Introducing English Syntax
Introducing English Syntax
Typeset in Goudy
by Swales & Willis Ltd, Exeter, Devon, UK
Introduction 1
0.1 Who this book is for 1
0.2 What this book does 1
0.3 What is syntax? 3
0.4 The role of meaning 4
0.5 The connection to language teaching and training 5
Bibliography 261
Index 262
Symbols and abbreviations
Symbols
[ ] square brackets are used to indicate a subordinate clause at
sentence level.
/ / slants are used to show subordinate clauses inside phrases (i.e. at
phrase level).
Ø indicates omission of a certain element.
indicates that the particular unit could be analysed further.
arrows indicate a general connection between two items (as
discussed in the accompanying text).
a kinked left-pointing arrow indicates the relation of a clause inside
a phrase to the head of the phrase.
» indicates a relation of presupposition between two elements.
→ indicates an implicative relation between two elements.
→ indicates the negation or destruction of a former implicative relation.
Sentence function
S Subject
P Predicator
Oi Indirect object
Od Direct object
A Adverbial
Cs Subject complement
Co Object complement
Symbols and abbreviations ix
Other abbreviations
ELT English Language Teaching
EFL English as a Foreign Language
ESL English as a Second Language
Reference abbreviations
LGSWE Biber, D. et al. (1999). The Longman Grammar of Spoken and
Written English. Harlow: Longman.
Fenn, P. (2010). A Student Advanced Grammar of English.
SAGE
Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto.
Introduction
Picking out examples of ‘grammar’ here we can say, for instance, that the verb
enjoy has the third person singular ending, the verb watch is in the gerund, and
the noun films is in the plural. What we have now described is the morphology
of those words, i.e. the particular grammatical form in which they appear in this
sentence. Morphology, then, is what we might call word grammar. But the sen-
tence does not consist of just isolated words, of course. In every sentence there
is a grammatical relationship between the different words. This second level of
4 Introduction
grammar (‘beyond the word’) is what we call syntax. When we say, for example,
that Amy is the subject of the sentence, watching sad films is the direct object
of enjoys and sad films is the direct object of watching, then we are referring to
the grammatical level of syntax. Other syntactic points we might observe could
concern word order: this type of sentence conveys a statement (in contrast, for
instance, to a question) and therefore has to have declarative word order, with
the subject Amy in front of its verb enjoys. Another point is that here the adjec-
tive sad has to precede the noun that it describes. And so on.
What must also be taken into account is the connection between syntax and
morphology: the grammatical form of a word often depends on its relationship
to other words. The reason for the third person singular -s-ending on the verb
enjoy, for example, is that it has to agree grammatically with its subject Amy, a
noun that also has the morpho-semantic characteristic of third person singular.
Or take the gerund form of watching. This is triggered by the verb enjoy in front
of it. With some other verb, e.g. want, we would need an infinitive, i.e. a differ-
ent morphological form of watch:
The syntax of a sentence, then, can affect the morphology of the individual
words. On the other hand, the morphology of the words often tells us some-
thing about their actual or possible syntactic relationships to other words in the
same sentence. When we look at enjoys, say, we know that it has to have a third
person singular noun as subject before it. A clause with a gerund verb, like watch-
ing sad films, is a typical direct object. Other possible positions would be as subject
(Watching sad films is Amy´s favourite hobby), or following a preposition (Amy is
always for watching sad films). The morphology of a word can therefore indicate its
syntactic role and position in a given or possible sentence.
So, although they deal with different areas of grammar, syntax and morphology
are really two sides of the same coin and have a two-way relationship:
(3) Grammar
Syntax Morphology
(4) Grammar
Syntax Morphology
Meaning (Semantics)
Note that here too we have a two-way relationship. The grammar conveys the
meaning, but the intended meaning also determines the grammar.
Though this book is specifically about syntax, we will often refer to its close
relation to morphology and semantics.
1.0 Structure
The term structure is used in this book to cover the following:
All this concerns grammatical characteristics of words and groups of words that
are permanent and individual, and do not depend on particular sentences. What
contrasts with structure is the idea of function (subject, object, etc.), which, as
we will see later, is a sentence-dependent concept. For the moment we will stay
with structure. Function is discussed in the next chapter. The aspect of structure
that we want to look at more closely now is the word-class, which needs some
detailed explanation.
To say more, we might follow this with another noun and extend this further
with an adverb:
But the options are restricted. The second noun cannot swap positions with the
verb (*Jenny tea drinks regularly)1 and an adjective could not replace the adverb
(*Jenny drinks tea regular). On the other hand, there is nothing to be said against
putting adjectives before the nouns:
This is not just about position. Some word-classes are more closely associated
than others. Adjectives, we can see here, relate typically to nouns, whereas
adverbs relate to verbs and verb sequences. Further examples of close neighbours
are articles and nouns, and prepositions and nouns. Conjunctions, on the other
hand, combine the larger parts of sentences that we call phrases and clauses
(see 1.4 below for a detailed discussion of these terms).
So we can see that word-classes tell us a great deal about what goes where in
a sentence.
Finally, semantics also plays a large role in the character of word-classes.
Traditionally, in fact, it is meaning, rather than syntax or morphology, that is
used to define word-classes, especially in the teaching of children. This is not sur-
prising, as meaning is more easily understood by young learners than grammar. In
this approach, nouns, e.g. are said to refer to things and people, verbs are labelled
‘doing words’, signifying actions, and adjectives are thought of as ‘describing
nouns’. Linguists have often criticised descriptions of this kind as vague and unre-
liable. And it is true that they can easily be contradicted. For instance, abstract
nouns (such as love and hate) do not really mean ‘things’. Words like action and
8 Basic elements of grammatical structure
movement refer, obviously, to ‘actions’, yet they are not verbs. On the other hand,
verbs are not just ‘doing words’: they can mean states (Vanessa strongly resembles
her sister) or experiences (Alan caught a cold).
Nevertheless, there is a lot of truth in semantic characterisation. It is not
enough for a full definition, but gives us a good indication of typical cases or
prototypes. Not all nouns refer to ‘things’ or people, certainly. But the reverse is
usually true, i.e. that almost all words referring to things or people do belong to
the class of nouns. Similarly, the typical meaning of a verb is that it refers to an
event or state, even though a few nouns do the same thing. Furthermore, verbs
always link other elements in the sentence together as participants in the event
or state. This is not only a grammatical relationship, but a semantic one. For
instance, in
the verb tells us that John and Mary became involved with each other, and
moreover in a certain general way: John caused what happened and he caused it
to happen to Mary. This is what we call in semantics an agent–patient relation-
ship. It is not exclusive to verbs, nor is it always present when verbs are used,
but it is prototypically part of verb meaning in sentences that have the pattern
Noun + Verb + Noun. This shows generally that when we use grammar, we also
think meaning. In the more detailed discussion of the individual word-classes
further below, we will therefore examine matters from both grammatical and
semantic perspectives. The next section, meanwhile, introduces the important
concept of phrase, an analytical category closely allied to word-class.
Young and Jenny on the one hand, and green and tea on the other, belong
together. The verb drinks and the adverb regularly are just single words. But we
could expand these too (grammatically speaking, that is) into groups, e.g. has
drunk and quite regularly:
(7) (Green tea) (has been drunk) (quite regularly) (by (young Jenny)).
Though there are certain exceptions to this rule, phrases in principle remain
together and act as a group. This applies particularly to sentence functions
(discussed in detail in Chapter 2), which relate to phrases as a whole: for instance,
the subject of (6) is Young Jenny and the direct object green tea, which becomes
the subject in the passive version in (7). It is phrases, therefore, rather than indi-
vidual words, that comprise the first level of sentence organisation.
Notice that each phrase has a main word (respectively Jenny, drunk, tea and regu-
larly). This is called the head of the phrase. The word-class of the head gives its
name to the phrase. As Jenny and tea are nouns, young Jenny and green tea are noun
phrases. The phrase quite regularly has the adverb regularly as its head, and is there-
fore an adverb phrase. The verbs in a sentence form the verb phrase, here has drunk
(with drunk as the head). Similarly, there are adjective phrases (e.g. very big, with
the adjective big as the head), and prepositional phrases (e.g. in the house, with the
preposition in as the head). Phrases can also include others, as shown in (7) by the
prepositional phrase by young Jenny, which contains the noun phrase young Jenny.
The concept of being ‘included’ or ‘contained’ within a particular unit of sen-
tence organisation is expressed by the linguistic term constituent, which refers to
component elements of larger units. Words are therefore constituents of phrases
and phrases can be constituents of sentences or of other phrases.
A final word must be said on single words: drinks and regularly in (5) above
were ‘expanded’ into units of more than one word. We did this in order to
explain the term phrase and demonstrate its central features. In actual fact,
however, linguistics treats single words already as phrases. It does so precisely
because they are capable of extension into a multi-word unit with themselves
as potential heads. Looked at from the opposite point of view, most multi-word
phrases can be reduced syntactically to their heads alone and the phrase struc-
ture of the sentence will remain intact. Drinks and regularly, then, represent
phrases (a verb phrase and an adverb phrase respectively), i.e. phrases with only
one constituent. And by the same token the single-word constituents of (1), (2)
and (4) can now be described, more accurately in a syntactic sense, as phrases:
1.3.1 Nouns
•• Semantics:
Nouns denote entities, i.e. living things (person, woman, plant, animal),
objects (table, road, car), other physical phenomena (weight, distance, elec-
tricity, rain, wind), and abstractions like concepts and ideas (wish, religion,
memory, economics, friendship). Names such as Peter, London, Christianity,
Communism are called proper nouns and are spelt with capital letters.
Nouns have further semantic features that not only identify them as nouns
but also influence their morphology and syntax. Many can be counted, but
others cannot. Those referring to persons can imply male or female identity
(i.e. sex or gender).
•• Morphology:
An important feature of nouns is what we call number: that is, they can be
singular or plural. The singular is the ‘normal’ or unmarked form (cat) and
the plural is marked, usually just by adding the ending -s (cats). There are
various irregular plural forms, e.g. internal change of vowel (man→ men,
goose→ geese), same form as singular (sheep→ sheep), etc.
Another important feature related to this is countability. Most nouns
are what we call count nouns, i.e. they appear in the singular and plural
with numbers (one girl, ten girls). But there are also many non-count nouns.
These cannot appear with numbers. Some are only singular (tea, wheat, infor-
mation), others are only plural (surroundings, clothes).
And finally, a third central feature of nouns is their person status. This is a
wholly semantic factor, but it has a kind of ‘sleeping’ morphological charac-
ter that appears grammatically in the relationship to other word-classes like
pronouns and verbs. Consider the sentence:
Basic elements of grammatical structure 11
(11) Our neighbour is celebrating in her garden, but although we like her, she
has not invited us.
Note that the noun neighbour ‘controls’ the choice of any following pronoun
that refers back to it. As the garden belongs to the (apparently female) neigh-
bour we have to say her garden and not *our garden, followed by we like her
(and not, for instance, *We like them), and she has not. . . (rather than *You
have not. . .). This is the morphology of a category that we call person. It
forces pronouns to correspond in certain ways to their ‘parent’ nouns (i.e.
their antecedents), which can only be referred back to by he, she, it or they.
As these are known grammatically as third person pronouns, nouns are also
regarded as having third person status. (The division of person status into
three sub-categories numbered first, second and third is explained fully under
Pronouns below). Example (11) also shows us that pronoun choice (in the
singular at least) is further restricted by whether the noun refers to a thing
or a person and in the case of a person whether the person is male or female.
This is known as gender, and is differentiated according to masculine (he), for
male persons, feminine (she), for female persons, and neuter (it) for things.
•• Syntax:
Nouns
{{ can be preceded by determiners, such as articles (see below), and also
by adjectives:
The big cat.
These accompanying words form a unit with the noun that we call a
noun phrase.
Nouns
{{ occur (alone or in a phrase) before and after verbs:
The dog followed the boy.
{{ occur (alone or in a phrase) after prepositions:
On the table; in anger; under a large tree.
1.3.2 Pronouns
Pronouns are specialised semantic and morphological variants of nouns. They
are not really a separate word-class, but form a sub-division of nouns. Basically,
they are used to stand for nouns, i.e. represent them, in certain grammatical and
communicative contexts.
•• Semantics:
Pronouns step in as substitutes for full nouns that speakers cannot use, or do
not wish to use, in particular circumstances. The most general reason is to
avoid repeating a noun (and more usually a whole noun phrase) which has
already been mentioned:
(12) The milkman usually comes around 11 o’clock, but today he´s very late.
Maybe his cart has broken down. That was the reason why he was late on
one day last week. The cart is an old one that he’s been driving for years.
12 Basic elements of grammatical structure
Back-reference to previous elements of texts and dialogues is known
generally as anaphora. The back-referring item is called the anaphor.
Pronouns are one of the most common examples of anaphor. In (12) the
pronouns printed in bold type all show this anaphoric relationship. Note,
however, that what they refer back to is different in each case. That is,
each pronoun here represents a particular sub-category with its own dis-
tinct kind of use:
First I we
Second you you
Third he, she, it they
A point to note is that gender is marked only in the third person singular. A
further point is that, unlike full nouns, the personal pronouns are marked for
case. That is, their syntactic status in a sentence (position and function) is
marked morphologically. There are two case forms, subject (= those in the
box above), and object, as follows:
First me us
Second you you
Third him, her, it them
First my our
Second your your
Third his, her, its their
Demonstrative pronouns are marked for number, i.e. they have separate
forms for singular (this/that) and plural (these/those). The same applies to the
prop pronoun: one (singular), ones (plural).
The relative pronouns who, which and that are differentiated in use
according to semantic criteria, which we will not discuss further here (see
Ch. 10.1, on relative clauses). Who has an object form (whom) and a geni-
tive (whose). Note that who and which can also be interrogative pronouns.
Basic elements of grammatical structure 15
A further Doppelgänger is that, which, as we have just seen, also features as
a demonstrative pronoun (see below under Syntax).
