Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

LIN 121

Introduction
to
Grammatical Analysis I

Professor Oyè Táíwò (2021)

Department of Linguistics and African Languages,
University of Ibadan, Ibadan
[email protected]; [email protected]
08053506069; 08024661260

LIN 121: Page 1 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Table of Contents

General Introduction and Objectives 3

Meaning of Grammar 4
Types of Grammar 6
Misconceptions about the Use of the Term Grammar 8
Construction 9
Syntax 10
The Word 11
Word Classes or Parts of Speech 14
Determiners, Quantifiers, Pronouns and Complementizers 20
Grammatical Functions 30
Word Order 31
The Phrase 34
The Clause 40
The Sentence 42
Understanding Complex Structures 43
Paradigmatic and Syntagmatic Relations 45
Interpreting Information 50
Basic Grammatical Terms/Notions 55
References 60

LIN 121: Page 2 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

General Introduction and Objectives

Grammar is traditionally subdivided into two different but inter-related areas of study:
morphology and syntax. Morphology is the study of how words are formed out of smaller
units called morphemes, and so addresses questions such as: What are the component
morphemes of a word like Antidisestablishmentarianism and what is the nature of the
morphological operations by which they are combined together to form the overall word?
Syntax is the study of the way in which phrases and sentences are structured out of words, and
so addresses questions like: What is the structure of a sentence like What’s the president
doing? and what is the nature of the grammatical operations by which its component words
are combined together to form the overall sentence structure? (Radford 2004)

This course, Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I, is intended to familiarize you with

topics on descriptive analysis in Syntax without a bias for any particular syntactic theory or
framework. In this couse material, you will come across topics and terms that cut across all
syntactic theories, as you familiarize yourself with them, you will be able to duscuss syntax
with ease and without the usual fear that is attached to it by some.

Some of the topics you will study in the course are the following: grammatical functions,
functional categories, grammatical features, subcategorization and selection restrictions.
Others include paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations, processes and participants, given and
new information, topic and comment and end focus.These topics have been presented in
simple and easy-to-understand manner so that it will be possible to study them on your own
and you will have a vivid and clear understanding of them.

General Objectives
This course shall provide you with introductory descriptions and explanations of syntactic
analyses for you to be able discuss and analyse elementary grammatical structures. You
should be able to explain the following at the end of the course: meaning and types of
grammar, the word, word classes, word order, grammatical functions, structures above the
word such as the phrase, the clause and the sentence. Other topics that you should be able to
discuss are paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations in constructions, interpreting information
and basic grammatical terms and or notions.

LIN 121: Page 3 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Meaning of Grammar
Introduction
Grammar is a central term in Linguistics. However, there is a great deal of confusion about
this term because it is used in very many ways. In other words, the term ‘grammar’ covers a
wide range of phenomenon.

The Linguistic Definitions of Grammar

Term grammar goes back to the Greek word which may be translated as ‘the art of writing’.
But this word acquired a much wider sense and came to embrace the whole study of language.
In Linguistics, the concept of grammar is not restricted to a single meaning despite the fact
that all these meanings are taken to be standard in their own contexts. Each definition depends
on the context where the term is used. Although these meanings interrelate with one another
somehow, yet you should know how to distinguish one from the other. These meanings are
stated below.
 Grammar is all that a native speaker knows in the use of his language.
 Grammar is a branch of language study which comprises morphology and syntax.
 Grammar is a formal description of a language usually being published as grammar texts meant
for students or other users.
 Grammar is a set of language rules which can be generalized into a body of truth called theory.
 Grammar is the attainable standard of acceptability being used to justify grammatical expressions
in a particular language.

Grammar as the native speaker knowledge

A native speaker is the one that speaks a language as his first language. He is expected to be
competent in that language because he uses it as a mother- tongue (the first language one
acquired in life). This is the language through which he acquires more knowledge in life. He
also uses this language to learn other languages. Therefore, it is expected that he knows the
structure of his language. He is the best person to describe his language because he knows
when an utterance is correct or not. Linguists believe that he could do this because he had
internalized the grammar of his language. Between Mr. Òjó that speaks only Yorùbá and
Mallam Nuhu that speaks only Hausa, who do you think can really describe the Yorùbá
language structure? Of course, it is Mr. Òjó. Since Mr. Òjó is a native speaker of Yorùbá, his
knowledge of the language constitutes a kind of Yorùbá grammar. Mr. Òjó has in his head a
complete grammar of Yorùbá “according to” his experience in the language. So does Mallam
Nuhu a complete grammar of Hausa corresponding to his exposure therein. In the same way,
the native speakers of Edo, Efik, Igbo, Idoma, Ebira, Urhobo, Is̩e̩ kiri, Ijo̩ and other languages
also have the grammar of their languages in their heads.

The native speaker knowledge is implicit. It is usually easy to think about and to report on.
According to Chomsky (1957), it is seen as a device that formulates all the acceptable
sentences possible in a language. It is a very broad concept of grammar because it includes the
right pronunciation (the phonology), the right structure (the syntax) and the right meaning
(semantics) of each acceptable expression. This is represented in the diagram below.

GRAMMAR

PHONOLOGY SYNTAX SEMANTICS

LIN 121: Page 4 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Phonology is the study of sound systems in language.

Syntax refers to the arrangement of words or ways in which words are put together and the
internal structure of the word i.e. syntax includes morphology.
Semantics is the study of meaning in language.

Grammar as Morphology and Syntax

In the specific or restricted sense, grammar is just one branch of language structure distinct
from phonology and semantics. It deals with a set of rules and examples dealing with the
syntax and morphology of a language.

LANGUAGE STRUCTURE

PHONOLOGY GRAMMAR SEMANTICS

SYNTAX MORPHOLOGY

Syntax refers to the arrangement of words or ways in which words are put together.
Morphology refers to the internal structure of words or the different forms or shapes of words.

Grammar as a Language Description

In another sense, grammar is a description of the structure of a language and how linguistic
units such as words and phrases are combined into sentences and the meaning and functions
of the sentences in the language in question. In this sense, every language be it English,
Yorùbá, Igbo has a grammar of its own and the grammar of one language is different from the
other.

When grammar is used in this sense, it is more preferable to use the term grammatical
structure. That being the case, when we are talking about the grammar of Hausa, for example,
what we mean is the grammatical structure of Hausa. This view is in Longman Dictionary of
Applied Linguistics where the first definition of grammar is given ‘a description of the
structure of a language and the way in which linguistic units such as words and phrases are
combined to produce sentences in the language. It usually takes into account the meaning and
function these sentences have in the overall system of language. It may or may not include the
description of the sounds of a language’.

Grammar as a Theory of Syntax

In a certain current linguistic theory, grammar is used to designate a set of rules and the
lexicon. The set of finite rules are designed to account for different languages with the aim of
providing a theory that can model what will be known as Universal Grammar (UG). Some of
these theories or models are Transformational Generative Grammar (TGG), Systemic
Grammar, etc. It should be emphasized that within Linguistics, this view of grammar has
undergone and is still undergoing several modifications to produce several model of
grammatical structure.

Grammar as a Standard of Acceptability

What do you think is meant by the term ‘grammar’ when one says any of the following
sentences?
LIN 121: Page 5 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

I need to improve on my grammar before I can attend that interview.

It is not a good grammar to say you should raise up your hands.
It is a bad grammar to say “It’s me” when you are asked who knocks at the
door.
Though John has a good command of vocabulary, his grammar is terrible.

When the term grammar is used in this way, one is simply making judgment on whether an
expression is acceptable or unacceptable in a particular variety or dialect of a language.
Linguists have also discovered that some expressions that are usually termed “ungrammatical”
in the standard dialect of a language are often accepted as grammatical in the non-standard
dialects. Therefore, if the research is based on any of those non-standard dialects, the same
expressions will be grammatical.

Types of Grammar

I will discuss six types of grammar. These are Descriptive Grammar, Prescriptive Grammar,
Pedagogical Grammar, Reference Grammar, Theoretical Grammar and Traditional Grammar.
I will explain each of the types with appropriate examples where applicable.

Descriptive Grammar
Descriptive Grammar is an approach that describes the grammatical constructions that are
used in a language. These are the sounds and sound patterns, the basic units of meaning, such
as words, and the rules to combine them to form new sentences. When linguists wish to
describe a language, they attempt to describe the grammar of the language that exists in the
minds of its speakers. There may be some difference among speakers’ knowledge, but there
must be shared knowledge, because it is this grammar that makes it possible to communicate
through language. The grammar then, is what we know; it represents our linguistic
competence. To understand the nature of language, we must understand the nature of this
internalized, unconscious set of rules, which is part of every grammar of every language. A
descriptive grammar does not tell you how you should speak; it describes your basic linguistic
knowledge. It explains how it is possible for you to speak and understands, and it tells what
you know about the sounds, words phrases and sentences of your language.

Prescriptive Grammar

Prescriptive Grammar is a manual that focuses on constructions where usage is divided, and
lays down rules governing the socially correct use of language. The prescriptive grammarians
believed that there are certain “correct” forms that all educated people should use in speaking
and writing and that language change is corruption. They wished to prescribe rather than
describe the rules of grammar. For example, they would say that “two negatives make a
positive” and therefore one should not say I don’t have none rather one should say I don’t
have any; that even when you is singular, it should be followed by the plural were; hence it
wrong to say You was wrong about that. The correct form is You were wrong about that. In
comparative constructions, the nominative form of the pronoun (e.g. I, he, and they) should
follow than and not the objective form (me, him, and them). Therefore, it is wrong (as the
prescriptive grammarian would say) to say Ade is fatter than me. The correct form is Ade is
fatter than I. Many of these “rules” were based on Latin grammar, which had already given
way to different rules in the languages that developed from Latin. Many of these new rules
LIN 121: Page 6 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

were legislated in English grammar. All those who prescribe rules for language are bound to
fail. Language is vigorous and dynamic and constantly changing. All languages and dialects
are expressive, complete and logical.
Pedagogical Grammar
A Pedagogical Grammar of a language is a book specifically designed for teaching a foreign
language or for developing an awareness of the mother tongue. It is also known as teaching
grammar. It states explicitly the rules of the language or dialect. It assumes that the student
already knows one language and compares the grammar of the target language with the
grammar of the native language. The meaning of a word is given by providing a gloss- the
parallel word in the student’s native language such as ilé “house”. It is assumed that the
student knows the meaning of the gloss “house” and so the meaning of the Yorùbá word ilé.

Sounds of the target language that do not occur in the native language are often described by
reference to known sounds. The rules on how to put words together to form grammatical
sentences also refer the learners’ knowledge of their native language. Pedagogical grammars
might be prescriptive in the sense that they attempt to teach the student what is or is not a
grammatical construction in the new language. Their aim is different from grammars that
attempt to change the rules or usage of a language already learnt.

Reference Grammar
A Reference Grammar is a grammatical description that tries to be as comprehensive as
possible, so that it can act as a reference book for those interested in establishing grammatical
facts in much the same way as a dictionary is used as a “reference lexicon”. For example in
the book ‘A Reference Grammar for Students of English’ by R.A. Close, the preface says the
book ‘will explain how an English sentence is built up,… describe the grammatical system as
a whole…[and] introduce the terminology with which we can label its component parts’.
Professor Awobuluyi’s book ‘Essentials of Yorùbá Grammar’ ‘…presents the Yorùbá
language as it really is, rather than as seen hitherto. The major parts of speech of the language
are…established uniformly on the criterion of function alone’. Books like the ones mentioned
above are reference grammar books of these languages. Other examples of reference grammar
include ‘A Grammar of Yorùbá’ by Emeritus Professor Ayo̩ Bamgbos̩e, ‘English Grammar: A
Linguistic Study of its Classes and Structures’ by F.S. Scott et al.

Traditional Grammar
Traditional Grammar is a term often used to summarize the range of attitudes and methods
found in the period of grammatical study before the advent of linguistic science. The
‘tradition’ in question is over 2,000 years and includes the works of classical Greek and
Roman grammarians, Renaissance writers and 18th century prescriptive grammarians. The
traditional grammarian saw it as his task to formulate the standards of correctness and to
impose these, if necessary, upon the speakers of the language. Linguists generally use the term
‘traditional grammar’ pejoratively, identifying an unscientific approach to grammatical study
in which languages were analyzed in term of Latin, with scanty regard for empirical facts i. e.
publicly verifiable data/facts obtained by means of observation or experiment.

Theoretical Grammar
Theoretical Grammar is an approach that’s goes beyond the study of individual language. It
studies language and languages with a view to constructing a theory of their structure and
functions. Those that pertain to human languages, representing the universal properties of
LIN 121: Page 7 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

language, constitute the universal grammar. Theoretical grammar determines what constructs
are needed in order to do any kind of grammatical analysis, and how these can be applied
consistently in the investigation of a human language. Theoretical grammar supplies the
concepts and categories in terms of which particular languages are to be analyzed. The goal of
theoretical grammar is the formulation of a satisfactory theory of the structure of language in
general. For example, it might formulate the hypothesis that all languages have nouns and
verbs. The study of grammar of a particular language (descriptive grammar) provides the data
which confirm or refute the propositions and theories put forward in theoretical grammar.

Misconceptions about the Use of the Term Grammar

Introduction
The term ‘grammar’ could be regarded as misconceptions. In this lecture, I will explain and
analyze these misconceptions so that you will be able to avoid them. After studying this
lecture, you should be able to identify certain misconceptions about grammar and analyze how
they are so.

Misconceptions about Grammar

Using the term grammar to refer to the grammar book
It is not uncommon for a school pupil to ask his/her classmate the following question: “Can
you lend me your grammar?” It is obvious that the term grammar in this sense simply refers to
a grammar book. But in actual fact, the grammar of a language is not the same thing as the
book. However, it could be argued that although the book itself is not the grammar, what it
contains is at least grammatical. Even in this sense, the grammar of the language in question is
still limited as presented by the author of the book because the grammar of a language is
certainly more than the one written by an individual author.

Equating Grammar with Grammatical Labels or Terminologies

Another sense in which the term grammar is misused is when it is confused with grammatical
terms. It is not unusual for a school teacher to complain that a student ‘does not know any
grammar’ when the student does not know for example that the word ‘dancing’ belongs to the
grammatical term called ‘gerund’ or when the student is unable to refer to traditional terms as
part of speech, or when the student does not know the traditional definition of the verb as, ‘a
word which expresses action, or state of being’. Common grammatical terms such as noun,
verb, gerund, subject, object, predicate, etc. do not constitute the grammar of a language. The
fact that a student cannot define such grammatical term that is given to word when it is used
in a certain way does not mean that the student does not know any grammar in the sense of the
structure of the language in question.

Grammatica
When the term grammar is used in the sense of ‘grammatica’: a Greek word meaning a set of
rules for writing; it is clear that languages which have never been reduced or committed to
writing will be regarded as having no grammar. However, it should be emphasized that the
spoken language precedes the written language and that one learns to speak before learning to
write. This means in effect that the grammatical patterns written down when we write the
grammar of a language already exist in spoken form. That being the case, the view that
languages that have not been reduced or committed to writing have no grammar is simply
unacceptable.
LIN 121: Page 8 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Grammar and Meaning

Another misconception is that grammar is essentially concerned with meaning. This view is
unacceptable in Linguistics where a distinction is usually made between Grammar and
Semantics. There are indeed several ways of showing that there is no one to one
correspondence between grammatical and semantic distinctions. To cite just one instance, we
can consider the case of sex and gender. Sex is a semantic distinction while gender is a
grammatical distinction. Examples from Romance languages- French, Italian, Spanish will
clearly show that it is wrong to equate sex with gender or to give meaning to gender as male
or female in grammar. In these romance languages, all nouns can be divided grammatically
according to gender into two places namely masculine and feminine. The classification is
supported in the grammar in the fact that different forms of articles and adjectives go with
these classes. Some examples are stated below.

French Italian Spanish English

Masculine: Le livre il libro el libro ‘the book’
Feminine: la porte la parta la puarta ‘the door’

French: Masculine Feminine

Le livre vert La porte verte
the book green ‘the green book’ the door green ‘the green door’

Given these examples, it will be clearly wrong to claim that in French, Italian and Spanish
languages, all objects are either male or female or that they have the meaning male or female.
This is far from being correct, what simply happens is that in grammar of these languages, all
nouns can be divided into two classes: masculine and feminine.

Another evidence to show that gender in grammar does not mean the same thing as sex is the
fact that in some languages, many of the nouns which are classified as feminine actually refer
to occupation that are normally performed by heavy looking young men as is evident in the
following French examples.

