/1996]

1) A pharmacist has 8 liters of a 15 percent solution of acid. How much distilled water
must she add.... 2) By installing a $120 thermostat, a family hopes to cut its annual
heating bill...

Adding and Subtracting Polynomials [12/08/1996]

How do you add and subtract polynomials?

Algebra and Trig Equation [4/20/1996]

How can I solve this equation: 1 = sin(3x) - cos(6x) ?

All About Functions [11/06/1996]

Could you please explain functions?

Completing the Square [09/08/1997]

Please explain 2x^2 = x + 5 .

Derfs and Enajs: Algebra and Venn Diagrams [03/09/2003]

 All Derfs are Enajs. One-third of all Enajs are Derfs. Half of all Sivads are Enajs. One
Sivad is a Derf. Eight Sivads are Enajs. The number of Enajs is 90. How many Enajs are
neither Derfs nor Sivads?

Diagonals and Tiles [11/17/2001]

Jay tiled a 15x21' rectangular ballroom with 1 ft. sq. tiles. Then he drew diagonals
connecting opposite corners of the room. How many tiles did the diagonals pass through?

Direct/Indirect Variation [6/12/1996]

Please explain direct and indirect variation.

Distributive Property [04/25/2002]

What's the best and simplest way to teach pupils that a-b = -(b-a)?

Distributive Property, Illustrated [09/28/2001]

How can I show (12*2) + (12*3) using the distributive property?

Doubling Sequence [8/24/1996]

On Jan 1st it snowed one centimeter; on Jan 2, 2cm; on Jan 3, 4 cm...

Equation of a Line Parallel to an Axis [06/19/2003]

How can I get the equation of a line if the line passes through a point and is parallel to the
x- or y-axis?

Equations of a Line given Two Points [8/31/1996]

How do you find the equation of a line going through two points if you only know the
two points?

Equations: the "Elimination" Method [11/20/1996]

Is there an easier way to solve a system of two equations than by the substitution method?

Explaining Algebra Concepts and FOIL [08/04/1998]

Some ideas for learning algebra that may help prevent frustration.

Exp, Log, and Ln Functions Explained [7/31/1996]

What is the exp function? When is it needed? Also, how do I calculate Log and Ln
functions with basic arithmetic and logic?

Factoring Polynomials [11/14/1996]

Is there a logic behind the factorization of polynomials?

Factoring Polynomials [11/07/2001]

Factoring polynomials like 12x^3y^9 + 20x^5y^4.

Factoring to Solve a Problem [7/31/1996]

I have problems understanding the solution I get when I factor an expression to solve: x
(x + 1) = 132...?
Finding the Equation of a Line [01/08/1997]
Given either a point and a slope or two points, how do you find the equation of a line in
both point-slope and standard form?

Geometric Objects and Properties using Algebra [06/29/1998]

Why does y = mx+b, and what does it mean?

Graphing Coordinates [1/15/1997]

How can you tell if you have a straight line just by looking at the numbers?

Horizontal and Vertical Asymptotes [12/5/1995]

I am confused about horizontal and vertical asymptotes. Please tell me how to find them,
and their definition.

An Introduction to Parabolas [02/04/1999]

What is a parabola? What are some of its properties? What are some examples of
parabolas in real life?

Linear Expressions [08/17/1999]

What are linear expressions, and how will I use them in my life?

Linear Programming [01/30/1997]

Maximize the profit of a nutrition center given information about the energy trail mixes
they sell.

Locus and Equations of Lines [01/10/1999]

Describe the locus of points that are 3 units from the line x = -1...

Long Division of Polynomials [6/26/1995]

How do you use long division to solve polynomials with remainders?

Loosening the Earth's Belt [1/18/1996]

The earth has a belt around the equator that is perfectly fit. If a measurement of 1 foot is
added to the belt, theoretically the belt will no longer touch the earth at any point. What is
the new distance between the surface of the earth and the belt?

Man and Train on a Bridge [2/1/1996]

When a man is 3/8 of the way across a railroad bridge that goes from point A to point B,
he hears a train approaching at 60 mph. If he runs back he will meet the train at A, and if
he runs forward the train will overtake him at B. How fast can the man run?