•• Syntax:
Anaphoric reference with most pronouns generally involves the whole noun
phrase, and not just part of it:
(15) The big brown dog had hurt itself badly. It could not stand on its back legs.
An exception here is the prop pronoun, whose job is to replace just the
noun part of a noun phrase:
I wanted to buy red shoes for my daughter, but she preferred white ones.
Other major syntactic points are the following:
{{ Possessive pronouns, as was said above, are not pronouns syntacti-
cally, but determiners (see further below). That is, they have the
function of article words in larger noun phrases. We will therefore
refer to them from now on as possessive determiners. Only what we
called above the pronoun possessives have real pronoun status syntac-
tically. The same is true of demonstrative pronouns. Only when they
appear without a following noun, as in (12) above, are they pronouns
in a syntactic sense. But with a noun following (this problem, that cat)
they are demonstrative determiners.
{{ Anaphora is a semantic relationship (i.e. it is a form of reference).
But it also has a variety of morphological consequences, as we saw
above, e.g. personal pronouns, reflexive pronouns, possessive deter-
miners, pronoun possessives have to agree morphologically with
their antecedents. This is therefore a syntactic relationship too,
as the grammar of one word in a sentence affects the grammar of
another. Another example is the case of personal pronouns. Case
is a morphological feature, but is dependent on sentence function
(see next chapter), which is a syntactic relation. This is just a
further pointer to what we said at the beginning of this chapter:
semantics, morphology and syntax interact in a sentence to pro-
duce its total meaning.
{{ Relative pronouns introduce relative clauses.
{{ Interrogative pronouns introduce questions and interrogative clauses
(see Chapter 3, 3.1).
1.3.3 Verbs
•• Semantics:
Verbs, as we have already said, typically denote actions and states, i.e. things
that ‘happen’, ‘last’ and ‘go on in time’:
16 Basic elements of grammatical structure
(16) a. The dog followed the boy.
b. Karen is a teacher.
The close relation to time is shown by the fact that we can ask questions
referring to the verb using expressions like When? and How long?:
For how long/When did the dog follow the boy?
How long has Karen been a teacher?
Another close connection to time is that verbs always show us, through
tense, how an occurrence or state relates to the moment of speech,
e.g. before it (past), simultaneous with it (present), both at once (present
perfect), and so on. Tense is part of morphology, as we will see immediately.
Nevertheless, it points to something semantic, i.e. a time reference that is a
basic component of verb meaning.
In a more general way we can say that verbs have a semantically con-
necting effect: they link the other ‘participants’ named (typically the
subject noun and any elements following the verb) with each other. In
doing so they produce a message, or what is sometimes referred to as a
proposition. In (16)a. above, for instance, the two noun phrases the dog and
the boy are brought into a meaningful relationship with each other through
the verb. The same applies to Karen and a teacher in (16)b. Some verbs, it
is true, can create a proposition without anything following:
(17) a. David snores.
b. Karen sang.
But they still form a link, i.e. bind the noun to themselves to form a sense
unit or message.
It is the semantic conception of a proposition that lies behind the sen-
tence as a grammatical unit (see below under Syntax).
•• Morphology:
In English the verb is the word-class with the most complex system of forms.
We can see this already in a relatively simple statement like
(18) Jenny drinks coffee.
Firstly, the verb has an ending (-s) that is connected grammatically with the
noun Jenny, which refers to the ‘doer’ (or agent) of the action. The agent, in
sentences like this one, generally has the function of subject. Functions belong
in the next chapter, as we have said, but the term subject is important here
already, as it is this (or, more exactly, the noun in that function) that deter-
mines the ending of the verb. It does this according to the person status of the
noun, here third person singular. In other words a third person singular noun
requires this characteristic to be shown also in the verb ending. Syntactically,
this is another example of agreement, this time subject–verb agreement, also
known as concord. Verbs, then, are also marked for person, or, more exactly,
they are marked according to the person status of their subject noun (since
person is properly speaking a characteristic of nouns, not verbs).
Basic elements of grammatical structure 17
Tables like the following, showing all the person forms of a particular
verb (here be) are familiar to every language learner:
First I am we are
Second you are you are
Third he/she/it is they are
Finite verbs like drinks in (18) consist of just a single verb. Most, however,
are composed of two or more separate verbs in partnership, such as have
drunk, were drinking, have been drinking, will drink, can drink, and so on. These
are composite verb forms. Most of them are made up of one auxiliary verb +
lexical (or main) verb, though some have two or even three auxiliaries:
have + drunk
were + drinking
can + drink
have been + drinking
should have been + drunk
18 Basic elements of grammatical structure
Auxiliary verbs are ‘helping’ verbs. They form a supporting partnership
with main verbs in various ways. For instance, they help in creating tense
(have + past participle = perfect), aspect (be + present participle = progressive),
the passive (be + past participle = passive form), and so on. These are purely
morphological operations, and the auxiliaries concerned (be and have) are
therefore called grammatical auxiliaries. These contrast with modal auxiliaries,
like can, must, should, etc., which have individual meanings (as well as helping
with grammar). Auxiliaries are also essential for certain syntactic operations,
such as forming questions and negatives (see below). A further grammatical
auxiliary for this purpose is do. Note that the lexical verb here is always a parti-
ciple or infinitive. It is the auxiliary that gives the partnership its finite features
(i.e. concord, tense and aspect). Nevertheless, the partnership as a whole, as a
unit, is regarded as finite. All the verbs involved work together, as one phrase.
For this reason we call these units verb phrases. A composite verb form is always
one verb phrase, and the cases listed here are all finite verb phrases.
Verb phrases always follow the subject noun or pronoun (for a definition
of the function of subject, see Ch. 2), and in general follow it directly:
They were dancing.
An exception is with certain types of adverb that can occur between
subject and verb: They often dance.
{{ Negation:
Verbs are negated by adding not after an auxiliary verb: They were not
dancing. If there is no auxiliary verb in the affirmative sentence (as with
the simple aspect of the present or past tense), do has to be added as a
‘dummy’ auxiliary (known as do-support): They did not dance.
{{ Position in interrogative sentences (questions):
These are also known as weak forms, and affect certain auxiliaries and nega-
tion. In less formal language certain auxiliaries are shortened (abbreviated),
and in writing attached to the subject noun or pronoun by apostrophe:
I am I´m; you are you´re; he is he´s;
the car has gone the car´s gone; we will we´ll; and so on.
20 Basic elements of grammatical structure
The negative particle not is also reduced to n’t and attached to the
auxiliary:
aren´t, doesn´t, hadn´t, won´t, can´t, mustn´t, etc.
1.3.4 Adjectives
•• Semantics:
Adjectives denote qualities or characteristics of entities, i.e. they are
‘describing words’ relating to nouns. When they are derived from proper
nouns, i.e. names, they are known as proper adjectives and are spelt with
capital letters. Proper adjectives typically refer to characteristics such as
national and regional identity (French, British, Texan), religion (Christian,
Protestant, Buddhist), historical, cultural and political groupings (Victorian,
Impressionist, Marxist, Keynesian), etc.
As with other word-classes, certain semantic features of adjectives have
an effect on their morphology and syntax. A typical feature is their gradabil-
ity, i.e. whether they can be considered in terms of degree or extent: a little
tired, rather bored, highly sensitive. Associated with this is comparability: you
might be happier now than in the past, when you were more wealthy but less
relaxed. On the other hand you cannot be *slightly married or *somewhat dead,
and nor can you be less or more of either than anyone else. This is because
the state referred to is thought of as absolute.
•• Morphology:
As with other word-classes there are no specific forms that all adjectives
must have. Many cannot be distinguished from verbs or nouns. But there are
certain typical endings (suffixes) that are used to derive adjectives from other
kinds of words, such as -ful (wonderful), -ious or -ous (envious, mountainous),
-ic (tragic), -al (tropical), -ish (selfish), -ible and -able (sensible, considerable),
-ive (primitive), -ent and -ant (different, significant), -y (sleepy), and so on. On
the other hand there are many members of other word-classes that are simply
used as adjectives with no change made to them. For example,
{{ participles: a passing car, falling rain, the broken ladder;
1.3.5 Adverbs
•• Semantics:
Adverbs add various kinds of information to phrases and sentences. One
of their most typical jobs is to describe how an action takes place. In this
respect they are like adjectives, i.e. they are ‘describing words’. An important
difference, however, is that they do not refer to nouns, but to verbs. Compare
the following:
Thinker is a noun and needs an adjective to describe it. Thinks is a verb and
can only be described by an adverb. Note the difference in form. Making
the adjective into an adverb requires the addition of an -ly-ending (more
on this point under Morphology below). The business of adverbs is broader
than just describing how something happens, however. They can also tell
22 Basic elements of grammatical structure
us when (tomorrow, yesterday), where (here, there), how often (sometimes,
always, once, twice), and to what extent (highly, deeply, much). These core
meanings are generally referred to as manner (how), place (where), time
(when, how often) and degree (to what extent). The question words used to
ask about them (how?, when?, where?, how much?, etc.) are known together
as interrogative adverbs.
In all of these cases the adverb relates to the verb. Technically, we call
this modifying the verb. Adverbs can also modify other parts of a sentence.
As we saw in 1.3.4, adverbs of degree (very, slightly, completely, etc.) modify
gradable adjectives. Adverbs of focus direct our attention to particular
phrases (only, also), emphasise them in some way (particularly) or restrict
point of view (socially, politically, etc.). They may also apply to a whole
sentence: Psychologically, he´s a broken man; I only wanted to say ‘hello’;
Federico repaired the washing-machine too.
Connective adverbs like however, therefore, furthermore, etc., are impor-
tant semantic links between one sentence and another: So what did you do
next?; Anyway, we had a great time; Incidentally, how is Federico?
Comment adverbs (modal adverbs) show the speaker´s attitude to his
or her utterance, or indicate in some other way how it is intended to be
understood: Well, he obviously doesn´t love her; Unfortunately, we lost all
our money.
•• Morphology:
As already mentioned, adverbs can be derived from adjectives by the addi-
tion of the suffix -ly:
Most adverbs are like this. Nevertheless, there is a lot of ‘anarchy’. A large
number of them have no special adverb marking, chiefly because they are
not related to adjectives at all. Among these are many common adverbs,
such as perhaps, now, often, also, soon, etc. Others that do have an adjective
partner have the same form and add no suffix, e.g. fast, hard, deep, far, near,
late, high, low. Some of these also have -ly versions, but they are either not
related in meaning to the adjective, or reflect just a specialised adjectival
meaning: hardly, nearly, lately, deeply, highly. And there are a number of
further exceptions.
Like adjectives, adverbs can be gradable (very quickly, rather dangerously), and
then usually participate in comparison:
come immediately before them, e.g. very nice, right after lunch, about a
boy, even you.
{{ Apart from this, the most general position, especially with adverbs of
manner, time and place, is final, i.e. at the end of the sentence or clause,
following any phrases that are part of the verb´s necessary complementation:
She spoke to the horse softly.
I saw Mike yesterday.
General exceptions to this are as follows:
{{ Certain adverb types, especially those of frequency (often, sometimes,
always, etc.) are attracted to a medial position, i.e. between subject and
verb, or after the first auxiliary:
I have never been to Scotland.
McCaverty occasionally drank at Bewlin´s Bar.
This also applies to common adverbs of focus that restrict, add or emphasise:
Jane had only/already/also been working at the hospital for six months.
I especially enjoyed the picnic on the beach.
{{ Most adverbs that give speaker comments, focus on viewpoint or connect
with previous sentences favour initial position, i.e. the beginning of the
sentence:
Basically, the company is no longer profitable. Moreover, it has been like this for
at least the last six months. Frankly, I don´t see that it can survive much longer.
•• quantifiers:
There weren´t many
people at the concert.
•• numerals: Two men came into the room.
•• possessive pronouns: I like your new jacket.
•• demonstrative pronouns:
Where did you get this
watch, Mr Breene?
•• the interrogative pronouns which and whose:
Which/Whose bicycle did
you take this afternoon, Paul?
•• the relative pronoun whose:
Mary is the woman
whose husband works for
Cruikshank Chemicals.
24 Basic elements of grammatical structure
A modern term in linguistics that is used to cover all these is determiner. But
there is an objection to this: as we will see later in Chapter 4 (4.1.1.1), the expres-
sion determiner really refers to a phrase function and not a word-class. However,
we will nevertheless use the term here (exceptionally) to cover both function and
word-class. It is important to have an expression that brings all these sub-groups
together in one overall word-class, for as we will see immediately, they have a
common basic meaning as ‘identifiers’. It is also necessary to replace the tradi-
tional term ‘pronoun’ in the last four categories above by a more appropriate one.
Although the ‘pronoun’ label has a certain semantic justification, syntactically
these are ‘article words’ and not ‘pronouns’, as was already indicated under 1.3.2
above in the case of possessives and demonstratives. We will refer here, then, to
possessive determiners, demonstrative determiners, interrogative determiners
and, in the case of whose, to the relative determiner.
•• Semantics:
Two forms of identification are involved with determiners: definite and
indefinite. These terms are derived from the traditional names for the two
kinds of article, the and a/an. But as terms they are a little misleading. There
is a tendency to think, e.g. that the ‘woman’ in the phrase a woman is auto-
matically a less specific one than the ‘woman’ referred to by the woman. But
this is not necessarily so. If I tell you, There is a woman outside, I mean a
specific one, not just ‘any woman’. If, on the other hand, I make a statement
like The modern woman is very different from the Victorian woman, I mean
‘any woman’ from each respective period, although I have used the definite
article. So what is the difference?
{{ The indefinite article identifies an entity by category. This is the central
meaning of a/an. For instance, if I say This is a table, I mean ‘an object
belonging to the category “table”’. If I say That´s not a cat; it´s a rabbit,
I mean ‘the category of the animal referred to is not “cat”, but “rabbit”’.
This is the way we identify and refer to an object, animal or person that
we mention for the first time.