La vigie ‘the night watch’ La recruit ‘the recruit’

La sentinelle ‘the sentinel (guard)’

Moreover, in German, the words that are commonly used to refer to young girls as well as
young ladies are classified as neuter gender (neither masculine nor feminine), e g

German: das mädchen ‘girls’ Das fräuleu ‘young ladies’

The conclusion from all these examples and others is that grammar is not essentially
concerned with meaning.

Some Languages have Grammar while others are devoid of Grammar

Another misconception is the viewpoint that some languages have grammar while others are
devoid of grammar. This viewpoint is based on a very restricted use of the term grammar. In
LIN 121: Page 9 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

this restricted sense, grammar is equated with just the morphological process referred to as
inflections. Thus, languages such as Russian and Latin which have inflections are regarded as
having grammar, while languages like English which have little inflections have not much
grammar, and languages like Vietnamis, Chinese, Yorùbá which have no inflections have no
grammar. In languages that have inflections, we have several shapes/forms of a word as is
evident from the following examples.

Russian ‘cat’
Koška ‘cat’ (nominative) Koški ‘of a cat’ Koške ‘to / for a cat’
Košku ‘cat’(accusative) Koško ‘by a cat’ Koške ‘about a cat’

Latin ‘Master’
Dominus ‘master’ (nominative) Domini ‘of a master/ masters (plural)’
domino ‘to/from a master’ dominum ‘master’(accusative)
domine ‘O master’ dominomim ‘of masters’(plural)
dominos ‘masters’(accusative) dominis ‘from masters’

The fact that some languages have different shapes/forms for a word and others languages do
not have does not mean that the languages that do not have this feature have no grammar.
Inflection is just a grammatical feature and does not constitute the grammar of the language.

Construction
Construction is the term used by grammarians for the syntactic characterization of a sentence,
or of any smaller unit that we can distinguish within it. In this lecture, you shall study the
following: construction, a syntactic unit and grammatical categories. Constructions are to be
described in terms of functions and relation. A syntactic unit is a combination of words which
have a construction of their own. For example, in

1. He said you looked beautiful.

The last three words, you looked beautiful, form a syntactic unit also known as a syntagm. A
syntactic unit can be looked at from two angles. First, we can consider it as a whole, for its
functions either in isolation or as part of a larger unit. In the expression below

2. food which tastes peppery

the words in bold (last three words) is a relative clause, a clause whose function is in relation
to an antecedent noun. The whole expression ‘food which tastes peppery’ is a noun phrase
whose functions are the same as those of a single noun. The expression in (3)
3. It tastes nice.

is a main clause, functioning as a sentence, it is also a declarative sentence. Any unit can be
characterized on more than one dimension, for instance, (3) is a clause not a phrase,
declarative not interrogative, main and not relative clause.

The second characterization is in terms of a unit’s internal connection. Using the unit in (3) as
an example, It tastes nice has a Subject and Predicator. It (pronoun) is the subject of the verb
and the subject within the clause or sentence as whole. Tastes is a predicator to nice which is
the complement of tastes; nice (adjective) is the complement of the verb which is the relation
LIN 121: Page 10 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

of part to part, as well as the complement within the clause, relation of part to whole. In the
noun clause (2), food which tastes peppery, food is the head while which tastes peppery is
the modifier.
Constructions are to be described in terms of functions and relation, and not simply in terms
of parts of speech and their sequential distribution. In It tastes nice, the first word is a subject
related to a predicator, tastes; it is not simply a pronoun which is immediately followed by a
verb. A difference of construction can now be seen as a difference of meaning, either of the
whole or in at least one relationship between elements. For example

4. He sounded a fool.
means that, from what one heard, it seems that he is foolish, but

5. He sounded a trumpet.
he held the instrument and blew it. Here, there is a difference of construction as well as simply
a difference of words, a fool having the function of subject complement and a trumpet that of
a direct object.

Syntax
The term Syntax is from the ancient Greek Syntaxis, a verbal noun meaning ‘arrangement’ or
‘setting out together’. Traditionally, syntax ‘refers to the branch of grammar dealing with the
ways in which words, with or without appropriate inflections are arranged to show
connections of meaning within the sentence’ (Matthews 1981:1) For example, in it tastes
nice, there are connections of meaning among it, tastes, and nice, hence we have it
+tastes+nice word order and not any other permutations *tastes it nice, *it nice tastes, *nice
tastes it

There is also connection of meaning by inflectional agreement between the verb and pronoun
(it tastes not it taste). The individual connections can also form part of a different whole e.g.
How nice it tastes! (Exclamation) or as a part of a larger sentence. How nice it tastes, you are
not to eat anymore. The field of syntax covers both what is shown (e. g. How nice it tastes is
an exclamation) and the means by which it is done (agreement, order of words and other
devices). The syntax1 of a language is described in terms of a taxonomy (i.e. classificatory
list) of the range of different types of syntactic structures found in the language.

The central assumption underpinning syntactic analysis in traditional grammar is that phrases
and sentences are built up of a series of constituents (i.e. syntactic units), each of which
belongs to a specific grammatical category and serves a specific grammatical function. Given
this assumption, the task of the linguist analysing the syntactic structure of any given type of
sentence is to identify each of the constituents in the sentence, and (for each constituent) to
say what category it belongs to and what function it serves. For example, in relation to the
syntax of a simple sentence like:
6. Students protested

it would traditionally be said that the sentence consists of two constituents (the word students
and the word protested), that each of these constituents belongs to a specific grammatical
category (students being a plural noun and protested a past tense verb) and that each serves a
1
The discussion in this section is taken from Radford (2004, 2009)

LIN 121: Page 11 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

specific grammatical function (students being the subject of the sentence, and protested being
its predicate). The overall sentence Students protested has the categorial status of a clause
which is finite in nature (by virtue of denoting an event taking place at a specific time), and
has the semantic function of expressing a proposition which is declarative in force (in that it is
used to make a statement rather than e.g. ask a question). Accordingly, a traditional grammar
of English would tell us that the simplest type of finite declarative clause found in English is a
sentence like (6) in which a nominal subject is followed by a verbal predicate.

The Word
Despite the fact that the notion of words appears quite widespread or familiar, no one has yet
been able to propose a satisfactory universal definition of the word. In other words, it is not
easy to say categorically what a word is and how it can be defined.

Types of Words
The inability of linguists to find a satisfactory definition to the notion of the word could be
traced in part to the fact that there at least four different types of words. These are the
orthographic word, the morphological word, the lexical word and the semantic word.

Orthographic word: By orthographic word, it is meant the word which in writing has a space
on either side of it.
E g. That boy is a student of Linguistics. - 7 orthographic words

Phonological word: The notion of orthographic word applies only to the written medium.
This is so because in normal speech, we do not always have to pause between words. But if a
word can be identified by the phonological phenomenon of pause in speech, such a word is
referred to as a phonological word. Hence, a phonological word can be defined as sound or
combination of vocal sounds to express meaning.

Morphological words: A morphological word is recognized by its form or shape only and
not by its meaning. For instance, the word bank is one morphological word in spite of the fact
that it can refer to the following among others:
 it can refer to a place where money is loaned, issued, exchanged, and kept.
 it can refer to the rising ground bordering a river, lake or sea.
However, bank and banks will be regarded as two morphological words by virtue of the fact
that they are not identical in form.

Lexical Words: A lexical word includes all the various forms of items that are closely related
in respect of meaning. For instance, while bank and banks are two morphological words,
they are just one lexical word because of meaning relationship. Similarly, the various forms
such as the following write, writes, writing, written, and wrote are five morphological
words but only one lexical word.

WRITE is the lexeme (the basic lexical unit comprising one or several words) or the principal
word where other forms are derived.

WRITE

LIN 121: Page 12 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

write wrote writes written writing

TAKE

take takes taking taken took

Semantic Words: A semantic word is one which has just one unit of meaning. In effect,
morphologically identical items which differ in meaning are different semantic words. Words
like these are regarded as polysemous words. For instance, the item bank can have more than
one meaning, and for that reason, the item is not just one semantic word. A word that is
marked by multiplicity of meaning is said to be polysemous. If bank is given two meanings, it
is one morphological word with two semantic meanings. Also the word table can be one
morphological word but more than one semantic word.
table- chart, diagram
where things are kept e.g. book. Used for writing.

Identification and Classification of Words

Although there are no full proof criteria for identifying words, the following are among the
criteria that have been suggested by linguists for this purpose: the criterion of structural
stability and the criterion of uninterruptability

The criterion of structural stability: This criterion emphasizes the fact that of all linguistic
units, words are the most structurally stable in respect of internal structure. In other words, the
constituent parts of a complex word are more or less fixed, they cannot be rearranged.

Unwarrantable un- warrant- able not

* warrantableun *unablewarrant *ablewarrantun *warrantunable

Disagreement dis- agree- ment not

*agreementdis *dismentagree *mentagreedis *agreedisment

The criterion of uninterruptability: According to this criterion, the sequence of a word

cannot be interrupted. In other words, new elements cannot be inserted in the sequence of a
word.
Children we can have ‘little children’
but cannot have *child little ren

Disagreement we can have ‘small disagreement’

but cannot have *disagreesmallment

This criterion can in fact be used to confirm the number of words in a given sequence.

Grammatical Classification of Words

Several grammatical classifications of words have been proposed by linguists. Among such
are the following: Variable and Invariable words; Grammatical and Lexical words; Open-class
and closed – class words.
LIN 121: Page 13 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Variable words: Variable words are words that express or signal grammatical relationship
through a change of form, e.g.
boy - boys; big - bigger, biggest
Dance- dancing, dances, danced, dancers

Invariable words: Invariable words are words that express grammatical relationship without
a change of form. They include words like at, on – prepositions; and, but – conjunctions

Grammatical words: Grammatical words are words that merely signal grammatical
relationship or words whose roles are largely wholly grammatical. Other terms used for this
class of words are function words; empty words i.e. empty of semantic content, or functors.
E.g. Pronouns- I, they, you, it, Prepositions- at, on, Conjunctions- and, but, Articles- an, a, the, etc

Lexical words: Lexical words are words that have lexical meaning. In other words, they have
semantic content. e.g.
Nouns- bank, road, students, etc; Verbs –jump, cry, shout, etc; Adjectives- small, big, etc

Open-class Words: Open-class words are words which belong to word-class whose
membership is in principle unlimited or indefinite. New items or words are regularly added to
express new ideas, new inventions. e.g
Nouns- bank, road, students, etc Verbs –jump, cry, shout, etc
Adjectives- small, big, etc Adverbs – silently, slowly, quietly, etc

Closed-class Words: Closed-class words are words which belong to the word-class whose
membership is fixed or limited. New words are not regularly added to such class of words. e.g
Pronouns- I, they, you, it, etc Prepositions- at, on, etc
Conjunctions- and, but, etc Articles- an, a, the, etc

Word Classes or Parts of Speech

Words are assigned to grammatical categories (called parts of speech) on the basis of their
semantic properties (i.e. meaning), morphological properties (i.e. the range of different forms
they have), and syntactic properties (i.e. word-order properties relating to the positions they
can occupy within sentences): a set of words which belong to the same category thus have a
number of semantic, morphological and syntactic properties in common. For example, nouns
are traditionally said to have the semantic property that they denote entities: so, bottle is a
noun (since it denotes a type of object used to contain liquids), horse is a noun (since it
denotes a type of animal), and John is a noun (since it denotes a specific person). Typical
nouns (more specifically, count nouns) have the morphological property that they have two
different forms: a singular form (like horse in one horse) used to denote a single entity, and a
plural form (like horses in two horses) used to denote two or more entities. Nouns have the
syntactic property that only (an appropriate kind of) noun can be used to end a four-word
sentence such as They have no... In place of the dots here we could insert a singular noun like
car or a plural noun like friends, but not other types of word (e.g. not see, or slowly or up,
since these are not nouns).

In contrast to nouns, verbs are traditionally said to have the semantic property that they
denote actions or events: so, eat, sing, pull, and resign are all (action-denoting) verbs. From a
LIN 121: Page 14 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

syntactic point of view, verbs have the property that only an appropriate kind of verb (in its
uninflected form) can be used to complete a three-word sentence such as They/It can... So,
words like stay, leave, hide, die, starve and cry are all verbs and hence can be used in place of
the dots here (but words like apple, under, pink, and if aren’t). From a morphological point of
view, regular verbs like cry (in English) have the property that they have four distinct forms:
e.g. alongside the dictionary citation form cry we find the present tense form cries, the past
tense/perfect participle/passive participle form cried and the progressive participle form
crying.

Criteria for Categorizing words

Words are assigned to grammatical categories in traditional grammar on the basis of their
shared semantic, morphological and syntactic properties. The kind of semantic criteria
(sometimes called ‘notional’ criteria) used to categorize words in traditional grammar are
illustrated in much-simplified form below:

Verbs denote actions (go, destroy, buy, eat, etc.)

Nouns denote entities (car, cat, hill, John, etc.)
Adjectives denote states (ill, happy, rich, etc.)
Adverbs denote manner (badly, slowly, painfully, cynically etc.)
Prepositions denote location (under, over, outside, in, on etc.)

However, semantically-based criteria for identifying categories must be used with care: for
example, assassination denotes an action but is a noun, not a verb; illness denotes a state but
is a noun, not an adjective; in fast food, the word fast denotes the manner in which the food is
prepared but is an adjective, not an adverb; and Cambridge denotes a location but is a noun,
not a preposition.

The morphological criteria for categorizing words concern their inflectional and derivational
properties. Inflectional properties relate to different forms of the same word (e.g. the plural
form of a noun like cat is formed by adding the plural inflection -s to give the form cats);
derivational properties relate to the processes by which a word can be used to form a different
kind of word by the addition of an affix of some kind (e.g. by adding the suffix -ness to the
adjective sad we can form the noun sadness).

Although English has a highly impoverished system of inflectional morphology, there are
nonetheless two major categories of word which have distinctive inflectional properties –
namely nouns and verbs. We can identify the class of nouns in terms of the fact that they
generally inflect for number, and thus have distinct singular and plural forms – cf. pairs such
as dog/dogs, man/men, ox/oxen, etc. Accordingly, we can differentiate a noun like fool from
an adjective like foolish by virtue of the fact that only (regular, countable) nouns like fool –
not adjectives like foolish – can carry the noun plural inflection -s: cf.

They are fools [noun]/*foolishes [adjective]

There are several complications which should be pointed out, however. One is the existence
of irregular nouns like sheep which are invariable and hence have a common singular/plural
form (cf. one sheep, two sheep). A second is that some nouns are intrinsically singular (and
so have no plural form) by virtue of their meaning: only those nouns (called count/countable
LIN 121: Page 15 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

nouns) which denote entities which can be counted have a plural form (e.g. chair – cf. one
chair, two chairs); some nouns denote an uncountable mass and for this reason are called
mass/uncountable/non-count nouns, and so cannot be pluralized (e.g. furniture – hence the
ungrammaticality of *one furniture, *two furnitures). A third is that some nouns (like scissors
and trousers) have a plural form but no countable singular form. A fourth complication is
posed by noun expressions which contain more than one noun; only the head noun in such
expressions can be pluralized, not any preceding noun used as a modifier of the head noun:
thus, in expressions such as car doors, policy decisions, skate boards, horse boxes, trouser
presses, coat hangers, etc. the second noun is the head and can be pluralized, whereas the first
noun is a modifier and so cannot be pluralized.

In much the same way, we can identify verbs by their inflectional morphology in English. In
addition to their uninflected base form (= the citation form under which they are listed in
dictionaries), verbs typically have up to four different inflected forms, formed by adding one
of four inflections to the appropriate stem form: the relevant inflections are the perfect/passive
participle suffix -n, the past tense suffix -d, the third person singular present tense suffix -s,
and the progressive participle/gerund suffix -ing.

Like most morphological criteria, however, this one is complicated by the irregular and
impoverished nature of English inflectional morphology; for example, many verbs have
irregular past or perfect forms, and in some cases either or both of these forms may not in fact
be distinct from the (uninflected) base form, so that a single form may serve two or three
functions (thereby neutralizing or syncretizing the relevant distinctions), as Table 1 below
illustrates:
Table 1: Table of Verb Forms
BASE PERFECT PAST PRESENT PROGRESSIVE
show shown showed shows showing
go gone went goes going
speak spoken spoke speaks speaking
see seen saw sees seeing
come came came comes coming
wait waited waited waits waiting
meet met met meets meeting
cut cut cut cuts cutting

The largest class of verbs in English are regular verbs which have the morphological
characteristics of wait, and so have past, perfect and passive forms ending in the suffix -d. The
picture becomes even more complicated if we take into account the verb be, which has eight
distinct forms:
base be, perfect been, progressive being,
past was/were, present am/are/is
The most regular verb suffix in English is -ing, which can be attached to the base form of
almost any verb (though a handful of defective verbs like beware are exceptions).