Meaning of Irrational Exponents [03/17/1997]

y^x is the product of x factors of y. Where do irrational exponents fit in this? How can
you have an irrational number of factors?

Mixing Milk and Butterfat [09/04/2001]

Milk that has 5% butterfat is mixed with milk that has 2% butterfat. How much of each is
needed to obtain 60 gallons of milk that has 3% butterfat?
Negative Ratios and Dividing by Zero [6/8/1995]
How can 1 : -1 = -1 : 1 ? Is x divided by 0 = infinity? Are there different infinities?

No Solution, Infinite Solutions [01/03/2002]

Solve: 8(2x-3) = 4(4x-8); -3(x-3) is greater than or equal to 5-3x.

Order of Operations Puzzle [09/22/2002]

What is _ + _ x _ - _ = 22? We're given the numbers 2, 3, 4, 8.

The Particular and the General Case [11/06/2001]

If a+b+c=3 and a(^2)+b(^2)+c(^2)=5 and a(^3)+b(^3)+c(^3)=7 what is a(^
4)+b(^4)+c(^4)? And how is it done?

Polynomial Inequality Problem [2/7/1996]

A student asks for help with solving algebraic inequalities.

Proof by Induction [07/13/1997]

Prove by induction on n that |A^n|=|A|^n.

Purpose of Algebra [10/15/1996]

What is the purpose of algebra and who came up with the idea?

Pythagorean Theorem Proof: Four Right Triangles [10/7/1996]

I don't understand the Pythagorean Theorem.
http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/sets/high_algebra.html
Bickerton, 1991 pp 4-5

And yet the true source of our difference has been lying all the while, like Poe’s purloined letter,
hidden in plain view. There are not merely two things, consciousness and power over nature,
that distinguish us from other species, there is a third thing: language. While it would be absurd
to suppose that language in and of itself provided everything that differentiates us from apes,
language was not only the force that launched us beyond the limits of other species but the
necessary (and perhaps even sufficient) prerequisite of both our consciousness and our unique
capacities.

If this is so, why have people looked elsewhere for explanations? All along there have been
those who recognized that language must have played an important role. Consider for instance
the quotation from Darwin that serves as the epitaph for this book. But the precise nature of that
role remained obscure because a number of factors conspired to make language itself an elusive
and slippery object.

Language is, of all our mental capacities, the deepest below the threshold of our awareness, the
least accessible to the rationalizing mind. We can hardly recall a time when we were without it,
still less how we came by it. When we could first frame a thought, it was there. It is like a sheet
of glass through which every conceivable object in the world seems clearly visible to us. We
find it hard to believe that if the sheet were removed, those objects and that world would no
longer exist in the way that we have come to know them.

That, in turn, is because for most of us language seems primarily, or even exclusively, a means of
communication. Rather it is a system of representation, a means for sorting and manipulating the
plethora of information that deluges us throughout our waking life. How such as a system came
to be, how it functions, and what it accomplishes will form the themes of this book.

Also p 185-187
Also 58-59 (noun, verb, and predication)