However, we cannot use an indefinite article twice for the same entity. That
is, when something or someone has been introduced ‘by category’, subse-
quent reference to the same thing or person has to be definite:
(21) I was waiting for a bus one day in Beresford Square when an old woman
approached me and asked for money. The woman looked shabby and ill.
Then the bus came and unfortunately I had to get on it quickly without
giving her anything.
Bus and old woman are introduced by the indefinite article. But after that,
reference back to them requires the definite article (or some other form of
definite reference like a pronoun). The definite article here is therefore a
kind of anaphor pointing back to an entity already known to the hearer.
It may also point forwards, as a cataphor, to an identifying part following:
Basic elements of grammatical structure 25
(22) a. The man in the corner is smoking.
b. The couple we met on holiday have written to us.
The identifying information, on the other hand, may be entirely under-
stood through context, and not stated at all:
(23) a. I put the dirty plates in the dishwasher.
(= the plates we have just used for the meal; the dishwasher in our kitchen.)
b. I like the new jacket.
(= which you are now wearing, i.e. that one that you have on.)
•• Morphology:
The articles differ in form only according to pronunciation rules (i.e. phonology):
a before consonants, an before vowels; [δə] before consonants, [δi:] before vowels.
Demonstrative determiners have singular (this/that) and plural (these/those)
forms.
Possessive determiners, as seen above under Pronouns, have the same pro-
noun characteristics (person, number, gender) as the personal pronouns.
•• Syntax:
Determiners are parts of noun phrases. Some, such as the demonstratives,
numerals and most quantifiers, can be used also as independent pronouns
(see under Pronouns above), but then lose their determiner status.
Numerals, quantifiers and the indefinite article are affected by the number
and count status of the nouns they refer to, chiefly in the form of restric-
tions. The following are just a few illustrative examples (more details in
Chapter 4, 4.1):
{{ The indefinite article is restricted to count singular nouns, the zero
article to plurals and non-count singular nouns.
{{ Numerals can only precede count nouns; one is restricted to singular and
all other numerals to plural nouns.
{{ The quantifiers much, little and less can combine only with non-count
singulars, while many and few are restricted to count plurals.
{{ The quantifiers some and any precede non-count singulars and count
plurals, all and both only count plurals, each and every only count singulars.
26 Basic elements of grammatical structure
1.3.7 Prepositions
Prepositions are words like at, in, of, from, to, etc. They precede noun phrases
(e.g. to the cinema) and express a relationship between them and other parts of the
sentence. Or rather, as the ‘other parts’ come first, between those parts (e.g. Stella
went . . .) and the noun phrase following: Stella went to the cinema.
•• Semantics:
In their concrete meanings, most prepositions express a connection of space
or time, e.g. to/at/from the cinema (space), or at 8 pm, on Wednesday, in the
evening (time).
Abstract meanings include the following:
{{ ‘regarding’ or ‘concerning’: a story about a lion, a book on bee-keeping, a
quarrel over a damaged car, etc.
{{ ‘belonging’ and origin: the works of Dickens, a woman from Jamaica, a
problem with a client, his reasons for refusing, a painting by Turner, etc.
{{ abstract location/place: at high speed, in a bad mood, under pressure,
above suspicion, beyond belief, etc.
Abstract meanings like these underlie many collocations with nouns and
adjectives: attitude towards, love for, interest in, hatred of, dependence on, good/
bad at, aware of, angry/happy/disgusted with, keen on, nice to, fond of, etc.
Verbs in particular combine with prepositions to produce special meanings:
wait for, rely on, tire of, decide on, deal with, look for, enquire into. These are
known as prepositional verbs. The preposition in these cases mostly loses its
original meaning and is simply ‘absorbed’ into the meaning of the verb. For
example, decide on means choose, look for is ‘try to find’, and deal with means
to process in a certain way or subject to a certain procedure. Sometimes the
verb takes on a special meaning too: come across (find), look after (guard, take
care of), take to (start to like/do), wonder at (be surprised by), make for (move in
the direction of), etc.
All collocations of this kind, whether involving verbs, nouns or adjectives,
can be called composite lexical items. That is, they form one unit of vocabu-
lary, a semantic phrase that is idiomatic (= not literal in meaning). Often
verbs are involved together with nouns or adjectives, as well as prepositions:
take into consideration, take care of, pay attention to, keep an eye on, set one´s
sights on, lose one´s head over, get rid of.
•• Morphology:
Prepositions undergo no morphological changes at all. Because of this and
the fact that they are short, they are traditionally called particles. However,
they do have a morphological effect on following pronouns, requiring an
object form: for me, towards him/her, above us, from them.
Some prepositions form composite units with other items preceding them (com-
plex prepositions): in spite of, because of, up to, out of, etc. Syntactically, these
all count as ‘one preposition’, just as if they were composed of only one word.
Basic elements of grammatical structure 27
•• Syntax:
In simple sentences prepositions are always followed by nouns. In most cases
the preposition forms a syntactic unit with the noun phrase that follows it: at
the station, by car, from south-east Asia, with a large black dog. These are known
as prepositional phrases.
An exception to this is the prepositional verb. Here, as the name implies, the
preposition forms a syntactic unit with the verb: look after, wait for, decide on,
deal with. We still need a noun phrase after the preposition, e.g. look after the
children, wait for me, decide on a particular plan, deal with the day´s mail,
etc. But the noun phrase is regarded as separate from the preposition and, as
we will see later, is treated as an object of the prepositional verb (called a
prepositional object).
Finally, many prepositions can also become adverbs. This happens as soon as
the noun phrase is left out, e.g.:
(24) a. We waved to them on the other side of the street and they came across
(= across the street).
b. My young son had started to climb up a dangerous ladder in the garden.
I told him to come down immediately (= come down the ladder).
Across and down in these examples are no longer prepositions but adverb
particles. These also form a syntactic unit with their verbs, which are then
called phrasal verbs. It is important to distinguish carefully between phrasal
verbs, prepositional verbs and prepositional phrases (see Chapter 4, 4.2).
1.3.8 Conjunctions
These are words like because, when, although, since, if, etc., as in the following
examples:
•• Morphology:
Like prepositions, conjunctions do not change morphologically and tradi-
tionally also belong to the particles. Conjunctions that consist of more than
one word, like so that in the example above, are called complex conjunc-
tions. Other examples are: as soon as, as if, even if, even though, no matter how.
Certain constructions consist of two separate conjunctions working together
as a pair: You must either change your job or take a long vacation. These are
known as correlative conjunctions.
•• Syntax:
When two base sentences are joined together grammatically by a conjunc-
tion, they become clauses of the same sentence. We can therefore say that
the syntactic task of a conjunction is to link clauses in a sentence gram-
matically (as well as semantically, as we saw above). In this book we will
call the clause with the conjunction before it the conjunction clause, and
the other one the free clause. One of our main topics later will be the
explanation of the various syntactic relations between the free clause and
the conjunction clause. We do not need to talk about these yet, though.
Starting at the top of the hierarchy2 and going downwards level by level, we can
therefore say that sentences consist of clauses, clauses of phrases, phrases of words
and words of morphemes. Or, if we look at it ‘bottom up’, we can say that an
utterance is made up of morphemes (= the smallest unit of syntactic structure),
Basic elements of grammatical structure 29
which form words, which are grouped into phrases, which in turn combine into
clauses, from which a sentence is immediately composed. The introduction of the
clause-level between the phrase and the sentence may appear to conflict with the
impression possibly given earlier that the phrase is the immediate constituent of
the sentence. With sentences of the kind shown so far this is actually the case, at
least in effect, since here the terms clause and sentence refer to the same unit. The
sentence, in other words, is equal to the clause. With other types of sentence, as
we will see further below, this is not so.
Here we have three sentences. The last one, (28)c., has been formed by combin-
ing (28)a. and (28)b., using the word and to join them. In (28)c. the formerly
separate sentences in a. and b. have now become clauses of the same sentence.
We could of course take (28)c. as our starting-point and reverse the process.
In this case we would divide sentence (28)c. up by making each clause into a
separate sentence. Sentences become clauses when they are joined to form larger
sentences (they cannot then still be called ‘sentences’, because if they were, this
would violate our definition of a sentence as being the ‘largest unit of syntactic
structure’).
The clauses of a sentence need not be identical in structure with separate
sentences. Let us assume now that tea-maker Jane is ill and Benny does both jobs:
This will allow us to reverse the logic above and define sentence in terms of clause:
As already mentioned above (1.2), a phrase may consist of just one word, or of
more than one. If there are more than one, the unit will depend for its grammatical
32 Basic elements of grammatical structure
existence on one major member representing the particular word-class. This is
known as the head of the phrase. The head of a noun phrase must be a noun, that
of a verb phrase a main verb, that of an adjective phrase an adjective, and so on.
In (30) the heads of the two noun phrases are daughter and novels, respectively. As
the verb phrase consists of just one member (reads), this, obviously, is the head.
The second noun phrase actually consists of two nouns, crime and novels, but
only novels is the head, as this is the element we cannot leave out, i.e. the mem-
ber on which the unit crime novels depends. Grammatically speaking, phrases
are of flexible length and can be expanded or reduced, but the head always has
to be present. Conversely, it is the head around which expansion takes place,
i.e. around which the further elements of the phrase are grouped. Taking the
example in (29)c., we could expand the phrases in it as follows:
Notice also that if a phrase is shifted in the sentence, e.g. due to the passive
operation, it must move as a whole:
(32) (Our breakfast) (had been cooked) (by (my brother Benny)).
We cannot split phrases up and place their parts in other sentence positions. (33)
is ungrammatical and, for that reason of course, nonsense:
Exercises
Exercise 1
Bracket the phrases in the following that are constituents at sentence-level
(see 1.2).
Exercise 3
Show how semantics, morphology and syntax all contribute to the meaning of
these sentences:
And how is each of these language fields responsible for the differences in mean-
ing between the a. and b. sentences in the following?:
Notes
1 An asterisk (*) signifies an incorrect item of language.
2 Structures above the level of the sentence are referred to as text and discourse.
2 The simple sentence and its
grammatical functions
we have three phrases: my daughter and crime novels are both noun phrases and
reads is a verb phrase. The structure of the sentence, that is, is as follows:
(2) noun phrase (my daughter) + verb phrase (reads) + noun phrase (crime novels).
However, this does not tell us much about how the phrases are related to each
other in terms of meaning and grammar. One noun phrase comes before the verb
and the second follows it. But what does that say about their relationship to each
other and to the verb? This is where the idea of grammatical function comes in.
The first noun phrase, my daughter, functions as the subject of the sentence and
the second, crime novels, as the object (more specifically, as the direct object). The
verb phrase functions as the predicator: that is to say, it joins the two noun phrases
to form the sentence, and determines their parts in the meaning of the message:
subject predicator direct object
(3) My daughter reads crime novels.
For a basic description of the sentence, then, we need both levels of analysis,
i.e. structure and function. And for our sentence in (1), this can be expressed
as follows:
There are seven different sentence functions, which we will now look at in detail
(2.1.1–2.1.7). Our object of analysis in this chapter is confined to the simple sen-
tence (i.e. containing only one predicator) in its declarative form (i.e. expressing
a statement), with its verb in the affirmative (i.e. not negative) and in the active
voice (i.e. not passive).
{{ contains a verb (always the first, if there is more than one) which
P
(5) The children have been eating strawberries.
Mike is a student.
Maxine did not like Robert.
•• Semantics:
Also in terms of meaning it is the predicator which pulls the other members
of the sentence into a coherent message. Without a predicator there would
be no message. The predicator is the core of the statement.
S
(6) The children have been eating strawberries.
Mike is a student.
Maxine did not like Robert.
S
(7) They have been eating strawberries.
He is a student.
She did not like Robert.
These pronouns change forms in other functions, i.e. take on a different case
(see also below).
•• Semantics:
When the verb refers to an action, the subject is always the person or thing
performing the action, in other words the ‘actor’ or ‘doer’ (the agent, to use a
technical term, cf. SAGE, pp. 20, 422, 423ff.). If the verb refers to a state or
feeling, the subject is usually the person or thing that experiences it. In (6),
e.g., the children perform an action (eat), whereas Mike and Maxine experi-
ence particular states: a state of being, in the case of Mike, and an emotion
in the case of Maxine. (Note, again, that in this chapter we are referring only
to active sentences.)
The simple sentence: grammatical functions 37
2.1.3 Direct object (Od)
•• Syntax/morphology:
The direct object
{{ is always a noun phrase;
{{ but only when the predicator function is filled by certain kinds of verbs.
Od
(8) The children have been eating strawberries.
Maxine did not like Robert.
Od
(9) The children have been eating them.
Maxine did not like him.
•• Semantics:
The direct object is always the person or thing that ‘suffers’ from, or is the
target of, an action or feeling (known technically as the patient, cf. SAGE,
loc. cit.). This already shows us why a student in Mike is a student cannot be
a direct object. On the level of meaning, the verb be does not create a target
relation between the two noun phrases. It gives no sense of the first one
‘aiming’ any kind of affecting experience at the second. Verbs that do not
have direct objects following them, like be, are called intransitive.
{{ only occurs, again, when particular verbs fill the predicator function.
38 The simple sentence: grammatical functions
Oi Od
(10) The children gave their mother some strawberries.
Maxine sent Robert a letter.
Joe bought his sons new cars.
Oi Od
(11) The children gave her some strawberries.
Maxine sent him a letter.
Joe bought them new cars.
Od A
(12) The children gave some strawberries to their mother.
Maxine sent a letter to Robert.
Joe bought new cars for his sons.
Here there are two things to note. Firstly, there is no indirect object in this
case. That is, the verb is now monotransitive and the noun phrase that was
the indirect object in (10) now becomes part of a prepositional phrase, which
functions as an adverbial (A): more explanation of the adverbial function
follows below. Secondly, the prepositional phrase follows the direct object,
in contrast to the ditransitive version, where the indirect object precedes the
direct object. A final point and a word of warning on correct usage: not all
prepositional phrases like those in (12) can be expressed as indirect objects.