The obvious implication of our discussion of nouns and verbs here is that it would not be
possible to provide a systematic account of English inflectional morphology unless we were to
posit that words belong to grammatical categories, and that a specific type of inflection
attaches only to a specific category of word. The same is also true if we wish to provide an
adequate account of derivational morphology in English (i.e. the processes by which words
are derived from other words): this is because particular derivational affixes can only be
LIN 121: Page 16 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

attached to words belonging to particular categories. For example, the negative prefixes un-
and in- can be attached to adjectives to form a corresponding negative adjective (cf. pairs such
as happy/unhappy and flexible/inflexible) but not to nouns (so that a noun like fear has no
negative counterpart *unfear), nor to prepositions (so that a preposition like inside has no
negative antonym *uninside). Similarly, the adverbialising (i.e. adverb-forming) suffix -ly in
English can be attached only to adjectives (giving rise to adjective/adverb pairs such as
sad/sadly) and cannot be attached to a noun like computer, or to a verb like accept, or to a
preposition like with.

Likewise, the nominalizing (i.e. noun-forming) suffix -ness can be attached only to adjective
stems (so giving rise to adjective/noun pairs such as coarse/coarseness), not to nouns, verbs
or prepositions (Hence we don’t find –ness derivatives for a noun like boy, or a verb like
resemble, or a preposition like down). In much the same way, the comparative suffix -er can
be attached to adjectives (cf. tall/taller) and some adverbs (cf. soon/sooner) but not to other
types of word (cf. woman/*womanner); and the superlative suffix -est can attach to adjectives
(cf. tall/tallest) but not other types of word (cf. e.g. down/*downest; donkey/*donkiest,
enjoy/*enjoyest). There is no point in multiplying examples here: it is clear that derivational
affixes have categorial properties, and any account of derivational morphology will clearly
have to recognise this fact.

As we noted earlier, there is also syntactic evidence for assigning words to categories: this
essentially relates to the fact that different categories of words have different
distributions (i.e. occupy a different range of positions within phrases or sentences). For
example, if we want to complete the four-word sentence in (1) below by inserting a single
word at the end of the sentence in the --- position:

(1) They have no ---

we can use an (appropriate kind of) noun, but not a verb, preposition, adjective, or adverb, as
we see from:
(2a). They have no car/conscience/friends/ideas [nouns]
(b) They have no went [verb]/for [preposition]/older [adjective]/conscientiously [adverb]

So, using the relevant syntactic criterion, we can define the class of nouns as the set of words
which can terminate a sentence in the position marked --- in (1).

Using the same type of syntactic evidence, we could argue that only a verb (in its
infinitive/base form) can occur in the position marked --- in (3) below to form a complete
(non-elliptical) sentence:
(3) They/it can ---
Support for this claim comes from the contrasts in (4) below:

(4a) They can stay/leave/hide/die/starve/cry [verb]

(b) *They can gorgeous [adjective] /happily [adverb] /down [preposition] /door [noun]

And the only category of word which can occur after very (in the sense of extremely) is an
adjective or adverb, as we see from (5) below:

(5a) He is very slow [very+adjective] (b) He walks very slowly [very+adverb]

LIN 121: Page 17 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

(c) *Very fools waste time [very+noun] (d) *He very adores her [very+verb]
(e) *It happened very after the party [very+preposition]

But note that very can only be used to modify adjectives/adverbs which by virtue of their
meaning are gradable and so can be qualified by words like very/rather/somewhat etc;
adjectives/adverbs which denote an absolute state are ungradable by virtue of their meaning,
and so cannot be qualified in the same way – hence the oddity of
(6) !Fifteen students were very present, and five were very absent.
(where ! marks semantic anomaly)

Moreover, we can differentiate adjectives from adverbs in syntactic terms. For example, only
adverbs can be used to end sentences such as He treats her ---, She behaved ---, He worded
the statement ---: cf.
(7a) He treats her badly [adverb]/*kind [adjective]/*shame [noun]/*under [preposition]
(b) She behaved abominably [adverb]/*appalling [adjective]/*disgrace [noun]/*down [preposition]
(c) He worded the statement carefully [adverb]/*good [adjective]/*tact [noun]/*in [preposition]

And since adjectives (but not adverbs) can serve as the complement of the verb be (i.e. can be
used after be), we can delimit the class of (gradable) adjectives uniquely by saying that only
adjectives can be used to complete a four-word sentence of the form They are very ---: cf.

(8a) They are very tall/pretty/kind/nice [adjective]

(b) *They are very slowly [adverb] /gentlemen [noun] /astonish [verb] /outside [preposition]

Another way of differentiating between an adjective like real and an adverb like really is that
adjectives are used to modify nouns, whereas adverbs are used to modify other types of
expression: cf.
(9a) There is a real crisis [real + noun] (b) He is really nice [really + adjective]
(c) He walks really slowly [really + adverb] (d) He is really down [really + preposition]
(e) He must really squirm [really + verb]

Adjectives used to modify a following noun (like real in There is a real crisis) are
traditionally said to be attributive in function, whereas those which do not modify a following
noun (like real in The crisis is real) are said to be predicative in function.

As for the syntactic properties of prepositions, they alone can be intensified by right in the
sense of ‘completely’, or by straight in the sense of ‘directly’:
(10a) Go right up the ladder (b) He went right inside
(c) He walked straight into a wall (d) He fell straight down
By contrast, other categories cannot be intensified by right/straight (in Standard English): cf.

(11a) *He right/straight despaired [right/straight + verb]

(b) *She is right/straight pretty [right/straight + adjective]
(c) *She looked at him right/straight strangely [right/straight + adverb]
(d) *They are right/straight fools [right/straight + noun]
It should be noted, however, that since right/straight serve to intensify the meaning of a
preposition, they can only be combined with those (uses of) prepositions which express the
kind of meaning which can be intensified in the appropriate way (so that He made
right/straight for the exit is OK, but *He bought a present right/straight for Mary is not).

LIN 121: Page 18 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

A further syntactic property of some prepositions (namely those which take a following noun
or pronoun expression as their complement – traditionally called transitive prepositions)
which they share in common with (transitive) verbs is the fact that they permit an immediately
following accusative pronoun as their complement (i.e. a pronoun in its accusative form, like
me/us/him/them): cf.
(12a) She was against him [transitive preposition +accusative pronoun]
(b) She was watching him [transitive verb+ accusative pronoun]
(c) *She is fond him [adjective+ accusative pronoun]
(d) *She works independently him [adverb+ accusative pronoun]
(e) *She showed me a photo him [noun+ accusative pronoun]
Even though a preposition like with does not express the kind of meaning which allows it to
be intensified by right or straight, we know it is a (transitive) preposition because it is
invariable (so not e.g. a verb) and permits an accusative pronoun as its complement, e.g. in
sentences such as He argued with me/us/him/ them. (For obvious reasons, this test can’t be
used with prepositions used intransitively without any complement.

Categorizing words
Given that different categories have different morphological and syntactic properties, it
follows that we can use the morphological and syntactic properties of a word to determine its
categorization (i.e. what category it belongs to). The morphological properties of a given word
provide an initial rough guide to its categorial status: in order to determine the categorial
status of an individual word, we can ask whether it has the inflectional and derivational
properties of a particular category of word. For example, we can tell that happy is an adjective
by virtue of the fact that it has the derivational properties of typical adjectives: it can take the
negative prefix un- (giving rise to the negative adjective unhappy), the
comparative/superlative suffixes -er/-est (giving rise to the forms happier/happiest), the
adverbialising suffix -ly (giving rise to the adverb happily), and the nominalizing suffix -ness
(giving rise to the noun happiness). However, we cannot always rely entirely on
morphological clues, owing to the fact that morphology is sometimes irregular, sometimes
subject to idiosyncratic restrictions, and sometimes of limited productivity. For example,
although regular adverbs (like quickly, slowly, painfully etc.) generally end in the derivational
suffix –ly, this is not true of irregular adverbs like fast (e.g. in He walks fast); moreover, when
they have the comparative suffix –er added to them, regular adverbs lose their –ly suffix so
that the comparative form of the adverb quickly is quicker not *quicklier. What all of this
means is that a word belonging to a given class may have only some of the relevant
morphological properties, or even (in the case of a completely irregular item) none of them.
For example, although the adjective fat has comparative/ superlative forms in -er/-est (cf.
fat/fatter/fattest), it has no negative un- counterpart (cf. *unfat), and no adverb counterpart in
-ly (cf. *fatly). Even more exceptional is the adjective little, which has no negative un-
derivative (cf. *unlittle), no adverb -ly derivative (cf. *littlely/*littly), no noun derivative in -
ness (at least in my variety of English – though littleness does appear in the Oxford English
Dictionary), and no -er/-est derivatives (the forms *littler/*littlest are likewise not
grammatical in my variety).

What makes morphological evidence even more problematic is the fact that many morphemes
may have more than one use. For example, -n/-d and -ing are inflections which attach to verbs
to give perfect or progressive forms (traditionally referred to as participles). However, certain

LIN 121: Page 19 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

-n/-d and -ing forms seem to function as adjectives, suggesting that -ing and -n/-d can also
serve as adjectivalising (i.e. adjectiveforming) morphemes. So, although a word like
interesting can function as a verb (in sentences like Her charismatic teacher was gradually
interesting her in syntax), it can also function as an adjective (used attributively in structures
like This is an interesting book, and predicatively in structures like This book is very
interesting). In its use as an adjective, the word interesting has the negative derivative
uninteresting (cf. It was a rather uninteresting play) and the -ly adverb derivative
interestingly (though, like many other adjectives, it has no noun derivative in -ness, and no
comparative or superlative derivatives in -er/-est). Similarly, although -n/-d can serve as a
perfect participle inflection (in structures like We hadn’t known/expected that he would quit),
it should be noted that many words ending in -n/-d can also function as adjectives. For
example, the word known in an expression such as a known criminal seems to function as an
(attributive) adjective, and in this adjectival use it has a negative un- counterpart (cf.
expressions like the tomb of the unknown warrior). Similarly, the form expected functions as a
perfect participle verb form in structures like We hadn’t expected him to complain, but seems
to function as an (attributive) adjective in structures such as He gave the expected reply; in its
adjectival (though not in its verbal) use, it has a negative un- derivative, and the resultant
negative adjective unexpected in turn has the noun derivative unexpectedness.

So, given the potential problems which arise with morphological criteria, it is unwise to rely
solely on morphological evidence in determining categorial status: rather, we should use
morphological criteria in conjunction with syntactic criteria (i.e. criteria relating to the range
of positions that words can occupy within phrases and sentences). One syntactic test which
can be used to determine the category that a particular word belongs to is that of
substitution – i.e. seeing whether (in a given sentence), the word in question can be
substituted by a regular noun, verb, preposition, adjective, or adverb etc. We can use the
substitution technique to differentiate between comparative adjectives and adverbs ending in -
er, since they have identical forms. For example, in the case of sentences like:

(13a) He is better at French than you (b) He speaks French better than you

we find that better can be replaced by a more+adjective expression like more fluent in (13a)
but not (13b), and conversely that better can be replaced by a more+adverb expression like
more fluently in (13b) but not in (13a): cf.
(14a) He is more fluent/*more fluently at French than you
(b) He speaks French more fluently/*more fluent than you

Thus, the substitution test provides us with syntactic evidence that better is an adjective in
(13a), but an adverb in (13b).

The overall conclusion to be drawn from our discussion is that morphological evidence may
sometimes be inconclusive, and has to be checked against syntactic evidence. A useful
syntactic test which can be employed is that of substitution: e.g. if a morphologically
indeterminate word can be substituted by a regular noun wherever it occurs, then the relevant
word has the same categorial status as the substitute word which can replace it, and so is a
noun.

LIN 121: Page 20 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Determiners, Quantifiers, Pronouns and Complementizers

The purpose of this lecture is for you to understand and be able to explain the differences
between functors and contectives. Therefore, after you might have studied this lecture, you
should be able to identify functors or function words and describe them.

Content words or Contentives and Function words or Functors

Thus far, we have looked at the five major grammatical categories of English (i.e. the five
categories with the largest membership), viz. noun, verb, preposition, adjective and adverb.
For typographical convenience, it is standard practice to use capital-letter abbreviations for
categories, and so to use N for noun, V for verb, P for preposition, A for adjective and ADV
for adverb. The words which belong to these five categories are traditionally said to be
contentives (or content words), in that they have substantive descriptive content.

However, in addition to content words languages also contain functors (or function words) –
i.e. words which serve primarily to carry information about the grammatical function of
particular types of expression within the sentence (e.g. information about grammatical
properties such as person, number, gender, case, etc.). The differences between contentives
and functors can be illustrated by comparing a (contentive) noun like car with a (functional)
pronoun like they. A noun like car has obvious descriptive content in that it denotes an object
which typically has four wheels and an engine, and it would be easy enough to draw a picture
of a typical car; by contrast, a pronoun such as they has no descriptive content (e.g. you can’t
draw a picture of they), but rather is a functor which (as we shall see shortly) simply encodes a
set of grammatical (more specifically, person, number and case) properties in that it is a third
person plural nominative pronoun.

One test of whether words have descriptive content is to see whether they have antonyms (i.e.
opposites): if a word has an antonym, it is a contentive (though if it has no antonym, you can’t
be sure whether it is a functor or a contentive). For example, a noun such as loss has the
antonym gain; a verb such as rise has the antonym fall; an adjective such as tall has the
antonym short; an adverb such as early (as in He arrived early) has the antonym late; and a
preposition such as inside has the antonym outside. This reflects the fact that nouns, verbs,
adjectives, adverbs and prepositions typically have substantive descriptive content, and so are
contentives. By contrast, a particle like infinitival to, or an auxiliary like do (cf. ‘Do you want
to smoke?’), or a determiner like the, or a pronoun like they, or a complementizer (i.e.
complement-clause introducing particle) like that (as used in a sentence like ‘I said that I was
tired’) have no obvious antonyms, and thus can be said to lack descriptive content, and so to
be functors. Using rather different (but equivalent) terminology, we can say that contentives
have substantive lexical content (i.e. idiosyncratic descriptive content which varies from one
lexical item/word to another), whereas functors have functional content. We can then
conclude that nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs and prepositions are lexical or substantive
categories (because the words belonging to these categories have substantive
lexical/descriptive content) whereas particles, auxiliaries, determiners, pronouns and
complementizers are functional categories (because words belonging to these categories have
an essentially grammatical function).

Determiners and quantifiers

The first type of functional category which we shall deal with is the category of determiner (D
or DET). Items such as those bold-printed in (1) below (as used there) are traditionally said to
LIN 121: Page 21 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

be (referential) determiners (because they determine the referential properties of the italicized
noun expression which follows them):

(1a) The village store is closed. (b) This appalling behaviour has got to stop
(c) That dog of yours is crazy
Referential determiners are used to introduce referring expressions: an expression like the car
in a sentence such as Shall we take the car? is a referring expression in the sense that it is
typically used to refer to a specific car which is assumed to be familiar to the
hearer/addressee.

A related class of words are those which belong to the category quantifier (Q), and this is
traditionally said to include items like those bold-printed below:

(2a) Most good comedians tell some bad jokes (b) Many students have no money
(c) Every true Scotsman hates all Englishmen (d) Each exercise contains several
examples
Such items are termed quantifiers because they serve to quantify the italicized noun
expression which follows them. Since determiners and quantifiers are positioned in front of
nouns (cf. the boys and many boys), and adjectives can similarly be positioned in front of
nouns (cf. tall boys), an obvious question to ask at this point is why we couldn’t just say that
the determiners/quantifiers in (1) and (2) have the categorial status of adjectives. The answer
is that any attempt to analyze determiners or quantifiers as adjectives in English runs up
against a number of serious descriptive problems. Let’s see why.

One reason for not subsuming determiners/quantifiers within the category of adjectives is that
they are syntactically distinct from adjectives in a variety of ways. For example, adjectives
can be iteratively (i.e. repeatedly) stacked in front of a noun they modify, in the sense that you
can go on putting more and more adjectives in front of a given noun (as in handsome
strangers, dark handsome strangers, tall dark handsome strangers, sensitive tall handsome
strangers, etc.). By contrast, neither determiners nor quantifiers can be stacked in this
way (so that although we can have a quantifier + determiner + noun expression like both
the twins, we cannot have a multiple determiner expression like *the these books or a multiple
quantifier expression such as *all both twins).
Moreover, determiners, quantifiers and adjectives can be used together to modify a noun, but
when they do so, any determiner or quantifier modifying the noun has to precede any
adjective(s) modifying the noun: cf. e.g.

(3a) the same old excuses [determiner + adjective + adjective + noun]

(b) *same the old excuses [adjective + determiner + adjective + noun]
(c) *same old the excuses [adjective + adjective + determiner + noun]

Thus, determiners and quantifiers seem to have a different distribution (and hence to be
categorically distinct) from adjectives.