The most basic experience even for animals is inner or “I” and outer or “other”. Animals cannot
articulate it and do not have much consciousness with which to reference it, but there is a sense
of a center of the senses and an outside that is being sensed. This sense of I and other is what
drives the animals. The inner state of “I” and the outer state of “other” direct all activity and
experience and are the core elements of instinctual behavior. I and other are the first two nouns.
The first verbs is “experience” The first predication is “I experience”, the second is “I experience
other”. The first is intrnasitive the second transitive. The first adjectives are hot cold hungry
thirsty and these can be predicated of either I or other. I can be projected onto all others. All
others can be indentified with as I. These four parts of speech, noun, verb, adjective, and adverb
correspond to the four basic mental functions (cf. Carl Jung Psychological Types): thinking for
nouns (objectification of I and other which is later spread to all other objects that can be
experienced in time and space), feeling (more like experiencing than having emotions) for verbs;
sensing for adjectives, and intuition for adverbs (making distinctions such as very, seldom
quickly and so forth have to do with an intuitive assessment of a sensed situation. For example,
the animal runs is noun (object/thought) and experience (feeling), the animal runs quickly is
known through an intuitive assessment of the sensed situation.
The first sentence is “inner experiences”. The second is “inner experiences outer” the third, due
to the processes of projection and identification is “outer experiences” “outer experiences inner”
“outer1 experiences outer2” and so on. These experiences exist long into the past and probably
exist in other animals as well. However, when through the process of abstraction, inner becomes
a category (agent) and outer becomes a category (patient) and experiences becomes a category
(Verb), language can begin as the early beast/human says I sleep, I walk or transitively, I eat
vegetables or I take the stick. His ability to name objects and experiences quickly becomes a
large number of basic sentences much like those described by Bickerton for Proto-Lanuage or
the early speech of children. Though nouns and verbs seem at first sight to be the first two
grammatical categories, they more likely occur at the same time with adjectives and adverbs
which are the result of sensations of experience and expressions of intuitions about experience.

This stage of language can go no further without a further level of abstraction the creation of
linking words that serves as the first bit of grammar. The first were most likely prepositions
which are half verb and half noun. They provide both information about experience (between,
near, on, under) and information about location in time and space. They talk about what is in
time and space and their relation through time and space. IT is actually quite a creative link of
intelligence to create a half verb half noun element such as a preposition. What is both in time
and space and through time space can be only two things: position information between near on
and so forth . That is is this is either an amazing leap of intelligence or just a kind of fall out
from familiarity with nouns and verbs Perhaps derived from a demi noun or a demi verb, the
prepositon could easily have arisen from situations su. Other aspects of grammar have to
develop as well.

The core verbs of be have and do is probably the first breakout of the initial verb “experieince”
be refers to states have refers to possession and do to actions. All three are aspects of immediate
experience and can be easily developed from that first verb: be refers to intransitive actions or
basic descriptions of inner experience, have is used for the experience of outer objects that have
been incorporated into the world of inner while actions are activities of inner acted on outer. The
tree types of verbs that Bickerton mentions (186) can also be derived transitive verbs are the
Ditransitives arise from

Why are there only two objects in a di-transitive (why are three or more impossible). Perhaps
projected and indentified with simultaneously where the direct object is the projected outer and
the indirect object is the identified-with outer. There are only three possible relations: inner,
projected outer, and identified with outer as a kind of outer inner. Thus, there are only three
possible sorts of verbs: intransitive, transitive, and ditransitive. All other arguments in a sentence
are non-required; that is, they … Things like instrument, location, time, and so forth do not have
to do with the core experience of inner, projected inner, or identified with outer. We can not have
an indirect object as a sole required argument because that would apply an outward identification
without an outward object. We must project out to something before we can identify thus the the
object that we identify with is always in reference to a projected object (not unlike jealousy).
Is projecting out a core ability for abstraction and the discovery of language: do animals not
project?

What is this long diversion into Bickerton for? 1) to help understand what is difficult about
grammar, 2) to help demonstrate the role of grammar in critical thinking.

The first bit of predication occurs when “I” can say something of itself as an intransitive such as
I sleep or says something of other (transitive) I took a rock.

which only later becomes “be”, “do” and “have”.

I and other are the first two categories of nouns.

It is not likely that pronouns existed at this early stage but some sense of a self that wanted,
needed, liked,

P. 6 of Neumman’s The Origins and History of Consciousness. 1954.

“The dawn state of the beginning projects itself mythologically in cosmic form, appearing as the
beginning of the world, as the mythology of creation. Mythological accounts of the beginning
must invariably begin with the outside world, for world and psyche are still one. There is as yet
no reflecting, self-conscious ego that could refer anything to itself, that is, reflect. Not only is
the psyche open to the world, it is still identical with and undifferentiated from the world; it
knows itself as world and in the world experiences its own becoming as a world-becoming, its
own images as the starry heavens, and its own contents as the world creating gods.”

Parts of speech as elements

And sentences as molecules and compounds.