One must know which verbs can be ditransitive and which cannot. Several
verbs with similar meanings to those of ditransitive verbs can in fact only
be monotransitive, e.g. tell is ditransitive, but say and explain are both only
monotransitive; show is ditransitive, but demonstrate is only monotransitive.
So although all indirect objects can be paraphrased by the prepositional
phrase version, the reverse is not true. It just depends on the individual verb.
The point is mentioned again immediately below, under Semantics.
•• Semantics:
The indirect object is the receiver (or recipient) of the direct object. This
is clear from (10): the mother gets the strawberries, Robert receives a letter
and Joe´s sons get new cars. The prepositional phrase variants underline this
receiver meaning especially clearly.
The simple sentence: grammatical functions 39
However, we must emphasise the last point mentioned under Syntax/
morphology. Not all prepositional phrases with receiver meanings can be
converted into noun phrases as indirect objects. It depends on the particular
verb. As already mentioned, the verb show, for example, can be ditransitive,
but not the verb explain. So in (13)a. both variants are permissible, but not
in (13)b.
{{ occurs only after the verbs be, seem, become, feel, and any of similar
S Cs
(14) Mike is a student.
Mother seems worried.
Joe got angry.
But with intransitive verbs like those in (14) this is not so. Sentences con-
sisting just of *Mike is or *Joe got are ungrammatical. And they do not of
course make sense. The sense has to be completed by an adjective or noun,
as shown immediately below, under Semantics.
40 The simple sentence: grammatical functions
•• Semantics:
The subject complement describes a characteristic of the subject. If left out,
of course, the most important part of the message would be missing.
Od Co
(16) Bad food made the guests sick.
The pupils elected Robin class-monitor.
Jenny considers Alan stupid.
•• Semantics:
Just as a subject complement refers to a characteristic of the subject, so
the object complement describes a characteristic of the direct object. The
relation to the verb, however, is slightly different in the case of the object
complement. Generally speaking, the verb confers (or imposes) the charac-
teristic on the direct object. This might be a concrete case of cause and effect,
as in the first two sentences in (16); or a more abstract sense of imposition
by thought or feeling, as in the last example. Complex-transitive verbs are
a relatively small group. Among them are verbs of judgement and thought,
like think, find, consider, imagine, prove, judge, confirm, rank, etc.; and verbs
expressing declarations, such as call, name, declare and pronounce:
Od Co
(17) The parents called the baby Wanda.
The chairman declared the meeting open.
A doctor pronounced the patient dead.
A
(18) They completed the job last week.
People were waiting at the bus stop.
Morton crossed the road quickly.
A
(19) I often eat fish.
A
We should always be optimistic.
A
Stella had only washed three of the shirts.
The initial position (at the beginning of the sentence) is common with
adverbials that comment on the sentence, or connect it to a preceding
statement. It is also used with other types to emphasise them:
A
(20) In the town square a large crowd had gathered.
Frankly, I don´t think that the plan will succeed.
In that case, we ought to call the police.
Note that although the terms adverb and adverbial are connected, they
must be carefully distinguished as concepts. An adverb is a word-class.
An adverbial is a sentence function, like subject and predicator. So, for
instance, we say that the word frankly in the second sentence is an adverb
filling the function of an adverbial in that sentence. Adverbs, as we will
see later, do not always function as adverbials. And adverbials are certainly
not always adverbs, as our examples show. In (18), e.g., last week is a noun
phrase and at the bus stop a prepositional phrase. In (20) in the town square
42 The simple sentence: grammatical functions
and in that case are also prepositional phrases. Sentence functions and word-
classes are not the same thing, even though they occur together when we
are talking about sentences.
Another point concerns the question of when adverbials are optional
and when they are obligatory. Syntactically speaking, most adverbials are
optional, i.e. they are not required grammatically. Some, however, are
needed to complete the sense and grammar of the sentence, particularly with
verbs that express movement from one place to another:
A
(21) This train goes to London Bridge.
My grandfather came from Scotland.
Mrs Bleckford put the letter on the table.
Oi Od Od A
(22) We gave our son some money We gave some money to our son.
A A A
(23) This train only goes to London Bridge on Sundays.
Maureen just put the letter on the table slowly.
In the case of final position, the compulsory adverbial comes first, and any
others follow. Other factors affecting the order of adverbials are mentioned
briefly in the Semantics section immediately below.
•• Semantics:
It is customary to classify adverbials according to the same meanings as those
of adverbs. Typical concrete meanings are time, place and manner, answering
the questions When?, Where? and How? (see also SAGE, p. 23). This is the
order of the adverbials in the three example sentences in (18). Other common
categories include adverbials of frequency such as always and often, adverbials
of circumstance (in that case), focus adverbials like only, especially and particu-
larly, and adverbials of comment and connection, such as anyway, however, and
so. Further meanings will be mentioned later in the course of the book.
As we have seen at certain points in this and the last chapter, the mean-
ings of adverbs and adverbials has some influence on their position in the
sentence. Two or more adverbials in final position are usually found in the
order manner, place, time:
A A A
(24) He washed his hands quickly in the kitchen sink before the meal.
The simple sentence: grammatical functions 43
There are no strict grammatical rules on this, though, and the order may
vary according to style and speaker emphasis. A full guide to usage is given
in SAGE, pp. 196–208.
2.2.1 Transitivity
Transitive verbs are subdivided into the following types:
Od
(25) Fred was eating a hamburger.
Oi Od
(26) Dick bought his girlfriend a present.
Od Co
(27) We found the wine too sweet.
•• without complementation:
•• with complementation:
Cs
(29) Karen is Dick´s wife.
Jill felt happy.
A
The children had been in the garden.
Again, we can see here that the same verb may have various possibilities of com-
plementation. Eat, as already said, can be transitive or intransitive. (29) shows
that be can take a subject complement or an adverbial. This is not the case with
feel, which occurs only in the form seen here, i.e. solely with a subject comple-
ment. Furthermore, be and feel are examples of intransitive verbs which, unlike
eat in (28), always need complementation.
S P
(30) a. The letter has arrived. [S + P]
S P Cs
b. Janine became a teacher. [S + P + Cs]
S P A
c. This train goes to Leicester. [S + P + A]
S P Od
d. The painters are decorating the kitchen. [S + P + Od]
S P Oi Od
e. Our son sent us a postcard. [S + P + Oi + Od]
The simple sentence: grammatical functions 45
S P Od A
f. Craig put his hands in his pocket. [S + P + Od + A]
S P Od Co
g. His success has made us very happy. [S + P + Od + Co]
These patterns represent the minimum type that is permissible with each verb.
But one should bear in mind what was said in the previous section. A verb may
have several complementation possibilities. For example, the minimum pattern
with sing is the absolute minimum shown in (30)a. But further optional pat-
terns are those in (30)c., d., e. and f., as illustrated in (31)a.–e.:
S P
[S + P]
(31) a. Rita is singing.
S P A
b. Rita sings in the shower. [S + P + A]
S P Od
c. Rita sings Elizabethan love songs. [S + P + Od]
S P Oi Od
d. Rita sang her children Elizabethan love songs. [S + P + Oi + Od]
S P Od A
e. Rita sang Elizabethan love songs every evening. [S + P + Od + A]
And of course we could add an adverbial to (31)d. as well (Rita sang her children
Elizabethan love songs every evening).
It is the answer to the second question that concerns us first. We need first of all
to identify the major phrases in a sentence, those, that is, that are constituents at
sentence level. In (33) we have used brackets to do this. Each phrase is numbered
for reference and described briefly in the comments further below:
46 The simple sentence: grammatical functions
(33) a. 1 (They) 2(sent) 3(some money) 4(to the woman in Brighton).
b. 1 (The hot soup) 2(was getting) 3(cold) 4(in the draught from the open
window).
c. 1 (A light plane) 2(suddenly) 3(appeared) 4(between the mountains).
d. 1(Bad service in restaurants) 2(nearly always) 3(made) 4(Brian) 5(very
angry).
e. 1
(After the hectic years in London) 2(we) 3(bought) 4(ourselves) 5(a
small cottage in the country).
Note again that it is not our task yet to identify all the phrases in each sentence,
but just those that are the major constituents. It is only these that are relevant
for the sentence functions. Type of phrase, position and meaning are the further
points of orientation. For (33)a. this gives us:
(34) 1
(They) = noun phrase functioning as subject (S)
2
(sent) = verb phrase functioning as predicator (P)
3
(some money) = noun phrase functioning as direct object (Od)
4
(to the woman in Brighton) = prepositional phrase functioning as
adverbial (A).
S P Od A
(35) They sent some money to the woman in Brighton.
S P Oi Od
(36) They sent the woman in Brighton some money.
(37) 1
(The hot soup) = noun phrase functioning as subject (S)
2
(was getting) = verb phrase functioning as predicator (P)
3
(cold) = adjective phrase functioning as subject complement (Cs)
4
(in the draught from the open window) = prepositional phrase functioning as
adverbial (A).
Functional overview:
S P Cs A
The hot soup was getting cold in the draught from the window.
(38) 1
(A light plane) = noun phrase functioning as subject (S)
2
(suddenly) = adverb phrase functioning as adverbial (A)
3
(appeared) = verb phrase functioning as predicator (P)
4
(between the mountains) = prepositional phrase functioning as adverbial (A).
Functional overview:
S A P A
A light plane suddenly appeared between the mountains.
(39) 1
(Bad service in restaurants) = noun phrase functioning as subject (S)
2
(nearly always) = adverb phrase functioning as adverbial (A)
3
(made) = verb phrase functioning as predicator (P)
4
(Brian) = noun phrase functioning as direct object (Od)
5
(very angry) = adjective phrase functioning as object complement (Co)
Functional overview:
S A P Od Co
Bad service in restaurants nearly always made Brian very angry.
(40) 1
(After the hectic years in London) = prepositional phrase functioning as
adverbial (A)
2
(we) = noun phrase functioning as subject (S)
3
(bought) = verb phrase functioning as predicator (P)
4
(ourselves) = noun phrase functioning as indirect object (Oi)
5
(a small cottage in the country) = noun phrase functioning as direct object (Od)
48 The simple sentence: grammatical functions
Functional overview:
A S P Oi Od
After the hectic years in London we bought ourselves a small cottage in the country.
Exercises
Exercise 1
Decide whether the underlined parts in the following sentences are the direct
object (Od), the indirect object (Oi), the subject complement (Cs), or the object
complement (Co).
Exercise 2
Underline the adverbials (A) in the following and identify the kinds of phrases
involved.
Exercise 3
Show all the sentence functions in the following, using the appropriate letter
symbols (S, P, Od, Oi, Cs, Co, A):
S P Cs P S Cs
(1) Mr Creasey is a maths teacher. Is Mr Creasey a maths teacher?
S P Cs Cs P S
(2) Mr Creasey is our maths teacher. Who is Mr Creasey?
3.1.1 Yes-no-questions
Simple inversion, as seen in (1) is only part of the story. This sentence, in fact, is
an absolute exception. The reason for this is that as a general rule only auxiliary
verbs are allowed to participate in subject–predicator inversion:
S P Od P S P Od
(4) Denise is reading the newspaper. Is Denise reading the newspaper?
In other words, we cannot say *Is reading Denise the newspaper? The main verb
reading has to stay in third position (its declarative position, in fact); only the
auxiliary is participates in the inversion with the subject. So we have a split
predicator, and we mark both parts of it as P.
If the declarative sentence does not contain an auxiliary, we have to intro-
duce an artificial one in the form of do, before inversion can take place (known
as do-support):
S P Od P S P Od
(5) Mr Creasey teaches maths. Does Mr Creasey teach maths?
Questions are subject, then, to what we will call the auxiliary-inversion rule.
However, as example (3) shows us, this rule does not apply, exceptionally, to the
verb be. This is allowed to behave like an auxiliary, even when it is not one, as here.
The questions discussed so far are what we call yes-no-questions (meaning that
they can be answered with yes or no). A second major category is that of the wh-
questions, discussed in the next section.
S P Od
(6) a. Mr Creasey teaches maths.
Od P S P
What does Mr Creasey teach?
S P Od A
b. Denise is seeing her boyfriend this evening.
Od P S P A
Who is Denise seeing this evening?
S P Od A
c. Denise is seeing her boyfriend this evening.
A P S P Od
When is Denise seeing her boyfriend?
A point to note by the way is that the interrogative pronoun who has an object-case
form whom. This is not used much today, except in very formal style. (6)b. could
therefore be expressed as Whom is Denise seeing this evening? In ordinary language,
especially in speech, this version would not be very likely. There is one case, how-
ever, where the whom-form is compulsory. We deal with this a little later below.
Notice that in wh-questions subject–predicator inversion (with do-support, if
necessary, as in (6)a.) is the same as in yes-no-questions. There is one exception,
however: when the wh-word refers to the subject of the sentence, no inversion
takes place, i.e. the declarative word order is kept, and there is no do-support:
S P Od
(7) a. Mr Creasey teaches maths.
S P Od
Who teaches maths?
S P Od
b. Heavy rain caused the flooding.
S P Od
What caused the flooding?
S P Od A
(9) Sharon gave the book to Tracy.
A P S P Od
To whom did Sharon give the book?
A P S P Od A
(10) Who did Sharon give the book to?
S P Cs
(11) a. Bobby is getting fat.
Cs P S P
What is Bobby getting?
54 The simple sentence: structural variations
S P Cs
b. Paula seems angry.
Cs P S P
What does Paula seem?
S P Cs
(12) Paula is our new chairperson.
Cs P S
Who is Paula?
Because there is no do-support here, we may think at first glance that who is the
subject and Paula the subject complement. But that would be wrong. The func-
tions in the question must match the functions in the declarative sentence. So
if we think of the declarative sentence as the answer to the question, then it
is clear that the subject complement our new chairperson provides the missing
information that the questioner asks about by using who. Who must therefore be
the subject complement of the question. Or, to use another argument, as Paula
is obviously the subject of the answer (initial position!), Paula must also be the
subject of the question, leaving only the subject complement slot for who. (The
different positions of Paula in question and answer show also, incidentally, that
inversion occurs in the question.)