A further difference between determiners/quantifiers and adjectives can be illustrated in

relation to what speaker B can – and cannot – reply in the following dialogue:

(3) SPEAKER A: What are you looking for?

SPEAKER B: *Chair/*Comfortable chair/A chair/Another chair/The chair/That chair
LIN 121: Page 22 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

As noted earlier, nouns like chair have the property that they are countable (in the sense that
we can say one chair, two chairs, etc.), and in this respect they differ from mass nouns like
furniture which are uncountable (hence we can’t say *one furniture, *two furnitures, etc). We
see from (3) that a singular count noun like chair cannot stand on its own as a complete noun
expression, nor indeed can it function as such even if modified by an adjective like
comfortable; rather, a singular count noun requires a modifying determiner or quantifier like
a/another/the/that etc. This provides us with clear evidence that determiners and quantifiers in
English have a different categorial status from adjectives.

Indeed, a more general property which differentiates determiners/quantifiers from adjectives

is that determiners/quantifiers tend to be restricted to modifying nouns which have specific
number (or countability) properties. For example, a modifies a singular count noun, much
modifies a (singular) mass noun, several modifies a plural count noun, more modifies either a
plural count or a (singular) mass noun:

(4a) Can you pass me a chair/*a chairs/*a furniture?

(b) He doesn’t have much furniture/*much chair/*much chairs of his own
(c) He bought several chairs/*several chair/*several furniture in the sale
(d) Do we need more furniture/more chairs/*more chair?
By contrast, typical adjectives like nice, simple, comfortable, modern, etc. can generally be
used to modify all three types of noun: cf.

(5a) We need a nice, simple, comfortable, modern chair

(b) We need some nice, simple, comfortable, modern chairs
(c) We need some nice, simple, comfortable, modern furniture
(It should be noted, however, that a determiner like the can also be used to modify
singular/plural count and noncount nouns alike.)

It seems reasonable to suppose that determiners and quantifiers are functional categories
whereas adjectives are a lexical/substantive category. After all, there is an obvious sense in
which adjectives (e.g. thoughtful) have descriptive content but determiners and quantifiers do
not – as we can illustrate in terms of the following contrast (? and ! are used to denote
increasing degrees of semantic/pragmatic anomaly):

(6a) a thoughtful friend/? cat/?? fish/? !pan/ !problem

(b) a/another/every/the/this friend /cat /fish /pan / problem
As (6a) illustrates, an adjective like thoughtful can only be used to modify certain types of
noun; this is because its descriptive content is such that it is only compatible with (e.g.) an
expression denoting a rational (mind-possessing) entity. By contrast, determiners/quantifiers
like those bold-printed in (6b) lack specific descriptive content, and hence can be used to
modify any semantic class of noun (the only restrictions being grammatical in nature – e.g.
a(n)/another can only be used to modify a singular count noun expression). Thus, it seems
appropriate to conclude that determiners and quantifiers are functional categories, and
adjectives a lexical category.

Some linguists (e.g. Lyons 1999 and Adger 2003) treat quantifiers as a subtype of determiner
and hence assign them to the category D: one possibility along these lines is to suppose that
items like the/this/that are definite determiners, and those like a/some/many are indefinite
LIN 121: Page 23 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

determiners (and such a categorization could be said to be implicit in the traditional claim that
the is a ‘definite article’ and a an ‘indefinite article’).

However, the fact that a determiner like the can combine with a quantifier like all/every in a
sentence like:
(7) All the servile courtiers pandered to the every witless whim of King Kostas of Kostalotte

provides some syntactic evidence that the two have different distributions and hence may
belong to different categories. Moreover, quantifiers and determiners exhibit different
syntactic behaviour in respect of questions such as:

(8a) Who didn’t he want [any pictures of]? (b) ??Who didn’t he want [the pictures of]?

In both cases, who is the complement of the word of and is moved to the front of the sentence
from its original position after of. But whereas fronting who when it is the complement of the
quantifier expression any pictures of results in a grammatical sentence, fronting who when it
is the complement of a determiner expression like the pictures of generally leads to a sentence
of rather more questionable grammaticality. So, sentences like (7) and (8) could be said to
provide evidence that quantifiers and determiner are syntactically distinct and so belong to
different categories.

Pronouns
Traditional grammars posit a category of pronoun (which we can abbreviate as PRN) to
denote a class of words which are said to ‘stand in place of’ (the meaning of the prefix pro-)
or ‘refer back to’ noun expressions. However, there are reasons to think that there are a
number of different types of pronoun found in English and other languages. One such type is
represented by the word one in the use illustrated below:

(9a) John has a red car and Jim has a blue one
(b) I’ll take the green apples if you haven’t got any red ones

From a grammatical perspective, one behaves like a regular count noun here in that it has the
s-plural form ones and occurs in a position (after an adjective like blue/red) in which a count
noun could occur.

However, it is a pronoun in the sense that it has no descriptive content of its own, but rather
takes its descriptive content from its antecedent (e.g. one in (9a) refers back to the noun car
and so one is interpreted as meaning ‘car’). Let’s refer to this kind of pronoun as an N-
pronoun (or pronominal noun). By contrast, in the examples in (10) below, the bold-printed
pronoun seems to serve as a pronominal quantifier. In the first (italicized) occurrence in each
pair of examples, it is a prenominal (i.e. noun preceding) quantifier which modifies a
following noun expression (viz. guests/miners/protesters/son/ cigarettes/bananas); in the
second (bold-printed) occurrence it has no noun expression following it and so functions as a
pronominal quantifier:

(10a) All guests are welcome/All are welcome

(b) Many miners died in the accident/Many died in the accident
(c) Several protesters were arrested/Several were arrested
(d) Each son was envious of the other/Each was envious of the other
LIN 121: Page 24 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

(e) I don’t have any cigarettes/I don’t have any

(f) We have no bananas/We have none

We might therefore refer to pronouns like those bold-printed in (10) as Q-pronouns (or
pronominal quantifiers). If question words like which?/what? in expressions like which
books?/what idea? are interrogative quantifiers, it follows that interrogative pronouns like
those italicized in the examples below:

(11a) What have you been doing? (b) Which did you choose? (c) Who is she talking to?
are also Q-pronouns.

A third type of pronoun are those bold-printed in the examples below:

(12a) I prefer this tie/I prefer this

(b) I haven’t read that book/I haven’t read that
(c) I don’t particularly like these hats/I don’t particularly like these
(d) Have you already paid for those items/Have you already paid for those?

Since the relevant words can also serve (in the italicized use) as prenominal determiners
which modify a following noun, we can refer to them as D-pronouns (i.e. as pronominal
determiners).

A further type of pronoun posited in traditional grammar are so-called personal pronouns
like I/me/we/us/you/he/him/she/her/it/they/them. These are called personal pronouns not
because they denote people (the pronoun it is not normally used to denote a person), but rather
because they encode the grammatical property of person. In the relevant technical sense,
I/me/my/we/us/our are said to be first person pronouns, in that they are expressions whose
reference includes the person/s speaking; you/your are second person pronouns, in that their
reference includes the addressee/s (viz. the person/s being spoken to), but excludes the
speaker/s; he/him/his/she/her/it/its/they/them/their are third person pronouns in the sense that
they refer to entities other than the speaker/s and addressee/s.
Personal pronouns differ morphologically from nouns and other pronouns in modern English
in that they generally have (partially) distinct nominative, accusative and genitive case forms,
whereas nouns have a common nominative/accusative form and a distinct genitive ’s form – as
we see from the contrasts below:

(13a) John snores/He snores (b) Find John!/Find him!

(c) Look at John’s trousers!/ Look at his trousers!

Personal pronouns like he/him/his and nouns like John/John’s change their morphological
form according to the position which they occupy within the sentence, so that the nominative
forms he/John are required as the subject of a finite verb like snores, whereas the accusative
forms him/John are required when used as the complement of a transitive verb like find (or
when used as the complement of a transitive preposition), and the genitive forms his/John’s
are required (inter alia) when used to express possession: these variations reflect different case
forms of the relevant items.

Personal pronouns are functors by virtue of lacking descriptive content: whereas a noun like
dogs denotes a specific type of animal, a personal pronoun like they denotes no specific type
LIN 121: Page 25 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

of entity, but has to have its reference determined from the linguistic or nonlinguistic context.
Personal pronouns encode the grammatical properties of (first, second or third) person,
(singular or plural) number, (masculine, feminine or neuter/inanimate) gender and
(nominative, accusative or genitive) case, as shown in the table in (1) below:

Table 1: Table of personal pronoun forms

Person Number Gender Nominative Accusative Genitive
1 SG M/F I me my/mine
1 PL M/F we us our/ours
2 SG/PL M/F you you your/yours
3 SG M he him his
3 SG F she her her/hers
3 SG N it it its
3 PL M/F/N they them their/theirs
(SG = singular; PL = plural; M = masculine; F = feminine; N = neuter.

But what grammatical category do personal pronouns belong to? Studies by Postal (1966),
Abney (1987), Longobardi (1994) and Lyons (1999) suggest that they are D-pronouns. This
assumption would provide us with a unitary analysis of the syntax of the bold-printed items in
the bracketed expressions in sentences such as (14a/b) below:

(14a) [We politicians] don’t trust [you journalists] (b) [We] don’t trust [you]

Since we and you in (14a) modify the nouns politicians/journalists and since determiners like
the are typically used to modify nouns, it seems reasonable to suppose that we/you function as
prenominal determiners in (14a). But if this is so, it is plausible to suppose that we and you
also have the categorial status of determiners (i.e. D-pronouns) in sentences like (14b). It
would then follow that we/you have the categorial status of determiners in both (14a) and
(14b), but differ in that they are used prenominally (i.e. with a following noun expression)
in (14a), but pronominally (i.e. without any following noun expression) in (14b). Note,
however, that third person pronouns like he/she/it/they are typically used only pronominally –
hence the ungrammaticality of expressions such as *they boys in standard varieties of English.
Whether or not such items are used prenominally, pronominally or in both ways is a lexical
property of particular items (i.e. an idiosyncratic property of individual words).

Although the D-pronoun analysis has become the ‘standard’ analysis of personal pronouns
over the past three decades, it is not entirely without posing problems. For example, a typical
D-pronoun like these/those can be premodified by the universal quantifier all, but a personal
pronoun like they cannot: cf.

(15a) All these are broken (b) All those are broken (c) *All they are broken
Such a contrast is unexpected if personal pronouns like they are D-pronouns like those/these,
and clearly raises questions about the true status of personal pronouns.

Complementizers
The last type of functional category which we shall look at is that of complementizer
(abbreviated to COMP in earlier work and to C in more recent work): this is a term used to
describe the kind of (italicized) word which is used to introduce complement clauses such as
those bracketed below:
LIN 121: Page 26 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

(20a) I think [that you may be right] (b) I doubt [if you can help me]
(c) I’m anxious [for you to receive the best treatment possible]
Each of the bracketed clauses in (20) is a complement clause, in that it functions as the
complement of the word immediately preceding it (think/doubt/anxious); the italicized word
which introduces each clause is known in work since 1970 as a complementizer (but was
known in more traditional work as a particular type of subordinating conjunction).
Complementizers are functors in the sense that they encode particular sets of grammatical
properties. For example, complementizers encode (non)finiteness by virtue of the fact that
they are intrinsically finite or nonfinite. More specifically, the complementizers that and if are
inherently finite in the sense that they can only be used to introduce a finite clause (i.e. a
clause containing a present or past tense auxiliary or verb), and not e.g. an infinitival to-
clause; by contrast, for is an inherently infinitival complementizer, and so can be used to
introduce a clause containing infinitival to, but not a finite clause containing a tensed auxiliary
like (past tense) should; compare the examples in (20) above with those in (21) below:

(20a) *I think [that you to be right] (b) *I doubt [if you to help me]
(c) *I’m anxious [for you should receive the best treatment possible]
(20a/b) are ungrammatical because that/if are finite complementizers and so cannot introduce
an infinitival to clause; (20c) is ungrammatical because for is an infinitival complementizer
and so cannot introduce a finite clause containing a past tense auxiliary like should.
Complementizers in structures like (19) serve three grammatical functions. Firstly, they mark
the fact that the clause they introduce is an embedded clause (i.e. a clause which is contained
within another expression – in this case, within a main clause containing think/doubt/anxious).
Secondly, they serve to indicate whether the clause they introduce is finite or nonfinite (i.e.
denotes an event taking place at a specified or unspecified time): that and if serve to introduce
finite clauses, while for introduces nonfinite (more specifically, infinitival) clauses. Thirdly,
complementizers mark the force of the clause they introduce: typically, if introduces an
interrogative (i.e. question-asking) clause, that introduces a declarative (statement-making)
clause and for introduces an irrealis clause (i.e. a clause denoting an ‘unreal’ or hypothetical
event which hasn’t yet happened and may never happen).

However, an important question to ask is whether we really need to assign words such as
for/that/if (in the relevant function) to a new category of C/complementizer, or whether we
couldn’t simply treat (e.g.) for as a preposition, that as a determiner, and if as an adverb. The
answer is ‘No’, because there are significant differences between complementizers and other
apparently similar words. For example, one difference between the complementizer for and
the preposition for is that the preposition for has substantive lexical semantic content and so
(in some but not all of its uses) can be intensified by straight/right, whereas the
complementizer for is a functor and can never be so intensified: cf.

(21a) He headed straight/right for the pub [for = preposition]

(b) The dog went straight/right for her throat [for = preposition]
(c) *He was anxious straight/right for nobody to leave [for = complementizer]
(d) *It is vital straight/right for there to be peace [for = complementizer]
Moreover, the preposition for and the complementizer for also differ in their syntactic
behaviour. For example, a clause introduced by the complementizer for can be the subject of
an expression like would cause chaos, whereas a phrase introduced by the preposition for
cannot: cf.
LIN 121: Page 27 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

(22a) For him to resign would cause chaos [= for-clause]

(b) *For him would cause chaos [= for-phrase]
What makes it even more implausible to analyze infinitival for as a preposition is the fact that
(boldprinted) prepositions in English aren’t generally followed by a [bracketed] infinitive
complement, as we see from the ungrammaticality of:

(23a) *She was surprised at [there to be nobody to meet her]

(b) *I’m not sure about [you to be there]
(c) *I have decided against [us to go there]
On the contrary, the only verbal complements which can be used after prepositions are gerund
structures containing a verb in the -ing form.

A further difference between the complementizer for and the preposition for is that the noun
or pronoun expression following the preposition for (or a substitute interrogative expression
like who?/what?/which one?) can be preposed to the front of the sentence (with or without
for) if for is a preposition, but not if for is a complementizer. For example, in (24) below, for
functions as a preposition and the (distinguished) nominal Senator Megabucks functions as its
complement, so that if we replace Senator Megabucks by which senator? the wh-expression
can be preposed either on its own (in informal styles of English) or together with the
preposition for (in formal styles): cf.

(24a) I will vote for Senator Megabucks in the primaries

(b) Which senator will you vote for in the primaries? [= informal style]
(c) For which senator will you vote in the primaries? [= formal style]

However, in (25a) below, the italicized expression is not the complement of the
complementizer for (the complement of for in (25a) is the infinitival clause Senator
Megabucks to keep his cool) but rather is the subject of the expression to keep his cool; hence,
even if we replace Senator Megabucks by the interrogative wh-phrase which senator, the wh-
expression can’t be preposed (with or without for):
(25a) They were anxious for Senator Megabucks to keep his cool
(c) *Which senator were they anxious for to keep his cool?
(b) *For which senator were they anxious to keep his cool?

Furthermore, when for functions as a complementizer, the whole for-clause which it

introduces can often (though not always) be substituted by a clause introduced by another
complementizer; for example, the italicised for-clause in (26a) below can be replaced by the
italicised that-clause in (26b):
(26a) Is it really necessary for there to be a showdown?
(b) Is it really necessary that there (should) be a showdown?
By contrast, the italicized for-phrase in (27a) below cannot be replaced by a that-clause, as we
see from the ungrammaticality of (27b):

(27a) We are heading for a general strike

(b) *We are heading that there (will) be a general strike
So, there is considerable evidence in favour of drawing a categorial distinction between the
preposition for and the complementizer for: they are different lexical items (i.e. words)
belonging to different categories.

LIN 121: Page 28 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Consider now the question of whether the complementizer that could be analyzed as a
determiner. At first sight, it might seem as if such an analysis could provide a straightforward
way of capturing the apparent parallelism between the two uses of that in sentences such as
the following:
(28a) I refuse to believe that [rumour]
(b) I refuse to believe that [Randy Rabbit runs Benny’s Bunny Bar]

Given that the word that has the status of a prenominal determiner in sentences such as (28a),
we might suppose that it has the function of a preclausal determiner (i.e. a determiner
introducing the following italicized clause Randy Rabbit runs Benny’s Bunny Bar) in
sentences such as (28b).

