Why Modern Grammar? | 今やアメリカの大学への進学は必須である

今やアメリカの大学への進学は必須である

99%の日本の大学はAGI&量子時代に適応できる人材を育成できない。その為、2030年までに日本の大学の99%は消滅する

 

 

 

If you've studied English grammar using traditional methods and found yourself confused by sentences like "I made him leave," "She seems to understand," or "I want him to go," you're not alone. Traditional grammar, developed centuries ago, struggles to explain many common English constructions systematically.

 

Modern English Grammar - a systematic, scientifically-based approach that explains English structure as it actually works. 

 

You'll discover that constructions that seemed arbitrary in traditional grammar follow clear, predictable patterns in modern analysis.

 

Let's begin your journey from traditional confusion to modern clarity.

 

 

1.Traditional English grammar, based on Latin models, creates several fundamental problems for learners

 

Problem 1

Forced Categorization

Traditional grammar tries to fit all sentences into patterns like:

- Subject + Verb + Object + Complement (SVOC)

- Subject + Verb + Indirect Object + Direct Object (SVOO)

 

But what pattern is "I made him leave"?

- S + V + O + C? (But "leave" isn't describing "him")

- S + V + O + ? (What is "leave"?)

Traditional Analysis Fails

The sentence doesn't fit any standard pattern cleanly.

 

Problem 2 

Inconsistent Terminology

Consider these sentences:

- "I want to go" - traditional: "to go" is infinitive phrase

- "I want him to go" - traditional: "him to go" is... what exactly?

- "To go is fun" - traditional: "to go" is gerund phrase (but it's the same form!)

 

Traditional Analysis Fails

Same forms get different labels depending on position.

 

Problem 3

Missing Relationships

Traditional grammar can't explain why these sentences behave similarly:

- "I made him angry" 

- "I made him leave"

- "I consider him intelligent"

 

All feel like the same construction, but traditional grammar treats them differently.

 

Problem 4

No Systematic Testing

Traditional grammar relies on meaning and intuition rather than systematic tests. This leads to inconsistent analysis and confusion about borderline cases.