Teacher Discussion Forums

I've taken my Venn diagram as far as I can, and feel that the information in it may be more easily read from a set of tables - one for each letter of the alphabet.

This is something that I've been meaning to do for a while, but I've only just found out how to write text vertically, which I need to do to so that viewers don't have to scroll sideways.

Please look at this link to see what I'm doing. If I've missed any patterns of verbs followed by verbs, please let me know.

http://www.geocities.com/endipatterson/bigtableA.html

Also I've been told that this way of writing vertical text only works in Internet Explorer, I'd be interested to know if you can read it if you are using that or a different browser.

I don't understand why you need to write vertical text that way. Doesn't it work the same if you restrict the size of the column and just make a regular table? Anyway, it works on my Internet Explorer, 5.1, for OS9.1 Mac, and it also works in Safari for OSX, Mac.

T
h
a
n
k
s
.
.
.

...for the browser info, Laurie. So would you prefer to see text as above?

This is market reasearch time.

Yes, it should come out like that if I restricted the column width. Do you find that more readable? Would you still find it more readable if there were two lines of text as in the right hand side of the table?

That wasn't what I was imagining. When I looked at the page, the information in the columns was horizontal, much like this:

This is
an example
of what
the column
seemed to
look like.

Perhaps that wasn't what you intended in the first place. That is why I thought it would work with a restricted width. Perhaps you have no problem if other browsers read it well the way it is.

Edit: I decided to post a snippet so we both know what we are talking about. Here is a link to a small screen shot:
http://fog.ccsf.cc.ca.us/~lfried/example.gif

No, that's not what it's supposed to look like at all, and not a bit like what it looks like on internet explorer.

You know in Paint, if you type a line of text, then select "Image", then "flip/rotate". If you choose rotate 90 degrees, then that's exactly what my headings look like in IE. Most are only one line thick, a few of them are two lines thick. When I view it I can see all 26 headings for the different verb patterns without scrolling sideways. (I do have to tilt my head, though for obvious reasons.) I also have to scroll down to read all ther verbs, but that's par for the course. I don't know about you, but I hate scrolling sideways.

I don't know what to do now. It seems it works on IE but not other browsers.

Anyone else who reads this, can you confirm if that's the case, thanks.

Lorikeet's version is much easier on the neck, one has to say.

Are there fixed rules for which verbs may or may not appear in indirect questions?

I used Internet Explorer, but it was on a Mac.

So can I confirm that would you prefer scrolling sideways to turning your head, Woodcutter. I'm afraid that with 26 collumns I have to do one or the other.

With regard to the indirect questions(section 18 Venn diagram.) This section together with the present subjunctive is in fact causing me the biggest head ache of all.

1) Yes there are only certain verbs that can be used. Off hand I think that all indirect questions begin with a modal verb, but not all modal verbs are suitible. The second verb usually carries a meaning of being bothered, problematic or something similar and the third is some sort of speach act.

2) The real problem with indirect questions and some of the present subjunctive (section 15 Venn diagram, check out the link for this one, I think I did a reasonable job) is that although they deal with verb patterns, it is impossible to pick out a verb and say this verb is followed by x,y and z structures.

Instead we have to deal with preparatory phrases:

Would you mind telling us if...
It is imperative that...

I was intending to simply write the whole preparatory phrase.
What a nightmare.

I'm also not sure that there are any cases apart from the subjunctive where "that" is compulsory.

What do you think.

I hate to quibble with your labour of love, AP, but wouldn't it look easier on the eye without the 'N' s?

Further quibbles: I wonder whether the reporting verbs are not just a bit too much to take on. Are:

"He advised me that I should take out the "N"s"

"I admitted they looked a bit difficult to read"

"They argued (about) whether it would look better."

so unequivocally wrong?

All this is not nearly so black and white as the lefthand columns.
I mean, where do you draw the line? You'll have to put a lot of verbs in the later columns:

"He yelled/screamed/shouted/exclaimed/ moaned/ ululated/ stuttered/pronounced that he was fed up."

All this is not nearly so black and white as the lefthand columns.
I mean, where do you draw the line? You'll have to put a lot of verbs in the later columns

I never thought that this was going to be easy.

I could have VOH - in some collums, very occasionally heard, etc.

Thanks for moaned, stuttered and pronounced. I don't think I've got those.

Ack I looked at work, and it's vertical. Put me down as rather scrolling than twisting.

That's three votes to nil for scrolling instead of twisting - and one with ack before saying so. I think someone's telling me sth here.

I think I've got a better layout.

How about if I put the different verb patterns down the left, and the verbs on top and another row of the same verbs on the bottom so that most of the scrolling is sideways.

I reckon then that about half of the verb patterns could be viewed at a time.

I'd repeat the headings after every new letter and colour code the rows so that viewers can remember which heading they were looking at. I'd use pastle shades so as not to hurt people's eyes.

About the vertical text though. Is it the whole ideas that you don't like, or is it because the headings are very long. Would you be able to read single word verbs and a few phrasal verbs vertically?

If I wrote the verbs vertically, it would mean that the columns would all be the same thickness and the table would look neater than if I had to vary the width for individual verbs or have a standard width with a lot of bare space.[/b]

It's hard to know without seeing it. Not sure if you want to do two prototypes though.

I wonder if anyone could answer a couple of questions about verb patterns with "stay":

Is "stay" followed by the infinitive, present tense, past tense or past participle (or maybe a participle adjective) in "stay put"?
eg. It looks like there may be a blizzard, I think we'd better stay put for now.

Is "stay" followed by the past tense or past participle (or maybe a participle adjective) in "stay rooted"?
eg We tried to get him to move, but he stayed rooted to the spot.

Can anyone think of any similar expressions with "stay"? I don't think these are true idiomatic expressions, I suspect that "stay" just has special grammar.

Thanks.