Let us compare this with a completely different answer to the same question.
A teacher asks a group of pupils Who is Paula? and one of them replies I am Paula.
In this case the missing information is the subject:
S P Cs
(13) I am Paula.
S P Cs
Who is Paula?
Notice this time that Paula is in the same position in both. That is, no inversion
takes place in this question because who refers here to the subject.
Voice is usually considered to be something that affects, first and foremost, the
morphology of the verb. Focusing on this point for a moment first of all, we should
note that the passive voice of a verb is formed by combining its past participle
with the auxiliary be, as in (14)b. The following is also important to remember:
•• passive verbs refer to actions, and must therefore be in the progressive form
when necessary:
(15) The house was being renovated when the fire broke out.
Departing hotel guests are now being transferred to the airport.
•• only be + past participle counts as a passive. Other verbs that can be fol-
lowed by past participles, such as get and become, are not passive formations.
In this case the past participle occurs as an adjective in the function of subject
complement. Verbs like get and become are main verbs, not auxiliaries:
S P Cs
(17) The food was cooked.
In this analysis cooked is an adjective referring to a state, like married in (16). The
meaning is that the food was in a ‘cooked state’, i.e. it was not uncooked or raw.
But in isolation the sentence is ambiguous. It may alternatively refer to an action,
i.e. to something that happened. In this case was cooked must be regarded as
passive, and the functional analysis would be:
S P-pass
(18) The food was cooked.
S P Od A
(19) Melissa cooks the food here. [active]
S P-pass A A
The food is cooked by Melissa here. [passive]
All this shows us the main syntactic and semantic purposes behind the concept
of voice. The passive operation (passivisation) allows us, for one thing, to change
the word order of the active sentence. In doing this we shift the emphasis. By
bringing the patient to the beginning of the sentence as the passive subject, we
change the focus from the agent to the patient. The active sentence in (19),
e.g., is about ‘what Melissa does’, whereas the passive sentence is concerned more
with ‘what happens to the food’. When we want to stress the patient´s experience
in this way, we use the passive. The agent in fact may be completely unimportant
or unknown, and therefore remain unmentioned:
S P Oi Od
(21) Maxine sent Robert a letter. [active]
S P-pass A A
A letter was sent to Robert by Maxine. [passive]
The simple sentence: structural variations 57
Notice that in this case the indirect object has to be dropped, and expressed
by the prepositional phrase variant. This conversion is necessary because of
the basic rule that an indirect object can only occur together with a direct
object following it (see under 2.1.4 and 2.3.2). In the passive sentence the
direct object disappears (having become the subject). So we have to get rid of
the indirect object too.
The second form of ditransitive passivisation (and probably the most
common) converts the active indirect object into the passive subject, and
keeps the direct object:
S P Oi Od
(22) Maxine sent Robert a letter. [active]
S P-pass Od A
Robert was sent a letter by Maxine. [passive]
S P Od Co
(23) Jill called Jenny an idiot. [active]
S P-pass Cs A
Jenny was called an idiot by Jill. [passive]
3.3 Negation
So far all our sentence examples have been affirmative (sometimes referred
to as positive). That is, they have not been negated. When we negate an
affirmative sentence, we turn it semantically into its opposite: we say that
something is not the case. This is done by adding not, the negative particle
(technically an adverb), to the verb phrase, as is explained in detail in the
following sections.
S P A A
(25) a. Mike is coming to the dance tonight.
S P A A
Mike is not coming to the dance tonight.
S P Od A
b. She should have been doing her homework at that time.
S P Od A
She should not have been doing her homework at that time.
As the examples show, the negative particle just counts as part of the verb phrase,
i.e. functionally it is part of the predicator.
If there is no auxiliary in the affirmative sentence, do-support is necessary, as
with questions:
S P A A
(26) a. Mike came to the dance yesterday.
S P A A
Mike did not come to the dance yesterday.
S P Od
b. Mrs Conway designs clothes.
S P Od
Mrs Conway does not design clothes.
In speech, unless stressed, the negative particle becomes a weak form, added as
an ending to the auxiliary (an enclitic, as it is technically called), and informally
written as n’t:
The weak-form version reinforces the idea that not is a part of the predicator.
S P-pass A
(30) a. Not a soul could be seen in the street.
S P Od A
b. He rejected the criticism, but not angrily.
S P A
c. Not everyone can run fast.
S P Cs Cs
d. The summer was wet, and not warm.
In (30)a. and c. it is the subject noun phrase that is negated, and not is regarded
as part of it, i.e. is integrated into the subject function. In (30)b. and d.
the negated phrases are added using conjunctions (though, but). In b. this is an
adverb phrase functioning as an adverbial, and in d. an adjective phrase func-
tioning as a subject complement. (As we will see later, these additions to the
sentences are really clauses). There are two points to note here. Firstly, phrase-
focused negation occurs most commonly with subject noun phrases, as in (30)a.
and c. It is unusual in the verb complementation, unless there are additions to
already existing previous verb complementation, as in (30)b. and d. Otherwise
it is nearly always the verb that is grammatically negated, even if the negation
refers to parts of its complementation. This can sometimes lead to ambiguity.
Out of context, for instance, (31)a. may mean any one of b., c., d., or e.:
60 The simple sentence: structural variations
(31) a. Sam didn´t play darts on Tuesday night in the pub.
b. Sam didn´t play.
c. Sam didn´t play darts, but billiards.
d. Sam played darts in the pub, but not on Tuesday night.
e. Sam played darts on Tuesday night, but not in the pub.
(examples from SAGE, p. 289)
(31)b.–e., then, are four different interpretations of what the negated verb in a.
might mean. This shows that the semantic negation focus in (31)a. is ambiguous.
In b., as we might expect, it is on the verb (play); but in c. the intended negation
refers to the direct object (darts), in d. to the first adverbial (on Tuesday night), and
in e. to the second adverbial (in the pub). The moral of the story is that in all of
these cases negation has to be attached syntactically to the verb, even though the
semantic negation focus might be on various elements of the complementation.
To return to the general point being made, then, negation from a syntactic point
of view is generally a matter for the verb phrase, i.e. it is part of the predicator.
P Od
(32) a. Have another drink.
b. Turn left.
c. Be quiet and eat your crisps!
d. Keep calm and carry on!
The missing subject, in fact, is the most prominent feature of syntax with impera-
tives. Apart from this, functional labelling (as indicated in the first example)
and word order are the same as in any declarative sentence. In informal language
The simple sentence: structural variations 61
the subject is sometimes even included, usually together with a name, when the
speaker wishes to emphasise who is being spoken to:
Apart from the use of the name (known as vocative emphasis), there is no syn-
tactic distinction in this case between imperative and declarative sentences. A
different kind of emphasis (focusing on the verb) is created with do-support:
P Od
(34) a. Do have another drink.
b. Do be quiet and eat your crisps, Maurice!
The different meanings are also based on differences in syntax. In the b.-mean-
ing, (38)a. has the main verb let as its predicator and us as its direct object. (It
is not necessary to comment on the rest of the syntax in the sentence at this
point.) In the c.-meaning there is no direct object, let us go is simply one verb
phrase (and therefore one predicator). That is, it is one unit: a verb phrase in the
imperative form. Notice in this case that us is invariant, i.e. we could not replace
it by any other object. In the b.-meaning, of course, this is not so: here we could
equally say Let me go. . ., Let John go. . ., and so on. The invariance of us in the
imperative form shows that its identity as a separate pronoun is restricted simply
to the morphological task of signalling the first person plural character of the
imperative. But it has lost its status as a separate object and has simply become a
person-marker for the verb. This point is underlined by the fact that in the imper-
ative version we can reduce it to a weak form, let´s, a total exception (as pronouns
are otherwise never weakened), and impossible in the case of the b.-meaning.
The moral of the story, then, is that first person plural imperatives, despite their
different (derived) form, have the same syntactic status as second person impera-
tives: as one verb phrase they function also as one predicator:
P Od
(39) Let us have/Let´s have a drink.
Exercises
Exercise 1
Form yes-no questions from the sentences with no underlining. Otherwise, form
wh-questions relating to the underlined parts of the sentences. Mark all syntactic
functions in each question.
Exercise 2
Put the following sentences into the passive and then analyse them functionally.
If alternative passive versions are possible, please give them also and mark both
versions functionally.
1 The people of this country have elected O´Brien the new president.
2 Eleanor is going to give the stranger in the pub three packages.
3 A teacher was explaining the movements of the planets to some pupils in
class 4b.
4 Kevin´s son showed me the new family car.
5 Neighbours were looking after the children while the couple were at the
theatre.
6 Roberts waits on the guests and his wife does the cooking.
7 An unknown person has sent the mayor threatening letters.
8 Many customers consider the service at this garage to be inferior.
9 Tom´s colleagues had bought him an expensive wedding present.
10 When we arrived there several other prospective buyers were already looking
at the house.
Exercise 3
Using weak forms of not, negate the following sentences and then analyse them
functionally.
4.0 Phrases
As we saw in the last chapter, the phrase is the most basic unit in sentence analysis.
It is a structural unit based on word-class, and is the smallest unit that can fill a
sentence function. In this chapter we take a close look at what phrases consist of,
i.e. what we will call here in a general sense their composition. Like sentences,
phrases can be analysed internally in terms of both structures and functions. In
other words, the composition of a phrase consists of phrase functions and the struc-
tures that fill them. That is, like sentences, phrases can be analysed on the one
hand structurally, and on the other hand functionally:
Structures Functions
What this means concretely we will see in the following. In this first chapter on
the phrase, we will be looking at noun phrases, prepositional phrases, adjective
phrases, and adverb phrases.
The minimum that we need in order to form a noun phrase is a single noun, as in
(2)a. The rest is just a selection, of course. The prepositional phrase could follow
the noun on its own (trees in our garden), for example, or the adjective could be
used without the article (big trees). We´re simply looking here at the main pos-
sibilities for combining structural elements within a noun phrase. As can be seen
in (2)c. and (2)d., other types of phrase unit can also be included, here an adjec-
tive phrase and a prepositional phrase. One phrase inside another one is a general
phenomenon in syntax. The prepositional phrase itself here (in our garden), for
instance, also contains a further noun phrase (our garden). In fact, as we will see a
little later, this is the case with all prepositional phrases. Unlike a noun, a prepo-
sition cannot form its own phrase alone.
Now let us consider the phrase functions. The central function on which
every other function depends is the head of the phrase, which must be a
noun (trees). Without this, of course, there would be no phrase. The other
elements are optional. These consist of two large functional groups: the
one that comes before the head (the premodification) and the one following
(the postmodification):
This is only the first step, however. The premodification has an additional lower
functional level, which we should also add in our analysis. Articles function as
determiners and adjectives as what we call the modification:
4.1.1 Premodification
The functional concept of determiner comprises several different word-classes.
These, to re-cap, are:
To the possessive determiners we will now add the s-genitive (‘s, s’) such as
George’s, the Smiths’ or my uncle’s (for more on s-genitives see SAGE, p. 78,
LGSWE, pp. 292ff.).
The common semantic relation of determiners to the noun, as we said in 1.3.6,
is that of identification. They identify the noun following by locating it in certain
fields of reference. This is either indefinite (type, category or genre) or definite
(a known context or a relation to entities mentioned elsewhere in the commu-
nication or participating in it). A detailed discussion of individual meanings and
usage would go beyond the scope of a book like this one on syntax. For a full
guide, see SAGE, pp. 73–140 or LGWSE, pp. 270–2. Nevertheless we come back
to one or two syntactically important things about determiners further below.
The chief concern at this point is to establish the essential nature of a determiner
and distinguish it from the other main sub-category of premodification, i.e. that
of the modification. Semantically the modification comprises elements that char-
acterise the noun in a descriptive sense. Whereas the determiner relates to the
question which? (i.e. which or what entity is being referred to), the modification
tells us what kind of X is being referred to (i.e. characterises the entity more closely
and individually). First and foremost it is adjectives that fill this functional slot.
One or two other structural elements in this role are dealt with further below.
Determiner Modification
b. Premodification Head
Determiner Modification
Another point is that certain quantifiers (all, half and both) can precede the
determiner:
all the cars; half the cake; both my friends. In this case they function as what
we call predeterminers:
Predeterminer Determiner
Predeterminer Determiner
(9) a pint of milk; two pounds of beef; a drop of blood; a slice of bread; a bar of
chocolate
Similarly, nouns denoting containers of various kinds can also be seen as essen-
tially partitive in nature:
Such examples do pose a syntactic question, however. The first noun in each
case refers to an individual object and not just to a measure of something. This
also goes for drop, slice and bar in (9). Of the two nouns in each phrase, which one
Phrases and their structure (I) 69
is actually the head? In our partitive solution, of course, it is the second noun,
i.e. bread, chocolate, tea, water, etc. The first, as we have seen, is part of the
premodification. But we may also be justified in declaring the first noun as
the head. In this case the preposition of would form a unit with the second
noun and this unit would then function as a postmodification (see under 4.1.2
below). Both types of analysis are possible. The choice of one or the other is
basically a semantic issue depending on the particular context of use. If a guest
asks for a bottle of wine in a restaurant, it is obviously the noun wine that is
semantically profiled and therefore syntactically the head of the phrase. But
to a still-life artist painting a bottle of wine, for instance, the order of prior-
ity would probably be reversed, suggesting syntactically the postmodification
analysis. (Though of course neither artist nor guest is likely to care much about
syntax in these situations!)
This is another pointer to the fact that syntax and semantics are often inextri-
cably bound to one another.
Predeterminer Determiner
Determiner Modification
Determiner Modification
Finally, non-finite verb forms are also used as modifiers in the noun phrase:
The principles are semantic and have to do with certain categories of meaning.
Generally speaking, the modifiers referring to the qualities most intrinsic or
essential to the identity of the entity come closest to the head. There is there-
fore a kind of progression in meaning from ‘general’ to ‘particular’ in a left-right
direction.