However, there is evidence against a determiner analysis of the complementizer that. Part of
this is phonological in nature. In its use as a complementizer (in sentences such as (28b)
above), that typically has the reduced form, whereas in its use as a determiner (e.g. in
sentences such as (28a) above), that invariably has the unreduced form: the phonological
differences between the two suggest that we are dealing with two different lexical items here
(i.e. two different words), one of which functions as a complementizer and typically has a
reduced vowel, the other of which functions as a determiner and always has an unreduced
vowel.

Moreover, that in its use as a determiner (though not in its use as a complementizer) can be
substituted by another determiner (such as this/the):

(29a) Nobody else knows about that incident/this incident/the incident (= determiner that)
(b) I’m sure that it’s true/*this it’s true/*the it’s true (= complementizer that)

Similarly, the determiner that can be used pronominally (without any complement), whereas
the complementizer that cannot: cf.

(30a) Nobody can blame you for that mistake (prenominal determiner)
(b) Nobody can blame you for that (pronominal determiner)

(31a) I’m sure that you are right (preclausal complementizer)

(b) *I’m sure that (pronominal complementizer)

The clear phonological and syntactic differences between the two argue that the word that
which serves to introduce complement clauses is a different item (belonging to the category
C/complementizer) from the determiner/D that which modifies noun expressions.

The third item which we earlier suggested might function as a complementizer in English is
interrogative if. However, at first sight, it might seem as if there is a potential parallelism
between if and interrogative wh-adverbs like when/where/whether, since they appear to
occupy the same position in sentences like:
(32) I don’t know [where/when/whether/if he will go]

LIN 121: Page 29 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Hence we might be tempted to analyze if as an interrogative adverb. However, there are a

number of reasons for rejecting this possibility. For one thing, if differs from interrogative
adverbs like where/when/whether not only in its form (it isn’t a wh-word, as we can see from
the fact that it doesn’t begin with wh), but also in the range of syntactic positions it can
occupy. For example, whereas typical wh-adverbs can occur in finite and infinitive clauses
alike, the complementizer if is restricted to introducing finite clauses – cf.

(33a) I wonder [when/where/whether/if I should go] [= finite clause]

(b) I wonder [when/where/whether/*if to go] [= infinitive clause]

Moreover, if is different from interrogative wh-adverbs (but similar to other complementizers)

in that it cannot be used to introduce a clause which serves as the complement of a (bold-
printed) preposition: cf.
(34a) I’m not certain about [whether/when/where he’ll go]
(b) *I’m concerned over [if taxes are going to be increased]
(c) *I’m puzzled at [that he should have resigned]
(d) *I’m not very keen on [for you to go there]
Furthermore, some verbs (like discuss) can have a following complement introduced by
whether or another wh-word, but not one introduced by if: cf.

(35a) They were discussing [whether/when/where he should go]

(b) *They were discussing [if he should go]
Finally, whereas a wh-adverb can typically be immediately followed by or not, this is not true
of if: cf.
(36a) I don’t know [whether or not he’ll turn up]
(b) *I don’t know [if or not he’ll turn up]

For reasons such as these, it seems more appropriate to categorize if as an interrogative

complementizer, and whether/where/when as interrogative adverbs. More generally, our
discussion in this section highlights the need to posit a category C of complementizer, to
designate clause-introducing items such as if/that/for which serve the function of introducing
specific types of finite or infinitival clause.

Grammatical Functions
Words and other expressions fulfil grammatical functions within the sentences containing
them. In this lecture, you will learn about grammatical functions such as subject, predicate,
complement or object, adjunct, complex sentences, finite and nonfinite clauses.

Subject, predicate, complement or object2

Words and other expressions fulfil grammatical functions within the sentences containing
them. We can illustrate this point in terms of the following set of sentences.

(1a) John smokes

(b) The president smokes
(c) The president of Utopia smokes
(d) The former president of the island paradise of Utopia smokes

2
The discussion in this section is taken from Radford (2004, 2009)
LIN 121: Page 30 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Sentence (1a) comprises the noun John which serves the function of being the subject of the
sentence (and denotes the person performing the act of smoking), and the verb smokes which
serves the function of being the predicate of the sentence (and describes the act being
performed). In (1a), the subject is the single noun John; but as the examples in (1b/c/d) show,
the subject of a sentence can also be an (italicized) phrase like the president, or the president
of Utopia or the former president of the island paradise of Utopia. Now consider the
following set of sentences:
(2a) John smokes cigars.
(b) John smokes Cuban cigars.
(c) John smokes Cuban cigars imported from Havana.
(d) John smokes a specific brand of Cuban cigars imported by a friend of
his from Havana.

Sentence (2a) comprises the subject John, the predicate smokes and the complement (or direct
object) cigars. (The complement, cigars, describes the entity on which the act of smoking is
being performed; as this example illustrates, subjects normally precede the verb with which
they are associated in English, whereas complements typically follow the verb.) The
complement in (2a) is the single noun cigars; but a complement can also be a phrase: in (2b),
the complement of smokes is the phrase Cuban cigars; in (2c) the complement is the phrase
Cuban cigars imported from Havana; and in (2d) the complement is the phrase a specific
brand of Cuban cigars imported by a friend of his from Havana. A verb which has a noun or
pronoun expression as its direct object complement is traditionally said to be transitive.

Arguments
From a semantic perspective, subjects and complements share in common the fact that they
generally represent entities directly involved in the particular action or event described by the
predicate. To use the relevant semantic terminology, we can say that subjects and
complements are arguments of the predicate with which they are associated. Predicates may
have one or more arguments, as we see from sentences such as (3) below, where each of the
bracketed nouns is a different argument of the italicized predicate:

(3a) [John] resigned. (b) [John] felt [remorse] (c) [John] sent [Mary] [flowers]

A predicate like resign in (3a) which has a single argument is said to function as a one-place
predicate (in the relevant use); one like feel in (3b) which has two arguments is a two-place
predicate; and one like send in (3c) which has three arguments is a three-place predicate.

Adjuncts
In addition to predicates and arguments, sentences can also contain adjuncts, as we can
illustrate in relation to (4) below:
(4a) The president smokes a cigar after dinner. (b) The president smokes a cigar in his office.

In both sentences in (4), smokes functions as a two-place predicate whose two arguments are
its subject the president and its complement a cigar. But what is the function of the phrase
after dinner which also occurs in (4a)? Since after dinner isn’t one of the entities directly
involved in the act of smoking (i.e. it isn’t consuming or being consumed), it isn’t an
argument of the predicate smoke. On the contrary, after dinner simply serves to provide
LIN 121: Page 31 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

additional information about the time when the smoking activity takes place. In much the
same way, the italicized expression in his office in (4b) provides additional information about
the location of the smoking activity. An expression which serves to provide (optional)
additional information about the time or place (or manner, or purpose etc.) of an activity or
event is said to serve as an adjunct. So, after dinner and in his office in (4a/b) are both
adjuncts.

Word Order
Word order refers to the way words are arranged in a sentence. It is what makes sentences
sensible. So, proper word order is an essential part of writing and speaking—when we put
words in the wrong order, the result is a confusing, unclear, and an incorrect sentence.

Word order typology

The notion of a basic word order in terms of S, O, and V is common to a large number of
studies in grammatical language typology: languages are typologized on the basis of the order
in which S, O, and V typically occur in the simple sentences of the language. Word order
typology is the study of the order of the syntactic constituents of a language, and how
different languages can employ different orders. Correlations between orders found in
different syntactic sub-domains are also of interest. The primary word orders that are of
interest are the constituent order of a clause – the relative order of subject, object, and verb.

Some languages use relatively restrictive word order, often relying on the order of
constituents to convey important grammatical information. Others—often those that convey
grammatical information through inflection—allow more flexibility, which can be used to
encode pragmatic information such as topicalization or focus. Most languages, however, have
a preferred word order, and other word orders, if used, are considered “marked”.
Most nominative-accusative languages - which have a major word class of nouns and
clauses that include subject and object - define constituent word order in terms of the finite
verb (V) and its arguments, the subject (S), and object (O).

There are six theoretically possible basic word orders for the transitive sentence. The
overwhelming majority of the world's languages are either subject-verb-object (SVO) English
and French or subject-object-verb (SOV) Japanese and Turkish, with a much smaller but still
significant portion using verb-subject-object (VSO) word order as in Welsh. The remaining
three arrangements are exceptionally rare, with verb-object-subject (VOS) as in Malagasy,
being slightly more common than object-verb-subject (OVS), and object-subject-verb (OSV)
Hixkaryana (Carib language of Northern Brazil), being the rarest.

Word English Proportion of Example languages

order equivalent languages
SOV She him loves 45% Proto-Indo-European, Sanskrit, Hindi,
Ancient Greek, Latin, Japanese, Korean
SVO She loves him 42% Chinese, English, French, Hausa, Yorùbá,
Italian, Malay, Russian, Spanish
VSO Loves she him 9% Biblical Hebrew, Arabic, Irish, Filipino,
Tuareg-Berber, Welsh
VOS Loves him she 3% Malagasy, Baure, Proto-Austronesian
OVS Him loves she 1% Apalai, Hixkaryana,
OSV Him she loves 0% Warao

LIN 121: Page 32 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

(wikipedia.org/word order)

In many languages, changes in word order occur due to topicalization or in questions.

However, most languages are generally assumed to have a basic word order, called the
unmarked word order; other, marked word orders can then be used to emphasize a sentence
element, to indicate modality (such as an interrogative modality), or for other purposes.
For example, English is SVO (subject-verb-object) as in

I don't know that

but OSV is also possible:

That I don't know.

This process is called topic-fronting (or topicalization) and is common.

In English, OSV is a marked word order because it emphasises the object, and is often
accompanied by a change in intonation. An example of OSV being used for emphasis:

A: I can't see Alice. (SVO)

B: What about Bill?
A: Bill I can see. (OSV, rather than I can see Bill, SVO)

Non-standard word orders are also found in poetry in English, particularly archaic or
romantic terms – as the wedding phrase
With this ring, I thee wed (SOV)
Thee I love (OSV)

as well as in many other languages.

Types of Word Order in English

The standard word order in English is Subject + Verb + Object, this is the main pattern for
normal sentences and there is one main pattern for sentences that ask a question.

a. Standard Word Order

A sentence’s standard word order is Subject + Verb + Object (SVO).
Subject: typically, a noun or pronoun – the person, place or thing
Verb: the action or state of being
Object: the word or group of words influenced by the verb

The sequence of words is critical when communicating in English because it can impact the
meaning of what you’re trying to say. The sentence,

The chicken crossed the road

and
The road crossed the chicken

take on two different meanings because the subject and object are inverted. The same would
be true if the verb was used out of order, for example: “Crossed the road the chicken.”

LIN 121: Page 33 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

The subject is what a sentence is about; so, it comes first. For example:
The dog (subject) + eats (verb) + popcorn (object).
The subject comes first in a sentence because it makes our meaning clear when writing and
speaking. Then, the verb comes after the subject, and the object comes after the verb; and
that’s the most common word order. Otherwise, a sentence doesn’t make sense, like this:

Eats popcorn the dog. (verb + object + subject)

Popcorn the dog eats. (object + subject + verb)

b. Questions
When asking a question, we follow the order auxiliary verb/modal auxiliary + subject +
verb (ASV). Auxiliary verbs and modal auxiliaries share meaning or function, many which
are forms of the verb “to be.” Auxiliary verbs can change form, but modal auxiliaries don’t.
Here’s a chart to help you:

Auxiliary Verbs
Be Do Have
am does has
is do have
did had
are having
was
were
being
been
Modal Auxiliaries (Never change form)
Can could should might may shall
ought to must would will

Questions follow the form ASV; or, if they have an object, ASVO. Here are some examples:
Can he cook? “Can” (auxiliary) “he” (subject) “cook” (verb)
Does your dog like popcorn? “Does” (A) “your dog” (S) “like” (V) “popcorn” (O)
Are you burning the popcorn? “Are” (A) “you” (S) “burning” (V) “popcorn” (O)

Parts of Word Order

While almost sentences need to follow the basic SVO word order, we add other words, like
indirect objects and modifiers, to make them more detailed.

Indirect Objects
When we add an indirect object, a sentence will follow a slightly different order. Indirect
objects always come between the verb and the object, following the pattern SVIO, like this:

I fed the dog some popcorn.

This sentence has “I” (subject) “fed” (verb) “dog” (indirect object) “popcorn” (direct object).

The Phrase
LIN 121: Page 34 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Definition of the Phrase

A phrase is a group of related words without a subject and a finite verb. It can also be defined
as that unit of grammar typically but not necessarily containing more than one word but
functions as a unit lacking the subject- predicate structure characteristics of clauses. Examine
the following examples.
The girl The beautiful girl
Joy An influential man
James The giant of Africa
Nigeria

The Structure of the Phrase

As can be seen from the definition given above, a phrase in modern linguistic description can
consist of one word as we have in the examples below.

Dogs attack fiercely She ate often

In these examples, the single word in each column constitutes a phrase each. When a phrase is
made up of just a word, that word is called the head word or simply the head of the phrase.
The head of a phrase can therefore be simply defined as the minimal form of the phrase.

It is quite often common however, for other related words to occur with the head of the phrase
as it is evident from the following examples.
Many dogs can attack quite fiercely
She alone had been eating particularly often

Words that occur with the head of a phrase are dependent on that head. Sometimes, a
dependent word may precede the head of the phrase as in the following examples.
Many dogs, can attack, quite fiercely, had been eating, particularly often

The dependent words italicised and boldfaced in the above examples precede the head words.
Sometimes however, the dependent word can follow the head word of the phrase. e.g. she
alone, where alone is the dependent word which follows the head word she.

Whenever the phrase is made up of a head and (a) dependent word(s), the head can be
identified using the criterion of substitution or replacement. Thus a word which is
distributionally equivalent or can substitute for the entire phrase is the head. Let us examine
the examples in (a) and (b) below.
a. This sweet potato tastes incredibly nice
b. Potato tastes nice

These examples show that the phrase this sweet potato and incredibly nice in (a) can be
replaced by potato and nice respectively as in sentence (b). This means that potato and nice
are the head words in the phrases which contain them. Other examples of dependent words
that precede or follow a head word occur in the following sentence.

That beautiful car in the garage belongs to me.

LIN 121: Page 35 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

In this example, the dependent words that precede the head word ‘car’ are ‘that’ and
‘beautiful’, while the dependent string of words that follow this head word is ‘in the garage’.

In some model of linguistic description, the dependent word which precedes the head of a
phrase is referred to as the modifier while the dependent word which follows the head of a
phrase is called the qualifier.

Modifier = M; Head = H; Qualifier = Q

The phrase ‘That beautiful car in the garage’ can be structurally analyzed as follows:

H=car, M= that beautiful, Q= in the garage or

M M H Q
That beautiful car in the garage

In linguistic literature, modifiers are also referred to as pre-modifiers while qualifiers are
called post-modifiers.
The Noun Phrase (NP)
In some model of grammatical analysis, the Noun Phrase (NP) is referred to as the nominal
group. In its structure, the NP comprises of the head word which may be preceded by some
pre-modification and followed by some post modification.

M1 M2 H Q
That beautiful car in the garage

It is important to emphasize that the only obligatory element is the head word. Both the pre-
modification and the post modification are optional.

The head of the NP may be a noun or a pronoun. On the other hand, the modifiers may belong
to a number of different word-class e.g. articles, demonstratives, possessives (these are
normally called identifiers) or they may be numerals (quantifiers), adjectives or nouns.
Examples are given below.

M1 M2 M3 M4 H
Those five beautiful country houses
M1- article; M2-numeral; M3- adjective; M4- noun.

M1 M2 M3 M4 H
My three fierce police dogs

M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 H
All the five troublesome village policemen

Another type of pre-modification is the genitive case or the NP in the genitive which is
marked in English language by an apostrophe and s. for example, in the sentence below,

M1 M2 M3 M4 H
That young man’s elegant stupid female secretary
LIN 121: Page 36 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

that young man’s is the NP in the genitive.

The post modification qualifiers may be words, phrases or clauses as is evident in the
following examples.

M H Q
The funds available are not sufficient.

M H Q
The car in the garage belongs to me.

M H Q
The dog which I bought last year

The NP can occupy five important positions where a noun can be found in a sentence. These
are:
The subject of a verb e.g. That young boy has succeeded.
Object of a verb e.g. I have married the lady. We have a good reputation.
Complement of a preposition.e.g. He is afraid of that man.
Complement of a verb e.g. He is the president.
Complement of an object e.g. They name that lady a prostitute.