 References Does this man think through his beliefs before they harden into unwavering
principles? Is he open to countervailing evidence? Does he test his beliefs against new
evidence and outside argument? Does his understanding of a subject go any deeper than
the minimum amount needed for public display? Is he intellectually curious? Does he try
to reconcile his beliefs on one subject with his beliefs on another?

It's bad if a president is incapable of the abstract thought necessary for these mental
exercises. If he is capable and isn't even trying, that's worse. It becomes a question of
character. When a president sends thousands of young Americans to kill and die halfway
around the world, thinking about it as hard and as honestly as possible is the least he can
do.

From Truth out “is george bush a dope.

We are not conscious of our language facility though we are conscious of our language output.
We are resistant to looking at what we are unconscious of. We are conscious of statements about
math, but we have to look at the unconscious faculty of language to look at nouns and verbs. We
don’t say

p. 49 of Bickerton

“The putting together of words, once they have been selected is carried on so unconsciously, so
automatically, that we are quite unaware of the mechanisms involved or even that such
mechanisms exist. Yet if we did not have those mechanisms at our disposal, our vaunted ‘system
of communication’, for all the richness of its conceptual map [dictionary], would not be very
much more expressive that the grunts and snarls of beasts.”

Entity/N Affect/Adj = first subjects and predicates

In time and space

the state of something in time and space
Through time and space
variation on something through time and space

A Proposal for a coordinated view of grammar and grammar teaching

The core of this is the division of grammatical studies into operative and speculative (following
Mulroy’s use of the term), where the former includes all those aspects of grammar that are
needed to describe aspects of writing (subject verb agreement), English grammar for its own
sake, foreign language study, and logic and rhetoric.

Operative Speculative
Words: Parts of Speech required arguments
Phrases: Parts of Sentence complements
Sentences: Types of sentences ergativity
 Conjoined coreference
Transformations transformations

CONNECT BICKERTON’S PROTO LANGUAGE WITH LANUAGE BETWEEN NEANDRATHAL AND

ERECTUS VIA NEUMANN/KLEIN

It was the discovery of the self/other distinction that led from proto language to language. Once this discovery was
made subcategorization and empty categories fell into place. Other grammatical categories came from a recognition
of relativity and

1. I other
2. I other other I
3. he/she

When living in a primitive “participation mystique” world and self are one all responses are instinctive. The SRS
makes this more tenable and leads toward I and other, but with proto-language it is a largely unconscious recognition
of I and other

Freud Klein Neumann – in the paranoid schizoid position there is only I and other and relative states of chaos or
calm and response to those states: with the recognition that other is both good and bad and can be manipulated,
grammar arises and man sinks into a depressive position

Pre-language  paranoid schizoid position (I/exper) intransitive only PRS

Proto-language  depressive position (I/exper/other) transitive and intransitive only SRS
Language  resolve depressive position (I/exper/prs other/absnt other) ditransitive is added SRS

Subject/predicate exits from beginning as a experieince experiencer – topic???

Grammar = subcategorizations exist at all three levels but empty categories do not until level 3.

Prepositions = relativity of time and space (absent other allows absent time of past and present)
Tense=
Case = others exist in their own right as subjects objects and there are more than one
Gender = still a ways off
Pronouns=experiencer1(I) present other(the present mother)(2) not present other(the negative mother)

Tools artifacts and attempts to propitiate the universe appear at this time as a result of the knowledge of self and
present other and absent other.

Rapid spread of language would occur through participation mystique rather than procreation

Complementizers: arize from pronouns: 3 become six fixed word order or modifications of
pronouns quickly becomes an issue.

What about sov, svo etc distinctions

Necessary for Grammar:

C-Command
Case Assignment
Government
Binding
Empty categories
Required arguments
Optional arguments
Grammatical Elements do not refer at all (unlike the substantive parts of speech) rather they
reflect structural elements bickerton90 p. 10 (lexical items vs grammatical items

p. 11 he says, “Language, on the other hand, talks mainly about entities (whether other creatures,
objects or ideas) and things predicated of entities (whether actions, events, states, or processes).”
ProtoGrammar Full grammar

Velocity distance = static dymamic where dynamic for adverbs modifies verbs and static/distance
modifies nouns

Bickerton refers to the first verbs as behaviors and notes they are dynamic where entities are
static.
Category of categories: the set from which all others can be derived and which themselves can be
no further broken down.