72 Phrases and their structure (I)
Although there is some scope for variation, the following order is usually kept:
General More Size Age Shape Colour Origin Material Purpose/ Head
quality/ specific type
assessment quality/
assessment
a fine old curved white- Indian ivory hunting knife
handled
the pleasant good- tall young olive- Israeli maths teacher
looking skinned
a smart powerful new blue-and- French fibre speed boat
white glass
that awful tuneless fat middle- London rock singer
aged
4.1.2 Postmodification
Just as the premodification comprises everything that precedes the head, so the
postmodification comprises everything that follows the head. Elements of post-
modification are typically clauses:
Determiner Modification
Determiner Modification
Here the postmodifications are separated by commas from both the antecedent
and the rest of the sentence. The commas indicate that if the sentences were
spoken there would be a pause at that point, also causing a change of intonation:
Let us assume now that Alan has two houses and that the study contained three
further antique chairs from a different period (Victorian, for example), which were
still there. In this case we need defining information for each antecedent. This
must be given in restrictive postmodifications:
(24) a. Alan´s house in Mill Lane was being re-decorated (= only that one, not
the other two in Forbes Road and Pinkett Way).
b. The two antique chairs from the reign of Queen Anne were no longer in my
grandfather´s study (although the three Victorian ones were still there).
Notice now that there are no commas, meaning no parenthesis, and in the spo-
ken version no pauses. The whole of each noun phrase is now pronounced with
the same intonation, and in one breath:
(26) a. The sales manager, Mrs Tomlin, was interviewing candidates for a post.
b. Jane´s husband, a keen fisherman, is on the quay every Sunday with his
rods and nets.
c. Grandmother, unsure about her visitor´s identity, called the police.
Traditionally, noun phrase examples like those in (26)a. and b. are called
apposition. The antecedent and the postmodifier are said to be in apposition,
i.e. side by side, to one another. We will come back to this term later when
we discuss clause examples (see Chapter 10.3). Although for clarity commas
are desirable with all forms of non-restrictive postmodification, the comma
principle is not a fixed grammatical rule. The commas are sometimes left out,
although usually only with cases of apposition:
It is now sense and context that decide whether the postmodifications are
restrictive or non-restrictive. They look restrictive (i.e. there are no commas –
commas must definitely not be used with restrictive postmodifications!). But
context and social custom tell us at least with (27)a. and b. that women can
have only one husband and school classes (usually) only one maths teacher at
one time. The postmodifying names (proper nouns) are therefore most likely
to be non-restrictive. (27)c. is a different case. It is not unusual for people to
have more than one brother. So does the writer here mean ‘only Terry but not
my other brother, Simon’ (restrictive), or is this a case of a comma left out,
i.e. ‘my only brother, whose name is Terry’ (non-restrictive)? Only contexual
knowledge will help us to decide that one – as long, that is, as we only have the
written form to go on. The spoken form of the non-restrictive cases would still
be distinct (= slight pause and fall in intonation, see example in (22) above).
Postmodifier 1 Postmodifier 2
Determiner
Head Postmodification 1
Determiner
This is a good example showing that syntax and meaning are two sides of the
same coin and go hand-in-hand. In this case the individual situation and con-
text have to be interpreted semantically before the syntax of the phrase can be
properly defined.
As prepositional phrases have an important part to play in noun phrases, and vice
versa, our next port of call will be the prepositional phrase.
The triangle under the noun phrase slot indicates that the noun phrase is not
further analysed. We have not used this symbol in previous diagrams, but will do
so from now on for every phrase that is not broken down into its end components.
That, however, is precisely what we will do now for (35). The final, complete
analysis looks like this:
premodification head
Head Postmodification 1
Determiner
A A A
(38) On Saturday we are flying to Spain for a holiday.
Putting b. and c. together, we get very good at grammar. This gives us all the pos-
sible functional slots of the adjective phrase, which look like this:
Note again the use of the triangle symbol indicating that the phrase concerned
could be analysed further if desired. The only form of premodification in the
adjective phrase consists of adverbs of degree (and this only with gradable adjec-
tives, see 1.3.4). (40) is the basis of our phrase diagram. But it does not yet show
clearly how different relations of ‘closeness’ between the three members of the
phrase are arranged. There is a certain hierarchy which we could represent in
bracketed form like this:
Phrases and their structure (I) 83
(41) [[very (good)] at grammar]
That is, the adverb premodifies the adjective and both together, as a unit, are
complemented by the prepositional phrase. This means that for the phrase dia-
gram we need our concept of the head phrase again to distinguish different levels
of ‘belonging’:
Premodification Head
There is one adverb of degree, enough, that follows the head as an adjectival
complement (good enough). As with postmodification in noun phrases, there may
be more than one adjectival complement. The connection is then always serial
(see 4.1.2.2 above):
This means that the first phrase complements the head and the second comple-
ments the head plus the first phrase. This is a mirror image of the arrangement of
premodification and head in (41) and (42). In bracketed form:
Here also, as with (42) and the corresponding noun phrase pattern, we need the
head phrase slot to account for the unit head + first adjectival complement, as
represented in the internal set of square brackets in (44):
84 Phrases and their structure (I)
Multiple adjectival complementation occurs more often when one of the com-
plements is a clause (see Chapter 11 for a detailed account on this issue).
4.3.1 Comparison
Semantically, comparison tells us how much of something one entity has in
relation to another. It can involve various word-classes, but is probably most
typical with adjectives and adverbs (though gradable ones only!). With adjec-
tives, which is what we are focused on here, the ‘something’ referred to is
a characteristic of some kind. Comparative constructions express that one
‘comparison partner’ has more, less, or equal amounts of this characteristic
relative to the other partner:
For full guidance on formation and use of comparatives see SAGE, pp. 166–87
(or LGSWE, pp. 521–44). We will not go into semantics and morphology at
length here, but one or two morphological aspects should be mentioned briefly
in connection with the syntax. First, adjectives can have inflectional (for exam-
ple, shorter) and/or periphrastic (for example, more generous) comparative forms,
depending on the length of the adjective concerned. Periphrastic comparison
involves the use of more and less, which are adverbs of degree functioning as
Phrases and their structure (I) 85
premodifiers. Secondly, a comparative phrase follows the adjective as the
adjectival complement. The comparative particle than is a preposition in the
examples in (46). Similarly, the comparative particle as is a preposition when it
follows the adjective, i.e. when it introduces the adjectival complement. In the
premodifying position we will treat it is an adverb since it expresses an ‘amount
relation’. In keeping with the prepositional character of than and as (in comple-
ment position), comparative phrases are therefore prepositional phrases and fit
into the ordinary functional phrase diagram as follows:
prepositional phrase
Ø/adverb adjective
shorter than Mike
more generous than her husband
as tall as her father
As was said above, multiple adjectival complements are always serial, see exam-
ples (43)–(45). Internal phrase patterns here are therefore the following:
Together with the head, the first adjectival complement thus forms a head
phrase, with the premodification included. That is, pattern directly under the
86 Phrases and their structure (I)
adjective phrase slot in (47) remains the same, but ‘drops a slot downwards’,
so to speak, so that the second adjectival complement can be shown as com-
plementing the whole first pattern of premodification + head + adjectival
complement 1:
It is also possible for the two prepositional phrases to swap positions, so that
we get:
The head phrase now no longer includes the premodifying comparative adverb.
In the phrase diagram the premodification therefore has to feature on the same
level as the second adjectival complement:
Phrases and their structure (I) 87
(53) Adjective phrase
The most common structural patterns in the adverb phrase are thus the fol-
lowing:
Premodification Head
We now want to see how the adverb phrase fits into larger phrase patterns, for
example within an adjective phrase inside a noun phrase. Here a diagram of the
noun phrase the quite hotly spiced curries of Sri Lanka:
Determiner Modification
As mentioned briefly in 4.2.1, prepositional phrases can also have adverb parti-
cles as a kind of ‘specifying’ premodification: up in Scotland, over in France, down
in the south:
Premodification Head
Determiner phrase
Premodification Determiner
Some common degree adverbs take a ‘predeterminer’ position: such a nice boy!;
quite a good performance; rather a bad beginning. The position is optional for rather
and quite, which can also follow the article (a rather bad beginning). However,
they seem to be generally preferred in the predeterminer position. With such
there is no choice.
The predeterminer position only applies when the indefinite article is used.
All other determiners trigger the regular post-article position (some rather sour
apples; this quite humorous remark; many such doubtful characters). This in fact rep-
resents their meaning more faithfully, for like any degree adverbs, they modify
the adjective. The predeterminer position does not change this semantically,
i.e. there is no difference in meaning between quite a good performance and a
quite good performance. In other words, even as predeterminers, these adverbs still
belong semantically to the modification. Nevertheless, in functional-syntactic
92 Phrases and their structure (I)
terms they should be regarded as filling the predeterminer slot. What underlines
this point is that they also occur without adjectives, i.e. when there is no modi-
fication. Both cases are illustrated in the following diagram:
Premodification Head
This applies especially to those that specify directions with nouns referring to
dimensions of time and space:
Determiner
Here, too, there are inflectional forms (faster) and periphrastic forms (more
patiently), depending on the length of the word concerned, with periphrastic
comparison involving more and less as premodifiers. The comparative phrase with
than or as functions as the adverb complement. Again, full details on usage can be
found in SAGE, pp. 218–20 or in LGSWE, pp. 544–50:
prepositional phrase
Ø/adverb phrase adverb
faster than Mike
more patiently than her husband
as well as her mother
As has already been said, adverb complements occur only with comparative
constructions. That is, if we add a prepositional phrase, it is not part of the
adverb phrase, but an independent sentence adverbial (see comments on (58)
and (59) above):
That is, we can quite comfortably put the prepositional phrase also at the
beginning of the sentence:
Rather confusingly, however, the prepositional phrase can also precede the
comparative phrase:
94 Phrases and their structure (I)
(73) a. Brad drives faster in heavy traffic than Mike.
b. Mrs Sims drives more patiently under stress than her husband.
Even here, however, the meaning does not change. The prepositional phrases in
heavy traffic and under stress could equally have other sentence positions and are
therefore still independent functional units of the sentence as a whole. The com-
parative phrases, though, cannot be shifted. Admittedly, they have been cut off
from the rest of their ‘home’ in the respective adverb phrases, but they still belong
there and only make sense in combination with their adjectives. The independ-
ent prepositional phrases are ‘intruders’. They can be represented like this:
S P A1 A2 A1
(74) Brad drives faster in heavy traffic than Mike.
This indicates that the two parts of A1 belong together as a single phrase with a
single sentence function. What we have here is the phenomenon of phrase post-
ponement. It is caused by a kind of ‘interrupting’ external phrase which acts as a
parenthesis. The interrupting element may also be a whole clause. This point is
taken up again in Chapter 10.1.10.
Exercises
Exercise 1
Analyse the following phrases using phrase diagrams:
Exercise 2
Identify the errors in the following and describe them in terms of countability
and number status:
Exercise 3
State the differences in meaning between the a. and b. sentences in the following,
and say how those differences arise. Pay attention to possible contexts:
Exercise 4
Analyse the following according to sentence functions:
Finally we come to the verb phrase, the most important phrase in the sentence
and the one with the most far-reaching effects on sentence structure as a whole.
The main verb gives the verb phrase its individual lexical meaning (and for that
reason is alternatively called the lexical verb). This is the head of the verb phrase.
Any other members of the phrase must be auxiliary verbs and these precede the
head. In a sense they ‘modify’ it in very important ways: i.e. by indicating its
tense, aspect, person, and also, in an example like (1)d., its modal colouration
(for modality see SAGE, pp. 430ff.). However, apart from their semantic con-
tent, the basic nature of these categories is morphological: that is, they represent
compulsory morphological characteristics of a finite verb phrase (see 1.3.3). The
auxiliaries that express them are therefore not ‘premodifiers’ as such, but carriers
of formal grammatical features applying to the phrase as a whole. Sometimes
these carriers are contained in the main verb alone, as in (1)a. As a finite verb,
for instance in the form I work, this shows all the necessary tense, aspect and
person features by itself: first person, present tense and simple aspect. With com-
posite verb forms (e.g. perfect or progressives, see 1.3.3) these features are partly
‘outsourced’ to the preceding auxiliaries:
Phrases and their structure (II) 97
(2) a. Terry was lying on the couch.
b. He had arrived the day before.
In (2)a. the verb phrase was lying is marked (as it is usually called) for third person
singular, past tense and progressive aspect. The marking for the first two categories,
and also for half of the last one, is carried by the auxiliary. That is, was is a third
person singular, past tense verb form, and also contributes 50%, so to speak, to the
aspect marking, which requires a form of the verb be. The remaining 50% of the pro-
gressive form is added by the present participle form of the main verb. In (2)b. the
auxiliary had indicates the past element in the past perfect, half of the perfect tense
marking (which requires a form of the verb have) and third person singular; the past
participle form of the main verb is responsible for the remaining 50% of the perfect
form and for the simple aspect. Our phrase diagrams then have the following forms:
main verb
present participle
was lying
b. Verb phrase
3rd pers. sg. past perfect simple
main verb
past participle
had arrived
98 Phrases and their structure (II)
We thus have to see the verb phrase a little differently from the other
phrases. There is no modification and verb phrases consist entirely of verbs,
without any further components (except, of course, the negative particle
not). It is important to bear this point in mind. It is true, as we said in
Chapter 1 (see 1.3.3), that the verb phrase influences the architecture of
any remaining parts of the sentence. For that reason, what follows the verb is
often called its complementation. This is a rather loose term, however, and
should not be taken to mean that its components are actually part of the verb
phrase itself (as is usually done, for instance, in generative grammar models).
From the functional-structural point of view this would be a contradiction.
If following phrases are analysed according to their sentence functions
(e.g. direct object, adverbial, etc.), then they must be regarded as belonging
to the sentence-level. Equally, the verb phrase can only fulfil its function as
a predicator if the rest of the phrases in the sentence are regarded as separate
from it and on the same level as each other and the verb phrase. So when
we speak of the verb complementation, what we really mean is that its parts
actually ‘complement’ the sentence, in the sense that they ‘complete’ it.