Appositive Phrase
An Appositive Phrase is usually an NP that gives more information about a noun, a pronoun,
or a noun phrase. It can be used in place of a noun, a pronoun or a noun phrase it talks more
about. Appositive phrases are marked off by commas at the beginning and at the end in a
construction.
Examples are underlined in the examples below.
Jesus Christ, the Lord of lords, will reward you accordingly.
Things Fall Apart, Chnua Achebe’s first novel, is a classic.

Prepositional Phrase (PP)

A Prepositional Phrase (PP) is one headed by a preposition. It obligatorily has a noun phrase
as complement. Some examples are given below.
I saw the boy at the park. Behind a successful man is the woman.
Put it inside the room. The wife of my son is very godly.
My dear wife is an embodiment of virtues.

The Verb Phrase

The head of the Verb Phrase (VP) is the verb. However, there is no agreement among
linguists on the exact structure of the VP. For some linguists for instance, all the elements of
the VP are verbs of one kind or another. In other words, the head word which is also a verb is
accompanied by other verbs commonly referred to as auxiliary verbs to distinguish them from
the head verb which is called a lexical verb. Consider the examples below.
M M H
John may have gone

LIN 121: Page 37 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

M M M H
He should have been killed

As can be seen from these examples, the lexical verb is always the last element in the VP.
Other linguists have a much broader definition of a VP. For such linguists, a VP is equivalent
to the predicate of a sentence. Under that view, the underlined in the following sentences are
VPs.
John may have gone. John may have gone to the market.
John bought a very fine car last week.

For some linguists still, while the modifiers of the head word are auxiliary verbs, the qualifiers
are particles that are particularly closely linked to the head word (verb).

H Q
The clock runs down

M M H Q
John may have run across a friend

For such linguists, particles that are loosely linked to the head verb and which can be freely
interchanged with other particles are not part of the VP.

Types of Verb Phrases

Finite Verb Phrase: These are those containing finite forms of the verb i.e. verb forms which
indicate tense and are associated with a particular subject e.g. 1 st, 2nd or 3rd person. Such verb
forms vary according to the person and number of the subject. Examples of finite VP in
English language are underlined in the following sentences.
John is walking. John was walking John walked John walks

In fact, all forms of the verb with the exception of infinitive and participle are finite. A finite
VP can occur on its own in an independent or main clause.

Gerundive Phrase: A gerund is a verbal noun. In English, it is the ‘-ing’ form of a verb
(present participle form) used as a noun. Examples are underlined in the sentences below.
Rioting is evil They are fond of murmuring

A gerundive phrase is a phrase headed by a gerund. The underlined parts of the sentences
below are examples.
Shouting when praying, is common these days.
The law does not allow smoking in public places.

Participial Phrase: A Participial Phrase is a phrase headed by the participle form of a verb in
English. Participial phrases function as adjectives. Examples are underlined below.
Shocked by the comments of her friends, the lady decided to resign from her
appointment.
Having apologized, they can now present their case.

LIN 121: Page 38 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Infinitival Phrase: The Infinitival Phrase is a phrase headed by an infinitive verb. It can
function as a noun, an adjective or an adverb. Examples are given below.
To have a house is different from to have a home.
To control a woman is difficult. This is a woman to honour.
It is nice to know God. They stood up to greet him.

The Adjective Phrase

The Adjective Phrase (AP) functions to modify a noun. Its head is an adjective. In structure,
an AP may consist of only the head. In fact, many APs have this type of structure. However,
an AP may consist of the head and some pre-modification and post modification. The pre-
modification are usually adverbs, particularly the sub-class of intensifying adverbs.
Examples
M H
Very intelligent boy

M H
Highly satisfactory reply

Post modifications are complements. Such complements may be a prepositional phrase, an

infinitive clause or a that-clause.
Examples
H Q= PP
Anxious about his result

H Q= Infinitive clause
Anxious to do the right thing

H Q= that- clause
Anxious that somebody may replace her

Functions of Adjective Phrases

APs like adjectives have two uses or functions. These are the attributive function and the
predicative function. An AP performs the attributive function when it precedes or occasionally
follows a noun within an NP. Examples are given below.

That very fine house has been destroyed.

The man, complaining loudly, ran out of the House of Assembly.

APs that follow ‘copula’ verbs perform a predicative function.

His letter was very interesting.

There are APs that perform both predicative and attributive functions.
His letter was very interesting. - predicative function
I received a very interesting letter - attributive function
That very interesting letter has been destroyed – attributive function

On the other hand, some APs perform either attributive or predicative function only.
Attributive function only: A mere youth; the main event
LIN 121: Page 39 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Predicative function only: The boy is alone. The lion is asleep.

Adverb Phrase (AdvP)

The head of an Adverb Phrase (AdvP) is an adverb. In effect, an AdvP may consist of only an
adverb in its structure. Many AdvPs are of this type of structure.
Examples: He ran quickly. John ate well

However, an AdvP may also consist of the head word, which is an adverb and other adverbs
modifying this head word.
Examples
M H
He ran very quickly.

M H
John ate amazingly well.

AdvP have the following uses or functions: Adjunct function; Conjunct function

Adjunct function: The adjunct function is the principal function of the AdvP. AdvPs perform
this function when they provide information about the place, time, and manner, cause of the
action or event talked about in the clause in which the AdvPs occur.
Examples: He ran very quickly- manner She sang too often - time

Conjunct function: AdvPs that link or conjoin one clause to another perform a conjunct
function. The number of AdvPs that perform this function is limited and such AdvPs do not
normally contain modifiers in their structure.
Example: She is inefficient, therefore, cannot be considered for a post, besides, we
already have a better person.

AdvPs that indicate the speaker’s attitudes or stance to what he is saying perform a disjunct
function. Such disjunct adverbs normally occur in front of the sentence or clause. They may
contain modifiers in their structure occasionally.
Example: Frankly, John cannot do that job.

The Clause
Introduction
The clause is another principal unit of grammatical description next to the sentence in rank. I
will define and explain the various functions the clause can perform in human utterances.
After you have studied this lecture, you ought to be able to identify the clause, explain the
various functions performed by the clause and give a vivid account of the types of clauses in
human language.

Definition: A clause is a group of related words containing a subject and a verb.

Types of Clauses
The clause can be divided into two main types based on their structure. These are the main
clause and the subordinate clause.

LIN 121: Page 40 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Main Clause: The main clause is also known as the principal clause or the independent
clause. It is a clause that can express complete thoughts and such can stand on its own.
Example: She believes in herself, and she succeeds in her efforts.

The sentence contains two main clauses (underlined), each capable of standing alone. Note,
however, that if either of the underlined parts stood alone, it would be classified as a simple
sentence, not as a clause. Clause necessarily implies the large whole of which it is a part.

Subordinate Clause: The subordinate clause is a clause that cannot stand on its own in that it
does not express a complete thought. It is usually introduced by subordinating conjunctions
such as if, unless, that, because, while, whereas, when, etc.
Examples
Olú will leave if you abuse him.
O̩pé̩ loves you because you respect her.
It stopped raining before I got there.

The subordinate clauses are underlined in the examples above.

Functions of Clauses
The clause performs a number of functions in language. It can be used as a noun (this is called
the noun clause), as an adjective (called an adjectival or a relative clause), and as an adverb
which is known as an adverbial clause.

The Noun Clause: A noun clause is a subordinate clause used as a noun. In the sentences
below, the noun clauses are underlined.
He did not tell you what I wanted to do.
That we greet you always does not mean that we are sycophants.
We know what we need.

The Adjectival Clause: An adjectival clause is a subordinate clause used as an adjective. It is

also called a relative clause. Some examples are underlined in the following sentences.
That house which I built is on the last street.
The man whom I invited will come very soon
Students that study Linguistics are always very brilliant.

The Adverbial Clause: An adverbial clause is a subordinate clause used as an adverb. It has
the following types. Adverbial clause of time, answers the question ‘when?’ For example:
Before we responded, they had run away.
He was provoked when the man asked for a bribe.

Adverbial clause of place, answers the question ‘where?’

Nobody knows where he is heading to. Where I will be tomorrow, you cannot say.

Adverbial clause of reason, answers the question ‘why?’

She fainted because she was disappointed. I will make it because God is on my side.

Adverbial clause of concession tries to show contrast between the main clause and the
subordinate clause. The markers of this clause include although, though, even though.
LIN 121: Page 41 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Although he prepared, he did not do well in the test.

Even though I know it, I won’t tell you.

Adverbial clause of manner, answers the question ‘how?’

He talks as if he is God. Jane dances as an insect does.

Adverbial clause of condition gives the condition under which something will happen.
Provided that you know him, you can consult him.
Unless God intervenes, the situation will get worse.

The Sentence

Introduction: The sentence is the last of the principal unit of grammatical description. I will,
in this lecture, discuss the structures and functions of the sentence. At the end of this lecture,
you should be able to analyze any sentence into its structure and identify the function it
performs.

Definition of the Sentence: The sentence can be defined as a group of words having a subject
and a predicate, which expresses a complete thought.

The structure of the Sentence: Four types of sentences can be identified when you examine
the structure of the sentence. These are the simple sentence, the compound sentence, the
complex sentence and the compound- complex sentence.
The simple sentence expresses a single complete thought. In English language, it has only one
main verb.
Joy is wise. O̩pé̩ bought that book. I will win many awards.

The compound sentence is a combination of at least two simple sentences.

He laughed but I have crossed the Rubicon.
We went to the hostel, begged him but he refused to listen to us.
We went to the hostel;
We begged him;
He refused to listen to us.

A complex sentence contains a main clause and at least one subordinate clause.
Examples: When I become a man, I will listen to you.
I will listen to you (main clause)
When I become a man (subordinate clause)
John was disturbed because the examination was at the corner.
John was disturbed (main clause)
Because the examination was at the corner (subordinate clause)

A compound-complex sentence is a combination of compound and complex sentences. It

comprises at least two main clauses and at least one subordinate clause.

Example:

LIN 121: Page 42 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

When you are criticized, examine yourself, but do not reply your critics so that they
don’t feel important.
Examine yourself (main clause)
Don’t reply your critics (main clause)
When you are criticized (subordinate clause)
So that they don’t feel important (subordinate clause)

Functions of the Sentence: The sentence can be used in four ways. These are declarative,
imperative, interrogative and exclamatory.
The declarative sentence is a sentence that makes a statement of fact. It may be true or false,
negative or affirmative. Examples:
Things are becoming more difficult. He did not listen to us.

The imperative sentence is one that makes a command or an entreaty. The subject is you but
is often deleted because it is understood. Examples:
Stand up. Don’t lose hope. Love your neighbour as yourself.

The exclamatory sentence is used to express a sudden feeling or emotion. Examples:

This is serious! Good God! What is this! Why am I so favoured!

Understanding Complex Structures

Introduction: In this unit, you will study the following: end focus, end weight and
extraposition. These are terms used to refer to some complex structures employed in
discourse.

Objective: The purpose of this lecture is for you to understand and know how to analyse and
explain complex structures such as end focus, end weight ans extrposition.

End Focus
End Focus is the principle by which elements placed towards the end of a phrase, clause or
sentence tend to receive the focus or prominence associated with new information. Compare:

1a. I’m giving Rosie this dress. b. I’m giving this dress to Rosie.
Sentences (1a) and (1b) suggest different situations: in (1a) ‘this dress’ is new information –
the speaker may be showing the dress to a friend for the first time; in (1b) ‘to Rosie’ is new
information – the hearer may be looking at the dress already, but Rosie is now being
mentioned, for the first time, as its recipient. Thus, in both cases, there is a tendency to put
new information in a position of prominence at the end. End focus is important to grammar,
because it helps to explain why, where grammar offers a choice of different word orders; we
choose one order rather than another. An example is the choice between active and passive. In
spoken language, end focus tends to coincide with intonational emphasis.

End focus is the principle by which the most important information in a clause or sentence is
put at the end. It is what we call the ‘neutral position’ of focus. That is, chief prominence is on
the last open-class item or proper noun in the clause. It is the tendency to put new information
towards the end of the clause.

LIN 121: Page 43 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

It is important in grammar for it explains why, where grammar offers a choice of different
word orders. We choose one order rather than another.
Example: The person who receives the utmost security guidance and support
and whose life is mostly at risk is the President.

In the above example, the information that is being talked about is ‘the President’. It is the
new information for it was put at the end of the sentence and also, it is the chief prominent
because it is the most important. If it had not been included, the sentence would not make any
sense. The principle that the most important information in a clause or sentence is placed at
the end is a normal characteristic of sentence structure in English. Examples:
Given advice and the person is not yielding to the advice is very annoying
I will give the cup to Bola
Trying to sleep in a noisy environment is bad.
In the above examples, the underlined words are given prominence and are the end focus.

End Weight
In grammar, end weight is the principle by which longer and more complex units tend to
occur later in the sentence than shorter and less complex units. For example, in sentences
consisting of subject, verb and object, the subject is likely to be short and simple in
comparison with the object. Where English grammar allows a choice of different word orders,
end weight helps to explain the choice of one order rather than another. For example, we can
vary the order of the particle and object in a phrasal verb construction such as put (something)
off. When the object is a personal pronoun, the order object + particle is always preferred, as
in They put it off. If the object is a longer noun phrase, for example the meeting, then both
orders can be used:

2a. We’ll have to put the meeting off b. We’ll have to put off the meeting.
When the object is even longer and more complex, the position object + particle becomes
increasingly unacceptable because of an increasing violation of the end weight principle:

3a. We’ll have to put the next meeting of the General Assembly off.
b. We’ll have to put off the next meeting of the General Assembly.
The order of (3b) is clearly much more acceptable than that of (3a). End weight is closely
related to end focus.

In grammar, this is the principle by which longer structures tend to occur later in a sentence
than shorter structures. End weight is the principle by which longer and more complex unit
tends to occur in the end part of a sentence. Examples:
We would take the gifts given to us home
Instead of:
We would take home the gifts given to us

Take the ugly wrist watch off

Instead of:
Take off the ugly wrist watch
In the examples above, the underlined words are the end weight. The purpose of the end
weight is to make the complex word of a sentence easier to pronounce.

LIN 121: Page 44 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Extraposition
Extraposition is a special construction where a subordinate clause, acting as subject of a main
clause, is ‘extraposed’ – that is, placed at the end of the main clause – and replaced by it as an
initial subject:
4a. [That the expedition failed] was a pity.
b. It was a pity [that the expedition failed].
Sentence (4a) illustrates the normal subject-verb order, and (4b) illustrates extraposition. Not
only a that-clause, but nominal clauses in general can be ‘extraposed’ in this way. For
example, an infinitive clause is extraposed in:

5a. It pays [to send your kids to a good school].

It is obvious that extraposition serves the purposes of end weight and end focus. Thus (5b)
would be an extremely awkward violation of end weight if the normal subject-first order were
used:
5b. [To send your kids to a good school] pays.

Extraposition is a special construction where a subordinate clause acting as a subject of a main

clause is placed at the end of the main clause and replaced by the pronoun ‘it’.
Examples:
[To keep what belongs to another person] is wrong.

The above sentence is grammatically correct in a normal subject - verb order but for the sake
of extraposition, it would be:
It is wrong [to keep what belongs to another person].

[That I will go home this weekend] is thrilling.

In an extraposition context, it would be:
It is thrilling [that I will go home].

[To go to school] is good.

Extraposition would be:
It is good [to go to school]

Paradigmatic and Syntagmatic Relations

Words we use are related both individually as they belong to the same group, and structurally
as they have to select other words they combine with in a construction. These two relations
are known as paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations. These relations are also known as
system and structure or choices and chains. On the syntagmatic axis, words are linked, or
chained, together according to grammatical rules, but we make choices about which words to
link together on the paradigmatic axis, the axis of choice. The purpose of this lecture is to let
you know how words are related in constructions, therefore, after you have studied this
lecture, you should be able to explain paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations in syntax as well
as discuss the following types of relation: bi-lateral depedency, unilateral depedency, co-
ordinate depedency and mutual excusion

LIN 121: Page 45 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

The signs in the language system are interdependent. Each sign has a value, by which we
mean something like meaning. Each sign has the value it has just because this is the value that
all of the other signs have not got. The signs in the language system are related to each other
in two ways: there are rules for their combination, and there are contrasts and similarities
between them. These are also known as system and structure. The former relates to the
concept of paradigmatic relation and the latter to the concept of syntagmatic relation, two
concepts commonly ascribed to the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857–1913). The
following diagram is often used to indicate the concepts of system and structure.

