Before watching idk if “us” or “talk” is the object. Thinking about it now I think us the object, but I jus don’t know what talk is in the sentence. I think “us” is doing the talking but not yet sure about the part of speech for “talk”
After watching the segment it seems like “us” can be treated as a subject of “talk”. Like, talk is a verbal and it could have a subject “us”
On Sasz paragraph tree part. Here’s the paragraph:
Presumption of competence. Because being accused of mental illness is similar to being accused of crime, we ought to presume that psychiatric “defendants” are mentally competent, just as we presume that criminal defendants are legally innocent. Individuals charged with criminal, civil, or interpersonal offenses ought never to be treated as incompetent solely on the basis of the opinion of mental health experts. Incompetence ought to be a judicial determination and the “accused” ought to have access to legal representation and a right to trial by jury.
This is my paragraph tree but I was trying to focus mostly on the 1 clause per node rule:
It’s hard to explain why i ordered the tree in words, but imma just watch ahead.
I see i couldve included the quote
Presumption of competence.
in the tree. It helps cuz i think it’s the main point of the paragraph.
I see I couldve included the conjunctions in the nodes. i thought they were a separate thing from clauses
I like how each node can be numbered that makes it easier to refer to them.
I think every time I saw a clause with “ought” in it, i thought it was a call to action. I thought it had to be supported by other clauses with “ought” in them. I didn’t think clauses with “ought” in them could be reasons or arguments for other clauses.
I like that the end of the video talked about what purpose the tree should have. That instead of thinking of the perfect tree. I want to think about that more.