This is mentioned here simply to explain why a verb phrase does not include
anything beyond its verbs (for further reference see SAGE, pp. 273–310, or
LGSWE, pp. 358–450).
Complementation as such is no longer relevant at this point, and we will leave
it for the time being and turn our attention back to the actual phrase compo-
nents. Note that we include morphological information in the phrase diagram, as
this is relevant to the syntax of the phrase. As we said above, a finite verb phrase
must be marked for tense, aspect and person. This information is given for the
whole phrase beneath the main phrase slot in the diagrams. Beneath the sub-slots
we show the individual components of these categories, as they are distributed
over the different members of the phrase.
main verb
infinitive
should arrive
If a further auxiliary is added (as for instance in Kate should be arriving tomorrow),
it must be a grammatical one, in its infinitive form, and must follow the modal.
More than this, however, the second auxiliary is morphologically attached to the
main verb, as it helps to form the progressive of the infinitive. In order to capture
the hierarchy of elements properly, we therefore need to introduce a head phrase
slot, as with the other phrases we looked at in Chapter 4 (see, for instance 4.1.2.2,
and the diagrams there in (29) and (31)):
main verb
present participle
should be arriving
The grammatical auxiliary be appears in the past perfect in (6)a. and in the per-
fect infinitive form in (6)b. As this involves splitting the auxiliary be into two
further auxiliaries, we need to introduce the idea of an auxiliary phrase within
which this can be done (see also the head phrase slot in (5) above). For (6)a. the
diagram is therefore the following:
In (6)b. the grammatical auxiliary be followed the modal just as it does in (5).
But this time its tense form necessitates lower level splitting and therefore the
introduction of the upper level auxiliary phrase slot, as in (7)a.:
Phrases and their structure (II) 101
Each of them contains two verbs. The second verb in all three sentences is an
infinitive. In (8)a. and (8)b. the infinitive follows an auxiliary verb. As we
can see here, the infinitive comes in two variants, one with and one without
the preposition to before it. The normal form of the infinitive after auxil-
iaries is the version without to (e.g. must see, can see, would see, etc.). The
auxiliary ought is one of the exceptions, but there are others too, for instance
to be to, going to and to be supposed to, all of which also count as auxiliaries.
The point to remember in this connection is that auxiliaries are always parts
of other verb phrases: that is, they cannot stand alone and therefore do not
form separate verb phrases of their own. (8)a. and (8)b. therefore contain only
102 Phrases and their structure (II)
one verb phrase each. (8)c., however, is a different case. Using pronouns, we
could express (8)c. as The children want something or The children want this.
The verb want, that is, can stand alone. It is therefore not an auxiliary, but a
main verb. As a consequence, (8)c., unlike the preceding sentences, contains
two separate verb phrases, one finite (want), and the other non-finite, i.e. the
infinitive form to see. There are a large number of main verbs like want that
can be followed by the infinitive or other non-finite verbs (e.g. promise, expect,
try, learn, remember, seem, etc.). We call such verbs traditionally catenatives
(= ‘connecting verbs’), in order to distinguish them from auxiliaries. This
is important, because two separate verb phrases in the same sentence mean
that it consists of two separate clauses. In other words, the infinitive and its
direct object in (8)c. form a subordinate clause. This is dealt with in detail in
Chapters 7–9, and we will not go into the aspect of subordination further here.
The significant point here is that infinitives can form their own verb phrases.
This is the case with the other non-finites too. In the following examples the
catenatives stop and regret are followed by gerunds:
In phrase diagrams these look exactly the same as finite verbs. Here the infinitive
and gerund phrases from (8)c. and (9):
head
main verb
infinitive/gerund
to see/smoking/moving
And the same applies, essentially, when auxiliaries are involved. Non-finites can
appear in perfect and progressive forms:
main verb
past participle
having moved
b. Verb phrase
infinitive perfect progressive
5.2.1 Negation
Negation was dealt with thoroughly in 3.3. However, we want to re-consider
it here firstly as a reminder and, secondly, from the perspective of a procedure.
What is the process involved in negating verbs? As our starting point we will
take the two affirmative sentence examples in (13):
auxiliary present
no auxiliary
As pointed out in 3.3, using the weak form of the negative particle (n´t) tends to
emphasise the importance of the auxiliary in negation, as in writing the particle
is treated as an affix of the auxiliary:
Phrases and their structure (II) 105
(16) a. Christine doesn´t read a lot of crime fiction.
b. Christine hasn´t read a lot of crime fiction.
As the subject noun phrase now interrupts the phrase, we have a case of phrase
postponement. Functional labelling should therefore read as follows:
P1 S P1 Od
(18) a. Has Christine read a lot of crime fiction?
b. Does Christine read a lot of crime fiction?
Sub-script numbering shows that the two verbs belong to the same predicator. The
phrase diagram looks like any other in which an auxiliary precedes the main verb,
since inversion (as a clause construction) cannot be shown inside the verb phrase:
main verb
past participle
has read
b. Verb phrase
3rd pers. sg. present simple
b. Verb phrase
3rd pers. sg. present simple
main verb
infinitive
does read
S P-pass A
(20) a. Crime novels are read by many people.
S P-pass
b. Food was being prepared.
main verb
past participle
are read
b. Verb phrase
3rd pers. sg. past progressive passive
b. Verb phrase
3rd pers. sg. past progressive passive
The gap left by the missing main verb acts as a back reference, rather like a
pronoun in the case of a noun. It is the auxiliary, however, that mainly signals
the ‘pronoun’ role, so to speak, and for this reason we call it here an auxiliary
pro-form. What it refers back to is an antecedent main verb. This is always
part of a preceding separate clause or sentence, which means that the follow-
ing auxiliary pro-form is the predicator of its own separate clause, the pro-form
clause. There are several different types of pro-form clause, some co-ordinate,
like those in (22), and others subordinate. Two of the most common types
of pro-form clause in spoken language are question and answer tags (see also
SAGE, pp. 294ff.). The phrase diagram for an auxiliary pro-form, taking (22)b.
as an example, is as follows:
108 Phrases and their structure (II)
(23) Verb phrase
3rd pers. sg. present perfect simple
has Ø
(24) a. Kelly´s mother looks after the children during the week.
b. I waited for Jamie outside the hairdresser´s.
c. The police are looking into the matter.
d. They looked at the painting closely.
Further examples are attend to, cater for, deal with, depend on, look at, wait on, etc.
(for a comprehensive overview see LGSWE, pp. 416–18).
There are several points to note regarding sentence syntax:
head
main verb
prepositional verb
verb preposition
looks after
b. Verb phrase
3rd pers. pl. present progressive
verb preposition
present participle
are looking into
S P Od A
(26) a. Kelly´s mother looks after the children during the week.
b. I waited for Jamie outside the
hairdresser´s.
c. The police are looking into the matter.
d. They looked at the painting closely.
S P A
(27) a. She waited on the street corner. (= She stood on the street corner,
waiting for something/somebody.)
S P Od
b. She waited on the guests. (= She served the guests.)
S P A
c. The cat has got over the wall. (= It has jumped or climbed to the
other side.)
S P Od
d. The cat has got over its illness. (= It is now healthy again.)
As indicated in bold type, the preposition and the noun belong together in (27)a.
and (27)c., i.e. they form prepositional phrases (on the street corner, over the wall)
functioning at sentence level as adverbials (A). In (27)b. and (27)d. the preposi-
tion belongs to the verb, i.e. here we have prepositional verbs (wait on, meaning
‘serve with food and drink’, and get over, meaning ‘recover from’). A good test for
the difference is substitution. Prepositional phrases allow us to replace the prepo-
sitions by others fairly freely, without changing the meaning of the verb or its
relation to the noun following, e.g. She waited at/by the corner and The cat got onto/
off the wall. But with prepositional verbs, this is either not possible at all (as with
get over), or the range of possibilities is strictly limited and preposition substitution
alters the meaning. If (27)b. is turned into She waited with the guests, for example,
waited no longer has the sense of ‘serve’. We might alternatively keep the mean-
ing ‘serve’, and replace the preposition-noun sequence on + the guests by a suitable
prepositional phrase, say, in the restaurant. We then get She waited in the restaurant.
Although now ambiguous, the verb could still be interpreted as ‘served’. But the
verb–noun relation (waited–restaurant) has completely changed, semantically as
well as syntactically, from what it was in the original (waited–guests).
S P1 Oi P1 Od
(29) a. An old man asked Jill for money.
b. This house reminds me of St Pancras Station.
on his new book.
c. The editor congratulated Harris
S P1 Od P1 Co
d. A fan had mistaken me for the famous singer.
head
main verb
complex prepositional verb
verb preposition
asked for
Other ditransitive examples of complex prepositional verbs are: accuse s.o. of sth.,
talk s.o. into sth., persuade/convince s.o. of sth.
Phrases and their structure (II) 113
Further complex transitive examples of complex prepositional verbs are: regard
sth./s.o. as sth., punish s.o. for sth., honour s.o. for sth., praise s.o. for sth., bother s.o.
with sth., blame sth. on s.o., etc.
We meet the words off, up, on and down constantly as prepositions. However,
they are not prepositions in this case. Prepositions must always precede a noun.
Admittedly, the words that look like prepositions in (31) also precede nouns.
Here, however, they could just as easily follow the nouns:
Stylistically, in fact, this is often the preferred position. Moreover, if the nouns
are made into pronouns, the end position (or ‘post-position’) is compulsory. That
is, for example, we say She took it off or You must turn it down (and not *She took
off it or *You must turn down it). This shows that off, up, on and down in (31) and
(32) are not prepositions, but what we call adverb particles. When they combine
with a verb, that verb is known as a phrasal verb. The verbs take off, put up, switch
on and turn down are therefore phrasal verbs. Adverb particles belong to phrasal
verbs in the same way that prepositions belong to prepositional verbs. That is,
they are regarded as part of the verb phrase. Here the phrase diagrams for take off
and switch on as they occur in (31) and (32):
head
main verb
phrasal verb
b. Verb phrase
verb adverb particle
took off
main verb
phrasal verb
S P Od
(34) a. She took off her coat.
S P1 Od P1
b. She took her coat off.
That is, we have to account in the post-position also for postponement of the parti-
cle, using the subscript1 to show that it belongs with the verb to the same predicator.
Here, obviously, there is no risk of confusing the adverb particle with a preposi-
tion, as there is no noun following it. One must say, however, that in particular
with verbs of motion, adverb particles generally have a concrete meaning of place
or direction. And this is usually roughly identical with the meaning of an equiv-
alent prepositional phrase in which the same word functions as a preposition.
Come in, as in (35)c., is an example, and (36) shows a couple more:
In this situation preposition and adverb particle are closely associated. In fact,
the adverb particle can often only be understood on the basis of the equivalent
Phrases and their structure (II) 115
prepositional phrase (here in brackets), which is either mentioned previously or
implied in the particular context:
(37) a. Barry, please come down immediately (e.g. down the ladder you have
just climbed).
b. The bus stopped and several people got off (= off the bus).
c. The little girl ran to one of the swings and climbed on (= on(to) one of
the swings).
d. The cow came to the fence and looked over at us (= over the fence).
In cases like these we can speak of an ellipsis. That is, the noun following the prep-
osition (the prepositional complement, as you will doubtless recall from Chapter
4, 4.2!) is omitted in a situation where it can be understood contextually. This
converts the preposition immediately into an adverb particle, though the mean-
ing is unchanged. We might say, in fact, that the meaning of the prepositional
phrase is entirely shouldered by the preposition (which then, accordingly, loses
its identity as a preposition).
head
main verb
phrasal-prepositional verb
b. Verb phrase
1st person plural present progressive
verb adverb part. preposition
set out for
Phrases and their structure (II) 117
b. Verb phrase
1st person plural present progressive
main verb
phrasal-prepositional verb
S P Od
(40) a. The boss backed out of the agreement.
b. We are looking forward to our holidays.
We will also regard composite idioms of the pattern verb + noun + preposition
as a variant of the phrasal-prepositional verb, e.g. take care of, find fault with, pay
attention to, take part in, etc.:
S P Od
(41) a. Our son takes care of the garden.
b. He pays attention to every detail.
Outwardly these bear the same structure as complex prepositional verbs and
could also be analysed in the same way (see under 5.4.1.4 above). We prefer the
analysis here, though, as there is very strong idiomatic cohesion between verb
and noun. This is underlined by the lack of an article in the noun phrase and the
fact that there are no substitution possibilities for the nouns in such expressions.
Phrase diagrams for (41) would be the same as in (39)a., except that the adverb
particle slot under main verb would be marked noun.
118 Phrases and their structure (II)
(42) Verb phrase
3rd pers. sing. present simple
head
main verb
phrasal-prepositional verb
The object noun phrases the light and the guests in (43)a. and c. are transferred for-
ward into the subject position in (43)b. and d. (the passive versions), so that the
object position falls vacant, so to speak. This does not change the particle status
of on in (43)b., or preposition status of on in (43)d., of course. It is just that there
is nothing overt to distinguish them syntactically. Not only the preposition is in
fixed position after the verb: the particle is too, i.e. it cannot ‘wander’ anywhere.