SRS SRS

Resolution of depressive position or connection in (participation mystique) with individuals or

culture that as resolved the depressive position.

One-world
Paranoid schizoid
Depressive Position
intransitive
transitive (multiple outer but no relation between outers
They are either good and bad e.g one at a time)
ditransitive good and bad our one. Outer is one indvidual
sometimes good sometimes bad (two at once) – noticing relations
between others in the observed world.

Now union and separation are the only two processes thus the ONE self (intransitive) becomes
TWO (transitive) and returns to ONE. The TWO becomes One
and TWO and RETURNS TO ONE – the agent is the projector; the
patient is recipient, the subject is the experiencer the predicate is
the experience of the experiencer.

The resolution of the depressive position is the change from Proto-to Real Language and the
explanation for subcategorized arguments. It allows one to project
two objects rather than one at at time. The two can return to
transitive, the transitive can return to intransitive. But there are no
other possibities

Prepostions do not represent space and time – nouns and verbs do that. Rather they relate
velocity and distance.
Case 1, 2, or 3 (subject object or indirect object
Tense
Noun = in time and space
Verb = through time and space
Prep= relative time and space or relative velocity distance
Adv = intuition
Adj = sense info
Possession

The boy runs in the school yard

Resolution of depressive position must also allow generation of preps, case, tense, comp and so
on. Relation of one object to another prep to noun or prep to verb. Boy run yard boy run

Much the same as peripheral vision there is now a more

With the resolution of the depressive position and the discovery of ditransitivity relations
between others arrive. This is the first hint that prepositions can be and that of stating the
relation between others through case … Prepositions represent both time and space relations
between nouns and verbs and now velocity and distance between nouns and verbs. It is like the
squaring of a number. And hierarchy arises at this point

ON THE INTERCONNECTEDNESS OF ALL ASPECTS OF SYNTAX AS AN ARGUMENT

FOR THE ALL OR NOTHING HYPOTHESIS

All or nothing thinking of the paranoid schizoid position disappears and a relativity takes it
place.

The recognition that outer is not sometimes good sometimes bad, but one thing with more than
one attribute; the world of syntax comes into place:
The relativity of time and space and velocity and distance makes prepositions
The recognition of roles rather than an unconscious acceptance of “other” brings in
subcategorizations
The need to maintain relations brings in case and fixed word order
Empty categories are assumptions about fixed word order.

There is a blending of noun and verb that occurs to create prepositions that directly reflects the
blending of good and bad into one. 2=1 means 2 have been discovered.
In
On
At are all attempts to freeze things in time and space like “idea” “enthusism” and so f
From forth; however, like “be” or “exist” they exist through time and space as well.
With They are demi-verbs and demi-nouns at the same time. As such they cannot
receive case or tense. However, in their demi-ness they can relate nouns to verbs
or nouns to other nouns. A preposition tells you a little about how a noun is
located in time and space and through time and space. They can also attach to
verbs singly to expand the nature of that verb. Preps are both in and through time
 and space. You can say the “idea” I had yesterday, but in-ness or from-ness are
not things that can be

LOGIC IS NOTHING OTHER THAN SENTENCES STRIPPED OF THEIR MEANING AND

INTERPRETED SOLELY IN TERMS OF THEIR GRAMMAR
John is a lawyer. Becomes J is an a l
Lawyers have big houses L have b H

And so on. If the grammatical patterns match additional patterns that quarantee truth, then
arguments are said to be valid statements are said to be true an false.

Verbs and nouns are representatives of our higher order functions: thinking and feeling.
Adjectives and adverbs precede as the representatives of our preceiptions: adjectives represent
sensations and adverbs intuitions (judgments on things through time and space such often,
regularly, slowly quickly, and so forth).