Linguistic units function in terms of the interaction between system and structure. In so far as
linguistic units follow and precede one another, they form sequential syntagmatic structural
relations with each other. Simultaneously, they form paradigmatic relations with each other,
since a linguistic unit is significantly, i.e. differentially, replaceable with another or others at
that specific place in the structure, where all of the mutually replaceable linguistic units form a
system. These two dimensions of language, combination and contrast/similarity, are
commonly illustrated diagrammatically as two axes, the syntagmatic and the paradigmatic.
The syntagmatic relation is the structure in the diagram above while the paradigmatic relation
is the system.

On the syntagmatic axis, words are linked, or chained, together according to grammatical
rules, but we make choices about which words to link together on the paradigmatic axis, the
axis of choice. The relationship a given sign has with those with which it is combined on the
syntagmatic axis is evident in any given sentence. The syntagmatic axis is solely concerned
with structure.

Paradigmatic Relation
A paradigm is a set of all the different forms of a word; a set of associated signifies or
signified which are all members of some defining category but in which each is significantly
different. In natural language, there are grammatical paradigms such as verbs, articles, nouns,
or pronouns. A paradigm could be further defined as the system of morphemic variations
which is correlated with a parallel system of variations in environment. In other words, a
paradigm is the changes in the shape of linguistic form which matches a series of changes in
position. E.g.: go, going, went, gone There is a system of morphemic variations in these
words; this variation is correlated with a parallel system of variation in linguistic environment.
However, these morphemic changes go hand-in-hand with a series of grammatical positions
hence go can constitute the word in grammatical environment. For instance:

Present: Should I go to that school?

Progressive: Are you going to that school?
LIN 121: Page 46 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Past: I went to that school.

Perfect: I have gone to that school.

This shows that members of each of the set of verbs listed above are said to be in paradigm
relation. A paradigmatic relationship is also defined as one where an individual sign may be
replaced by another. Thus, for example, individual letters have a paradigmatic relationship
with other letters, as where one letter is used; another may replace it (albeit changing
meaning). Letters and numbers do not have a paradigmatic relationship. Paradigmatic
relationships are typically associative, in that both items are in a single membership set.
Paradigmatic relation can be viewed when a space is left to be occupied in a sentence. The
choice of word that can occupy such position (on vertical level) is what is termed
paradigmatic relationship. Example:

The snake bit the boy The cat bit the boy
The dog bit the boy The fox bit the boy
Paradigmatic relations are those contracted between items that are mutually substitutable in
some context. Form classes are paradigmatic classes. For example, in the English NP we have
a paradigmatic class of determiners including a, the, some etc. and a paradigmatic class of
nouns including man, boy, house.
A book/ the book A man/ a boy/ a house

Paradigmatic relations are those which belong to the same set by virtue of a function they
share. A sign enters into paradigmatic relations with all the signs which can also occur in the
same context but not at the same time. In a given context, one member of the paradigm set is
structurally replaceable with another. Signs are in paradigmatic relation when the choice of
one excludes the choice of another. The use of one signifier (e.g. a particular word) rather than
another from the same paradigm set. Paradigmatic relations can thus be seen as contrastive.

Syntagmatic Relation
A syntagm is a unit of language consisting of sets of phonemes, words, or phrases that are
arranged in order. It is an orderly combination of interacting signifiers which forms a
meaningful whole within a text, sometimes called a ‘chain’ such combinations are made
within a framework of syntactic rules and conventions. In languages, a sentence, for instance
is a syntagm of words.

In the formation of utterances, a number of linguistic units are joined in a structural bond
according to the rule of utterance formation in that language. The units are said to be in
syntagmatic relationship. Illustrations abound at the level of morphology, phonology and
syntax. At the phonological level, these words read / ri:d /, /fate /feit/. keg /keg/ consist of
three phonemes each. Each of these is joined together in a structural bond to give phonetic
shape of the whole word. They are all in syntagmatic relationship.

At the morphological level, words are also structurally bond, for instance, strategically is
made up of morphemes; strategy; -cal and -ly. The three morphemes give the word
strategically which are joined together in a structural bond. This shows a syntagmatic
relationship at the morphological level. At the syntactic level, words are joined together in a
bond to express thought. The NP, the best writer, is a syntactic unit exhibiting syntagmatic
relationship between the words, the, best, and writer. If the same three words order in
LIN 121: Page 47 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

reversed form, we have writer best the; but in syntactic rules of English, these words are not
bounded together structurally. There is no syntagmatic relationship, thus they cannot be
regarded as an English phrase.

Syntagmatic relations are the various ways in which elements within the same texts may be
related to each other. Syntagms are created by the linking of signifiers from paradigm sets
which are chosen on the basis of whether they are conventionally regarded as appropriate or
may be required by some rule system (e.g. grammar). Syntagmatic relations highlight the
importance of part of the whole relationships. Syntagmatic relationships are often governed by
structures such as spelling and grammar. They can also have less clear relationship, such as
those of fashion and social meaning. Examples:

1. The cat ate the mouse. 2. !The mouse ate the cat. 3. *Cat the mouse ate the.
Structurally, examples (1 & 2) are grammatical i.e. in terms of S. V. O structure of sentence.
Semantically (by meaning relation) only example (1) is acceptable or meaningful. It is absurd
to believe that a mouse will eat a cat. So, example (2) is semantically faulty or bizarre, hence
the mark ! before it. Example (3) violates word order (syntax) in English because it is the
article that comes before a noun. So, ‘cat’ cannot occupy or fit in the position it is found in
example (3), it is ungrammatical hence the mark * before the sentence to show
ungrammaticality.

Syntagmatic relations are those contracted between forms or form classes within some
structure. These may include relations of order e.g. in English NPs, the determiner must
precede the noun.
A man/ *man a

But in Yorùbá NP, it must follow the noun

ọkùnrin náà/ *náà ọkùnrin
man the the man

It may be the relations of dependency e.g. the Yorùbá NP ọmọ pupa ‘light-skinned child’
have the obligatory head ọmọ ‘child’ and the adjective pupa light-skinned’ dependent on the
noun within the NP.

Both syntagmatic and pragmatic analyses treat signs as part of a system – exploring their
functions within codes and sub-codes. We can further see in the table below:

R e l a t i o n s h i p s
Syntagmatic
A dog fell in this chair
Paradigmatic The cat sat on the mat
That man ate under that hut

In the above table, syntagmatic and paradigmatic relationships are illustrated. The horizontal
items have syntagmatic relationships as they follow on from one to another. The vertical items
have paradigmatic relationships as in each column; items can be substituted for one another.

LIN 121: Page 48 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

In general, syntagmatic analysis is the analysis of syntax or surface structure, syntagmatic

means one element selects the other element either to precede it or follow it. E.g. the definite
article ‘the’ selects a noun and not a verb.

Paradigmatic analysis is the analysis of paradigms embedded in the text rather than of the
surface structure. It often uses commutation tests i.e. analysis by substituting words of the
same type or class to calibrate shift in connotations.

Syntagmatic – words are linked according to grammatical rule

Paradigmatic – mutually substitute items e.g. form classes

Types of Relation: Mutual or bi-lateral dependency, unilateral dependency, Co-ordinate

dependency, and mutual exclusion. These relationships are abstract relationships between
sentence constituents; they are also functional relationships indicating the syntactic and
semantic functions of constituents in their relationships with other constituents. The fact that
these relationships are functional means that we need to find names to label the type of
relationship involved – modifier: head, possessor: possessed etc. The relationships are in
principle independent of any particular aspect of word or sentence form. For example, the
unilaterally dependent relation modifier: head can be exemplified by constructions involving
adjectives and nouns. In English, the relationship is realized in the order Adj + N (the red
book) but in Yorùbá, in the reverse order N + Adj (ìwé pupa náà (book red the) without
affecting the dependency. The Unilaterally dependent relation possessor: possessed (which is
itself a type of modifier: head construction with the possessed as the head) can be realized in
English by two constructions, the son of the king and the king’s son. The dependency relation
is the same in both constructions, but the word order is different and each construction
requires different markers (of and –s) to the relationship.

Bi-lateral3 or Mutual4 Dependency5: Constructions involving bi-lateral or mutual

dependency are called exocentric constructions. An exocentric construction is a construction
in which the distribution of either constituent in such a construction is different from the
distribution of the construction as a whole. Constituent structure rules introducing mutually
dependent constituents are usually of the form:
X → Y + Z e.g. PP → P NP.
Transitive verbs and its object V + NP,
Locative verbs and their locative complement V + PP etc.

In a PP, the distribution of a PP as a whole is different from the distribution of either a P or of

an NP; the two constituents of a PP. Many of the major syntactic relationship in all languages
are mutually dependent.

In many bi-laterally dependent constructions, one constituent requires the other constituents to
assume a particular grammatical form. In English, if the object of the preposition is the
pronoun in a PP, the pronoun must be in the oblique form. E.g.: to her; for him but not *to

3
involving two groups of people
4
actions that affect two or more people equally
5
shared by two or more people

LIN 121: Page 49 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

he, *for she. This relationship is known as government, the P is the governor and governs the
NP with which it is in construction.

Unilaterally Dependent Constructions

Here, one constituent is typically obligatory and the other, the dependent constituent is
typically optional. These are called endocentric constructions in which the distribution of the
construction as a whole parallel to that of the obligatory constituent. The obligatory
constituent is called the head of the construction and the optional constituent, the modifier of
the head. Constituent structure rules introducing unilaterally dependent constructions typically
take the form:
X → (Y+) Z e.g. NP → (Det+) N
In English NPs, the distribution of unmodified nouns is parallel to that of nouns modified by
determiners; the determiner is the modifier and the noun the head of the construction.

In unilaterally dependent constructions, the modifier must agree or concord with the head with
respect to some particular grammatical category e.g.

number: demonstratives agree in number with the head N

this man, these men

Number and Gender agreement: German
ein junger mann ‘a young man
eine junge frau ‘a young woman’
ein junges madchen ‘a young girl’

In cases as we have above, the head noun controls the form of the modifiers

Co-ordinate Dependency
In co-ordinate dependency, neither constituent depends syntactically on the other, each
constituent has the same distribution as the construction as a whole. Constituent structure
rules introducing co-ordinate dependency take the form:
X → X* e.g. Adj → Adj*

This introduces strings of adjectives like a little old lady i.e. a lady who is both little and old.
Many co-ordinate constructions include a marker of co-ordination like and or or. e.g.

My wife and I; You or your wife

though not all co-ordinate constructions show such a marker. Another case of co-ordinate
dependency with no marker is appositive structures e.g. President Jonathan, Professor
Elugbe, Mr. Oboh, the faculty Officer, our father, who is in heaven.

Relations of Exclusion
Here, where a constituent occurs, it does not permit the occurrence of a particular constituent.
For example, verbs of state in English do not in general occur with progressive auxiliary verbs
e.g.
*I am knowing Chinese, *Bill is seeming ill.

LIN 121: Page 50 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Proper nouns in English do not typically co-occur with the definite article (*the John) except
when they co-occur with a relative clause (the John I used to know), mass nouns do not co-
occur with plural expressions (*these water)

Interpreting Information

The sentence or clause conveys information which may be what the speaker assumed that the
audience is familiar with or not previously known. At the end of the lecture, you should be
able to explain given and new information, identify topic and comment in a sentence and
discuss how theme and rheme are realized in clauses

Given and New Information

This is a classification of the information conveyed by a sentence, clause or other grammatical
unit. Given information is information already assumed to be known by the audience or
reader, and new information is information not previously known and therefore to be
particularly brought to the hearer’s or reader’s attention. In speech, new information is
signalled by intonation and stress. For example, in the following exchange, the words in
capitals represent important new information and are also the words which are likely to be
strongly stressed:

1. Will the match take place TOMORROW?

2. Well, it MAY do, but I hope it will be POSTPONED.

There is a tendency to place new information after given information that is to save up the
important new information to the end of a sentence or clause. However, a speaker can vary the
position of old and new information by varying the position of stress. Notice, for example, the
difference of effect between (1) above and the same sentence (3) with a different major stress:

3. Will the match TAKE PLACE tomorrow?

Given Information
Given information is the information that is assumed by the speaker to be known to , assumed,
or inferable by the addressee at the time of the speaker’s utterance because the information is
a common knowledge, or part of the extralinguistic context, or previously established in the
discourse. Given information is always placed early in a sentence and spoken with low
amount of stress.

Types of Given Information

Given information has these types: Evoked entity, Inferable entity, predictable information
and salient information. Evoked entity can also be subdivided into situationally evoked entity
and textuallu evoked entity

Evoked Entity: This is a referent which is given information due to the fact that it has been
previously mentioned in the text, also due to the prominence of the reference in the
extralinguistic context.

Situationally Evoked Entity: It is a referent that is given information because of the

prominence of the referent in the extralinguistic context. Example: Could you bring the cup?
LIN 121: Page 51 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

The cup is previously unmentioned, but it is given information because there is only one cup
and its existence is known.

Textually Evoked Entity: This is a referent that is given information because it has been
previously included in the text. Example: The guy I worked with says he knows your sister
Since the referent of “he” has been previously mentioned in the text, it is textually evoked
entity.

Inferable Entity: This is a referent that may be inferred by the addressee from other
information that has already been given.
Example: I got on a bus yesterday and the driver was drunk

The mentioned of bus has made the driver inferable, a driver is assumed to be in the bus; thus
the addressee may assume without further specification from the speaker that is the driver of
the bus who is spoken of.

Predictable Information: This type of given information is the one that the speaker assumes
can be or could have been predicted by the addressee to occur in a particular position in a
sentence. Example: Ellipsis material in utterances is predictable information. Like the
sentence below:
She bought stationery like pencils, biros…
From the sentence, it could be predicted from the ellipsis that other stationary that were not
mentioned by the speaker are papers, books, envelopes etc.

Salient Information: This given information is that which the speaker assumes to be in the
addressee’s consciousness at the time of the speaker’s utterance.

New Information
New information is the information that is assumed by the speaker not to be known to or
assumed by the addressee or previously established in the discourse. It is typically placed late
in the sentence and it has a high amount of stress placed on the words representing it. In the
following exchange, the stressed words (in capital letters) are new information.
A: Do you know where the PORTER is?
B: He has gone to the OFFICE.

Brand-new entity: Brand new entity is a referent that has not been mentioned previously in
the discourse and it is assumed by the speaker to be previously unkown to the addressee.
Example: The guy I worked with says he knows your sister
“The guy I worked with” refers to a brand-new entity. However, when referred to again as
“he” it is no longer a brand-new entity but salient information.

Anchored Entity: Anchored entity is a brand-new entity that is linked to another referent
which is not brand-new by means of the inclusion of referring expression in the noun-phrase.
Example: The guy I work with says he knows your sister

LIN 121: Page 52 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

In the above example, “guy” which is brand-new is anchored to the speaker by the noun-
phrase “I work with”

Unused Entity: Unused entity is a referent referred to for the first time in the discourse, but
assumed to be already a part of the addressees’ knowledge.

Topic and Comment

In using these terms allowance is made to the fact that in uttering a (minimal) discourse unit
the speaker ‘says something about something’; in other words, there is something that has to
be regarded as the already established ‘matter of current concern’ about which new
information is added. The added information is named ‘comment,’ whereas the information
that has already been established and thus can serve as an anchoring point for the new
information is designated as ‘topic.’ The definition of Topic as ‘what is being talked about’
and Comment as ‘what is being said about what is being talked about’ is based on the axiom
that these two parts are present in every declarative utterance. This is expressed in regulative
terms by Lambrecht (1987: 254): ‘‘Do not introduce a referent and talk about it at the same
time.’’ He affirmed that the relation Topic-of ‘‘expresses the pragmatic relation of aboutness
that holds between a referent and a proposition with respect to a particular discourse’’. As
Lambrecht (1994: 127) stated: “A referent is interpreted as the topic of a proposition if in a
given discourse the proposition is construed as being about this referent, i.e. as expressing
information which is relevant to and which increases the addressee’s knowledge of this
referent’’.

In the discourse, I saw John yesterday. He was angry, the pronoun he in the second sentence
refers to the topic (it is the ‘topic expression’), whereas was angry designates the comment
that is about this topic. Topic can be viewed from different perspectives of definitions, we can
say: Topic is the phrase in a clause that the rest of the clause is understood to be about.

Ways of Determining the Topic of a Sentence

 In ordinary English, the subject is normally the same as the topic.
Example: The car hit the old man. A man died yesterday.
In the above sentences, the topic of the sentences appeared in the subject positions
which are underlined.
 It is also possible to use other sentence structure to show the topic of a sentence.
Example: As for the old man, the car knocked him down.
In the example, the topic is the underlined clause.
 The topic of a sentence can also be determined pragmatically i.e. the contextual uses of
words by the speaker. Here, it’s only when the speaker singles out the topic that you
can agree with him/her; this is simply because some words are ambiguous.
Example: Are you okay?
This sentence is an interrogative sentence and it can mean a polite and concerned way
of wanting to know one’s problem. It can mean a joke and it can mean an insult. So,
the topic is determined by the speaker.

Topic and subject

The difference between topic and grammatical subject is that topic is used to describe the
information structure of a sentence and how it coheres with other sentence, whereas, subject is

LIN 121: Page 53 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

purely a grammatical term. It is very possible to have a sentence where the subject is not the
topic, most common in the Chinese language.

Topic and comment go hand in hand, without the topic there can never be a comment, because
the comment is the extensive information given to support the topic.

Theme and Rheme

The message is constructed in the English clause in terms of theme and rheme. One element
of the clause is given the special status of theme by being put first, and it then combines with
the rest of the clause to constitute the message; other languages mark theme by other means;
for instance, Japanese uses the suffix -wa to signify that whatever it follows is the theme. The
theme is defined as ‘the element which serves as the point of departure of the message; it is
that with which the clause is concerned’, and the rest of the message is referred to as the
rheme; the theme is normally realized by nominal groups (examples (1), (2) and (3))
adverbial groups (5), or prepositional phrases (4).
Theme Rheme
(1) Tomas gave Sophie that Easter egg
(2) That Easter egg was given to Sophie by Tomas
(3) Sophie was given that Easter egg by Tomas
(4) At Easter Tomas went to see Sophie and Katie
(5) Very soon they were eating Easter eggs

Themes may, however, also be realized by clauses, as in the case of:

What Tomas gave to Sophie was an Easter egg.

However, in this case the clause what Tomas gave to Sophie functions as a nominal group in
the whole sentence; this phenomenon is referred to as nominalization. It is also possible to
have cases of predicated theme having the form it + be, as in

It was an Easter egg that Tomas gave to Sophie.

The most usual themes in English are those realized by the grammatical subject of the clause,
and these are called unmarked themes; when the theme is something other than the subject, it
is called marked theme (examples (4) and (5)).

Functional linguists tend to describe dislocations with informational notions such as theme
and rheme rather than grammatical structures. In the sentence below,

6. The book I lent you, have you finished it yet

the theme, the book I lent you, realized as a tone group unit, conveys information that is
considered to be already given or to be recoverable from the preceding discourse (what the
speaker, I, was talking about before). The rheme is new information, have you finished it yet.
In communicative frames that consider intentions and interactions between speakers as
essential components, left-dislocated elements are, more precisely, what the speakers intend to
expand their knowledge about.

In a course in literally stylistics, it is perhaps appropriate for one to mention at the outset that
the theme here is different from the way it is generally understood in literary analysis. When it
is used in relation to the term rheme, it has more technical grammatical term.
LIN 121: Page 54 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Example: I had a sleepless night yesterday.

“I” is the theme of this sentence while “has a sleepless night yesterday” is the rheme.
We can also say that the Theme is the starting point of the clause message.
 Theme is realized in English by the first position in a clause
 Theme must contain a participant, process or circumstance
 Theme must include element preceding the first participant, process or circumstance
The rheme is the constituent of a sentence that adds most new information in addition to what
has already been said in the discourse. It should be noted that everything else which follows
the theme in a single clause is the rheme. In other words, the rheme of the clause is formed by
all other constituents that follow it. The subject, circumstantial adjunct and complement when
they are fronted are all known as topical themes.

Tabular Presentation of the Differences between Theme and Rheme

Theme Rheme
1. It is the point of departure of Where the presentation moves after the
clause point of departure
2. It has the local text of clause as What is presented is presented in the
piece of text local context set up by the theme
3. Initial position in the clause Position following initial position

Themes in Declarative Sentence

It can be unmarked i. e. Theme = Subject. Examples:
(a) The two Nigerians stood waiting (b) Bayo and his father went into the forest
(c) No, I think it’s easy (d) Oh, you are a great man
(e) But I will have some tea

It can be marked i. e. Theme = Subject Examples:

(a) That I don’t know (b) What she had felt he never knew
(c) In January 1999, she travelled to London

Themes in Interrogative Sentence

It can be in polarity (Yes/No) questions: Marked Theme = Finite + Subject
Examples: (a) Are you interested in Syntax?
(b) Would you like a cup of coffee?
(c) By the way, were you serious about the issue?

It can be WH questions: Unmarked Theme = WH – Word

Examples: (a) What are you doing here?
(b) Where are we going?
(c) Then, in the name of goodness, why does she bother?

Theme in Imperative Sentences

Examples: (a) Wake me up before cock crows
(b) Don’t disturb me
(c) Let’s have a look at this receipt
(d) Oh, please stop it

LIN 121: Page 55 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

In all the examples given above, the underlined word(s) in each sentence is the theme while
the remaining part of each sentence is the rheme.

Basic Grammatical Terms/Notions

Tense
Tense denotes the time an action takes place, whether sometime in the past, in the present or
sometime in the future. It is a unversal category found in all languages, though its
morphological realisation differs from one language to the other. In other words, tense
markers may be morphologically marked, as found in English, or not morphologically marked
as is the case of the nonfuture tense in Yorùbá.

Tense as a grammatical category, relates the time of an event to the moment of utterance. The
notion of tense has to do with time relation between the events. Comrie (1985) says tense is a
grammaticalised expression of location in time. Lyons (1968: 305) says:
The essential characteristic of the category of tense is that it
relates the time of an action, event, or state of affairs referred
to in the sentence to the time of utterance: the time of
utterance being now.

A model can perceive, recall or anticipate an event. Therefore, there are only three possible
order relationships between events and any axis of orientation, the axis or orientation being
the point of initiation of speech or the point present, the ‘now’ of utterance. The three other
relationships are retrospective point (RP), the time anterior to the time of initiation of speech,
anticipated point (AP), the time posterior to the point of initiation of speech and the point
present (PP), the point of initiation of speech. (Ajongolo 2005, p. 120).

Point Present (PP): This is the point of initiation of speech which serves as the primary axis
of orientation, the point present of a tense system. According to Taiwo (2003), the importance
of the temporal point present is such that the act of recollection and anticipation actually takes
place in the point present, only the actual activity can be anterior or posterior.

Retrospective Point (RP): The time anterior to the time of initiation of speech. This is the
point which must have served as the point of initiation of speech sometimes prior to the actual
initiation of speech. For instance, when one says something about an event in the past, what
he I actually doing is recollecting that at some point in time before the moment of utterance,
an event took place.

Anticipated Point (AP): This is the time posterior to the point of initiation of speech. This is
the time posterior to the point of initiation of speech. It indicates a future point in time when it
is anticipated that an event will take place.

The main tenses found in many languages include the past, present and future. Some
languages have only two distinct tenses, such as past and nonpast, or future and nonfuture.
Tenses generally express time relative to the moment of speaking.

LIN 121: Page 56 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Present Tense: The present tense is the now of an event or existence. It is the point where an
action is viewed as taking place simultaneously or concurrently with the time when the action
is being reported. Simultaneity means that the exact point or moment at which the event is
taking place coincide with the time when the event is spoken of and this made it different
from the conception of continuous tense.

Future Tense: It is the anticipated point in time. It is the later of an event. It is natutrally
different from the present and past tense in terms of its reference to its limit exxxistence. This
is because it cannot be perceived directly or remembered it but can only be anticipated.

Past Tense: This expresses the location of the time of an event in antecedence. It is the ‘then’
of an event or existence, or the recollection/reminisces of an event or existence. The action is
only spoken of at present but the execution has already taken place at some point in time.

English (Past, Present, Future)

He went to the market Past went
He goes to the market Present goes
He will go to the market Future will go

Yorùbá (Future and Nonfuture)

Olú lọ sí ọjà Nonfuture – No marker meaning past event
Olù go to market ‘Olú went to the market’

Olú fẹ́ràn ójà. Nonfuture – No marker (meaning past/present situation/condition)

Olú like market ‘Olú liked/like the market’

Olú á lọ sí ọjà. Future – á future tense marker

Olú fut go to market ‘Olú will go to the market’

Aspect
Aspect looks at the internal temporal contour of a situation. It reflects the temporal
relationship between either the point of initiation of speech and the internal temporal structure
of the event described by an element; or the internal, temporal structure of a specific
background situation described by one element and the totality of the situation referred to by
another (Omamor 1982: 104–105). Aspect deals with the placement of an action with regards
to time and not necessarily the actual time the action occurs, unlike tense. It is all about the
complement of an action that the verbal group describes.

There are basically two types of aspect, perfective aspect and imperfective aspect. The
imperfective aspect is further subdivided into progressive or continuous aspect and haitual
aspect.

Perfective Aspect: Completeness: This shows that an action or activity described has been
completed. In other words, the action or activity described is already concluded. Examine the
sentences below.
I have danced. (completed action) I am dancing. (action in progress)

Examples of Aspects in Yorùbá

LIN 121: Page 57 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Perfective Aspect: The markers are ti, for a completed action or activity, ti máa ń, à ti máa,
and ti ń for action or activity that has already started.

Akẹ́kọ̀ ọ́ tí ń kẹkọ̀ ọ́
student perf. cont learn ‘Students are already learning’

Olú á tí máa lọ
Olú fut. perf hab. go ‘Olú would have been going’

Wón tí màá n kọrin

They perf hab cont sing ‘They would have been singing’

Mo ti se iṣẹ́ náà
I perf do work the ‘I have done the work’

Continuous or Progressive Aspect: The progressive aspect expresses an action that is taking
place or on-going at a particular point in time. It is an ongoing process at the time of speaking.
This aspect is used for event that are still progressive or uncompleted action, ń is its marker.

À ń jẹún
We cont eat ‘We are eating.’

Habitual Aspect: This aspect is used to report habitual event or occurrence, a máa and máa
ń are the aspect aspect markers in Yorùbá.

Olú á máa ṣiṣẹ

Olú hab work ‘Olú usually works’

Wọ́ n máa ń gba ibí kọjá

They hab pass here through ‘They usually pass through this place’

Mood
Mood is a category of the verb or verbal inflections that expresses semantic and grammatical
differences, including such forms as the indicative, subjunctive, and imperative. It is typically
used to indicate the syntactic relation of the clause in which the verb occurs to other clauses in
the sentence, or the attitude of the speaker toward what he or she is saying, as certainty or
uncertainty, wish or command, emphasis or hesitancy. It a set of syntactic devices in some
languages that is similar to this set in function or meaning, involving the use of auxiliary
words, as can, may, might. It is any of the categories of these sets: the Latin indicative,
imperative, and subjunctive moods.

Case
Case shows a noun's or a pronoun's relationship with the other words in a sentence. The main
cases are subjective or nominative case, objective or accusative case, dative case, possessive
or genitive case and vocatice case

Olú gave me the book in Ọpẹ’s house, Ayọ

LIN 121: Page 58 of 61
 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Nominative dative accusative genitive vocative

In English, nouns do not change their forms in any of the cases other than the possessive case
(e.g., Ọpẹ becomes Ọpẹ's). Pronouns, however, change their forms in the possessive case
(e.g., he becomes his) and the objective case (e.g., he becomes him).

The table below shows how nouns and pronouns change (or don’t) in the various cases

Sujective Objective Possessive Case Vocative Case

Case Case Possessive Possessive
Determiner Pronoun
I Me My Mine
You (sg) You Your Yours Get off, you
He /she / Him / her / it His / her /its His / hers / its
it
We Us Our Our
You (pl) You Your Yours You, scram!
They Them Their Theirs
Dog Dog Dog’s Hands up, dog
Dogs Dogs Dogs’ Run away, dogs

Gender
Gender is a specific form of nouns in which the division forms an agremment system with
another aspect of the language, such as adjectives, articles, pronouns, or verbs. It is a subclass
within a grammatical class (such as noun, pronoun, adjective, or verb) of a language that is
partly arbitrary and that determines agreement with and selection of other words or
grammatical forms. Gender is an inflectional form showing membership in such a subclass

Gender is considered an inherent quality of nouns, and it affects the forms of other related
words, a process called aggreement. For example, in Spanish, determiners, adjectives, and
pronouns change their form depending on the noun to which they refer. Spanish nouns have
two genders: masculine and feminine, represented by the nouns gato and gata respectively.

In languages with grammatical gender, each noun is assigned to one of the classes
called genders, which form a closed set. The division into genders usually correlates to some
degree, at least for a certain set of nouns (such as those denoting humans), with some property
or properties of the things that particular nouns denote. Such properties include animacy or
inanimacy, humanness" or non-humanness, and biological sex. Few or no nouns can occur in
more than one class. Depending on the language and the word, this assignment might bear
some relationship with the meaning of the noun (e.g. "woman" is usually feminine), or may be
arbitrary.

Example of Grammatical Gender in Spanish

Grammatical Gender Number Phrase Gloss
Masculine Singular El plato “the dish”
Plural Los platos “the dishes”

LIN 121: Page 59 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

Feminine Singular La guitarra “The guitar”

Plural Las guitarras “the guitar”

Pronouns may agree in gender with the noun or noun phrase to which they refer (their
antecedent). Sometimes, however, there is no antecedent—the referent of the pronoun is
deduced indirectly from the context: this is found with personal pronouns, as well as with
indefinite and dummy pronouns

With personal pronouns, the gender of the pronoun is likely to agree with the natural
gender of the referent. Indeed, in most European languages, personal pronouns are gendered;
for example, English the personal pronouns he, she and it are used depending on whether the
referent is male, female, or inanimate or non-human; this is in spite of the fact that English
does not generally have grammatical gender.

Person
Person a category used in the classification of pronouns, possessive determiners, and verb
forms, according to whether they indicate the speaker ( first person ), the addressee ( second
person ), or a third party ( third person ). Grammatical person is the grammatical distinction
between deictic references to participant(s) in an event; typically, the distinction is between
the speaker (first person), the addressee (second person), and others (third person). First
person includes the speaker (English: I, we, me, and us), second person is the person or people
spoken to (English: you), and third person includes all that is not listed above
(English: she, he, they, etc.)] Grammatical person typically defines a language's set of personal
pronouns

In many languages, first-, second-, and third-person pronouns are typically also marked for
singular and plural forms

Long Pronouns in the Oǹdó dialect of Yorùbá (Ajongolo, 2005, p.32)

Singular Plural
st
1 person Èmi Àwa
nd
2 Ùwọ Ànwan/Ẹ̀ nwẹn
3rd Òun Ànwan

Honorifics: Many languages express person with different morphemes in order to distinguish
degrees of formality and informality. A simple honorific system common among European
languages is the Tu-Vous distinction. Some other languages have much more elaborate
systems of formality that go well beyond the T-V distinction, and use many different
pronouns and verb forms that express the speaker's relationship with the people they are
addressing. Yorùbá employs the third person plural pronouns, Ẹ̀ yin, ẹ, wọ́ n, yín as pronouns
of respect (honorifc pronouns.

Ẹ káàárọ̀ ẹ̀gbọ́ n mi “Good morning my elder (brother/sister”

Mo rí wọn nínú ilé “I saw him/her/them inside the house”
Ẹ̀ yin ni wọ́ n ń wá “You (pl/sg) are the one they/he/she is looking for”
Ọmọ yìí ń kí yín “This child is greeting you (sg/pl)

LIN 121: Page 60 of 61

 Oyè Táíwò (2021): Introduction to Grammatical Analysis I

General References
Alo̩, Moses and Ayo̩ Ogunsiji (Eds) 2004. English Language Communication Skills for
Academic Purposes: Ibadan, General Studies Programme (GSP) Unit, University of
Ibadan.
Awobuluyi, O̩ladele 1978. Essentials of Yorúbà Grammar: Ibadan; O U
Awobuluyi, Ọladele 2013. Ẹ̀ kọ́ Gírámà Èdè Yorùbá: Oṣogbo, Atman Ltd
Bámgbós̩e, Ayò̩ . 1966. A Grammar of Yorùbá, Cambridge: CUP.
Bamgbos̩e, Ayo̩ 1967. A Short Yorùbá Grammar: Ibadan; H E B
Elson, B, and V. Pickett. 1962. An Introduction to Morphology and Syntax. California
Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Fromkin, Victoria and Robert Rodman 1988. An Introduction to Language: New York;
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers
Katamba, F 1993. Morphology: London: the Macmillan Press Ltd
Matthews, P.H. 1974. Morphology: An Introduction to the Theory of Word Structure.
London & New York: CUP
Lyons, John 1968. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics: Cambridge, C U P
Lyons, John 1982. Language and Linguistics: An Introduction: Cambridge, C U P
Taiwo, Oye 2011. Mofo̩lo̩jì: Àtúnṣe kejì (Morphology: Second Edition): Ibadan, Univeesal
Akada Books Ltd

LIN 121: Page 61 of 61