We cannot, for instance, say *The light was switched by David on. Here are four
more examples. The functional roles, as shown, are the same for all of them:
S P1 Oi P1 Od
(45) a. An old man asked Jill for money. [active]
S P-pass Od A
b. Jill was asked for money by an old man. [passive]
S P1 Oi P1 Od
c. A teacher accused Nigel of cheating. [active]
S P-pass Od A
d. Nigel was accused of cheating by a teacher. [passive]
When the verb is complex transitive the first noun is the direct object, which
in the passive, of course, becomes subject: this means that the active object
complement (Co) then changes to passive subject complement (Cs):
S P1 Od P1 Co
(46) a. A fan had mistaken me for the famous singer. [active]
S P-pass Cs A
b. I had been mistaken for the famous singer by a fan. [passive]
S P1 Od P1 Co
c. The police blamed the accident on Wendy. [active]
S P-pass Cs A
d. The accident was blamed on Wendy by the police. [passive]
Phrasal-prepositional verbs are not usually found in the passive. Passive forms
are either not possible at all, or, with the few that are possible, are usually
avoided as being stylistically inelegant. Occasionally look forward to and look
back on occur:
But the preference is always with the active version. In principle this is also the
case with the noun-type phrasal-prepositional verbs like take care of, find fault
with, pay attention to, take part in, etc. One, certainly, has a generally acceptable
passive form, viz. take care of. But the rest, if they can be passivised at all, do not
submit gladly:
Exercises
Exercise 1
Analyse the underlined verb phrases using phrase diagrams:
Exercise 2
Analyse the following sentences functionally and state in each case whether
prepositional phrases, prepositional verbs, or phrasal verbs are involved. Provide
phrase diagrams for all two- and three-part verbs.
The simple sentence consists of just one clause. The multiple sentence, which we
are going to introduce in this chapter, consists of two or more clauses. Clauses
can be joined together in one of two ways: by co-ordination or by subordination.
6.1 Co-ordination
In the following, (1)a. and (1)b. are separate simple sentences. That is, each
consists of one clause. (1)c. gives an example of how they can be joined together
to form one sentence:
Each sentence in (1)a. and (1)b. becomes a clause of the same sentence in
(1)c. The two clauses are joined by the word and, which belongs to the word-
class conjunction. As we said in Chapter 1, 1.3.8, the task of a conjunction is to
link clauses in a sentence. This link is both syntactic and semantic. That is, the
conjunction not only combines potentially separate sentences, but also tells us
how the second clause (the conjunction clause) relates in meaning to the first
(the free clause). In the case of and, it is simply an addition of one thing to
another. Other conjunctions are more profiled in meaning. For instance but
expresses a contradiction between the clauses, and or an alternative:
In addition, conjunctions also affect the syntactic status of the two clauses in
their relation to each other: and, but and or confer equal status on the two clauses.
Potentially each one can stand alone as a separate sentence. All we would have to
do is replace the conjunction by a full-stop. In a sense, therefore, the clauses are
independent of each other. Underlining this is the fact that they can be swapped
over, so that the conjunction clause becomes the free clause and vice versa:
The multiple sentence 123
(3) a. Millie works at a bank but Craig is a journalist.
b. You can take the train from the main station or you can catch a bus from
here.
(5) a. He has always cooked the meals and Ø S has done the housework.
b. He has always cooked the meals and Ø S Ø aux done the housework.
c. With her injury Kerry can´t play football or Ø S Ø aux go swimming.
d. Somebody will come and Ø S Ø aux pick you up from the airport.
124 The multiple sentence
The ellipsis-markers are used here to show clearly what has been left out, but they
are omitted in all examples following in the sections below.
(6) a. He cooks the meals, does the housework and looks after the garden.
b. With her injury Kerry can´t play football, go swimming or ride a bike.
A comma may also be placed, optionally, before the conjunction. But this is a
semantic consideration. It is applied to emphasise the distinction between the
two final clauses and tends to occur particularly with or:
(7) With her injury, Kerry can´t play football, swim long distances, or ride
a bike.
(8) a. *Patrick loves the good life, must earn money, or win the lottery.
b. Patrick loves the good life and must earn money or win the lottery.
This rule applies furthermore not just to adjacent clauses. All the clauses involved
(i.e. in our examples all three) must stand in the same relation to each other. As
this is generally ruled out with but, owing to the meaning of contrast, but does not
participate in this kind of comma co-ordination:
(9) a. *She left the house, forgot the door key, but luckily met her husband by
chance at the garden gate.
b. She left the house, but forgot the door key, but luckily met her husband
by chance at the garden gate.
Repetition of but can be avoided for stylistic reasons by substituting and then in
the third clause, or using subordination, e.g., Although she forgot the door key when
she left the house, she luckily met . . . .
The clauses themselves of course, as stated in 6.1, can exchange positions (They
had no money with them but took a train), but the conjunction must always remain
between them. As we will see later, this is a striking contrast to conjunctions
involved in subordination.
(11) a. We did not go on with our journey that afternoon, for we were very
tired.
b. *We were very tired for we did not go on with our journey that afternoon.
(11)b. is starred as unacceptable because it does not make sense to swap the two
clauses over. With for a reason is given in the second clause for the semantic
content in the first. That is, for is really a way of saying because, and will therefore
logically not allow its clausal meaning relation (i.e. the element of causality) to
be shifted to the other clause. However, as we have seen, flexibility in clause posi-
tion is otherwise a feature of co-ordination. A further point is that for (unlike the
other co-ordinators) will not allow subject or auxiliary ellipsis:
These untypical characteristics of for, plus its semantic closeness to because and as
(both subordinating conjunctions, as we will see further below) speak in favour of
regarding for also as a subordinating conjunction. On the other hand, for has to
remain between the two clauses. We cannot shift the conjunction clause together
with its conjunction to the initial position, as we can with as or because:
(13) a. Because/As we were very tired, we did not go on with our journey that
afternoon,
b. *For we were very tired, we did not go on with our journey that afternoon.
The first point to bear in mind is that co-ordinating conjunctions are not
parts of the clauses they introduce. If they were, the clauses could not change
position. In analysis we will show this, and the equivalent syntactic status of
co-ordinate clauses, by putting brackets around the separate clauses and leaving
the conjunction outside:
(15) a. (For his birthday we gave our grandson a bicycle) and (took him to
the zoo).
b. (They took a train) but (had no money with them).
c. (The neighbours are probably on holiday), or (have gone away for the
weekend).
d. (With her injury, Kerry can´t play football), (swim long distances) or
(ride a bike).
A S P Oi Od
(16) a. (For his birthday we gave our grandson a bicycle) and
S P Od A
(Ø took him to the zoo).
S P Od S P Od A
b. (They took a train) but (Ø had no money with them).
S P A A S P A
c. (The neighbours are probably on holiday), or (Ø have gone away for the
weekend).
A S P Od S P A
d. (With her injury, Kerry can´t play football), (Ø Ø aux swim long distances)
S P Od
or (Ø Ø aux ride a bike).
S
(18) a. Dave and Sue are on holiday.
Od
b. Rana is going to buy a car or a motorbike.
Cs
c. She was tired but happy.
6.3 Subordination
The second way of linking clauses produces an unequal relation between them,
i.e., a hierarchy:
(19) a. Carla was actually in love with Roberto, although she was getting
married to Paul.
b. When Carla was getting married to Paul, she was in love with Roberto.
c. If Carla gets married to Paul, she´ll have to give up Roberto.
This is because here the conjunction clause is made into a functional part of the
free clause, and thereby placed on a ‘lower’ level. This is known as subordination,
with the conjunction clause as a subordinate clause, introduced by a subordinat-
ing conjunction. The free clause, as the ‘dominant’ partner in the relationship,
is called the superordinate clause. In analysis, brackets are placed around the
subordinate clause and its function is marked above the opening bracket. In (19)
each of the subordinate clauses (or sub-clauses for short) functions in relation
to its superordinate clause as an adverbial (A). In contrast to co-ordinating con-
junctions, subordinating conjunctions are part of the clauses they introduce and
are included within the bracket marking off the subordinate clause. The reason
for this will become clear further below:
A
(20) a. Carla was actually in love with Roberto, [although she was getting
married to Paul].
A
b. [When Carla was getting married to Paul], she was in love with
Roberto.
A
c. [If Carla gets married to Paul], she´ll have to give up Roberto.
128 The multiple sentence
Multiple sentences with subordinate clauses, like these, are known as complex
sentences. Sub-clauses are also called dependent clauses, as they have a relation
of functional dependence on the superordinate clause. Both this and the kind
of function involved can be shown if we replace the sub-clause by a phrase of
roughly similar meaning:
A
(21) a. Carla was actually in love with Roberto, [although she was getting
married to Paul].
A
despite her future marriage to Paul
A
b. [When Carla was getting married to Paul], she was in love with Roberto.
A
At the time of Carla’s marriage to Paul
A
c. [If Carla gets married to Paul], she’ll have to give up Roberto.
A
Under the condition of Carla’s marriage to Paul
(22) a. Carla was actually in love with Roberto, despite her future marriage to
Paul.
b. At the time of Carla´s marriage to Paul, she was in love with Roberto.
c. Under the condition of Carla´s marriage to Paul, she´ll have to give up
Roberto.
Clause replacement in this way shows why we have to regard subordinating con-
junctions as parts of their clauses. The conjunction has to be replaced too, as this
signals the meaning relation of the sub-clause to the superordinate clause and
also the nature of the syntactic link, i.e., the syntactic function of the clause.
The conjunction is therefore part of the clause meaning, and must therefore
be regarded as a syntactic component of the clause. Another indicator is the
movement of the clause. As with co-ordinate clauses, many (though not all)
sub-clauses can exchange position with their superordinate clauses. However, the
conjunction then has to move too if the syntactic and semantic relation between
the clauses is to remain the same:
The multiple sentence 129
(23) a. A
lthough she was getting married to Paul, Carla was actually in love
with Roberto.
b. Carla was in love with Roberto when she was getting married to Paul.
c. Carla will have to give up Roberto, if she gets married to Paul.
Od
(24) a. We realised [that someone was following us].
Od
b. We realised [Ø someone was following us].
Od
c. Cathy asked [whether I would be at the conference].
S
d. [That Jake was out of work] did not bother him at first.
S
e. [Whether I would be at the conference] was uncertain.
Cs
f. The problem was [that Jake was out of work].
Cs
g. The big question is [whether I will be at the conference].
As we will see later, subject-clauses of this kind are more common with the sen-
tence construction known as extraposition (see Chapter 7, 7.5.1).
Sub-clauses functioning as object complement (Co) do not involve con-
junctions and will be dealt with later. This brings us to the general point that
conjunctions do not by any means always play a role in subordination. There are
other ways of subordinating clauses, as we will see further below. For the moment,
though, we will stay with the conjunction as the prototype subordinator.
although, though (concession); if, in case (condition); when, while, after, before,
as soon as (time); whereas (contrast); where (place); so that (purpose and
consequence); so (reason and consequence); as, since (time and reason).
Again we see the crucial role of conjunctions not simply as syntactic elements
but also as semantic indicators. Semantic identification is particularly important,
however, when there is no conjunction involved, as it is then often a little more
difficult to see the nature of the meaning relations and thus also of the syntactic
role of the sub-clause.
A
(25) a. Frank lost his job [because the factory closed].
A
for this reason/because of factory closure.
A
b. It rained a lot [while we were on holiday].
A
during our holiday
The multiple sentence 131
6.3.4 Relations between superordinate and subordinate clauses: further
aspects
What we have seen so far is that sub-clauses fill most of the same sentence func-
tions that phrases do: subject (S), direct object (Od), subject complement (Cs),
adverbial (A), and to these, as indicated above, we can also add object comple-
ment (Co), though examples for this last one still have to be given (see Chapter 7,
7.4.3). Exceptions, as already pointed out, are the functions of predicator (P) and
indirect object (Oi), neither of which are available for clausal roles. Furthermore,
there are absolute parallels regarding what is optional and what is compulsory
in particular sentences. Subject-clauses, of course, are always obligatory. Clauses
complementing verbs (i.e. following the predicator) generally follow the same
rules as phrases in the same functions. That is, whether clause complementation
is obligatory or optional depends on the particular verb concerned:
Od
(26) a. I knew [that I was wrong].
Cs
b. The question is [whether we have enough money].
A
c. She went to bed [because she was tired].
A
d. Sylvia put the letter [where nobody could find it].
(26)a. and b. are part of compulsory patterns (SPOd and SPCs respectively).
The same goes for (26)d., which has a compulsory adverbial slot, that is, with
the obligatory pattern SPOdA. (26)c. has the same pattern, but here, as with
most adverbials, the A-slot is optional. These factors affect traditional concep-
tions regarding the relative ‘dependence’ or ‘independence’ of the two clauses.
A highly simplified traditional view of subordination explains the sub-clause as
being ‘dependent’ in the sense that it cannot stand alone as a potentially sepa-
rate sentence, whereas the superordinate clause (usually called the ‘main clause’,
see below in 6.3.5) allegedly can stand alone and is therefore to be regarded as
‘independent’. This is true of our example sentences in (19), (25) and (26)c. But
it would not of course apply to any of those in (24) or (26)a., b. and d. Here the
sub-clause fills an obligatory function of the superordinate clause, which as a
result could not stand alone without the sub-clause. In the sense of the ‘defini-
tion’ the superordinate clause is therefore not ‘independent’ at all. Both clauses
in these cases are dependent on one another. The superordinate clause is only
potentially independent if the function of the sub-clause is optional. It is therefore
better to ignore any traditional notion of subordination in terms of ‘independent
vs. dependent’. Two clauses are in a hierarchical relation to one another when
one is a functional part of the other. This is the only valid general definition of
subordination at sentence level.
132 The multiple sentence
A final point on the superordinate clause: in the sentences discussed so far
the superordinate clause is what is traditionally known as the main clause.
This designates it as the ‘top clause’, so to speak, in the clause hierarchy of
the sentence. All superordinate clauses in our examples above are therefore
main clauses. This may seem as if we have introduced a second term for the
same thing. In the next section below, however, we come to complex sentences
containing more than one subordinate clause. We will then see that the two con-
cepts superordinate clause and main clause are not identical, and that we must
distinguish between them.
(27) a. We realised that someone was following us after we had been walking
for about an hour.
b. Frank has been out of work since he lost his job when the factory closed
down.
c. Although she went to bed because she was tired, Sally could not sleep.
As every clause has only one predicator (P), a useful first step is to identify the
predicators in the sentence: this will show us the number of clauses it contains
and will also give us a first point of orientation in determining their beginning
and end. The next thing to be done is to decide which predicator represents
the highest clause (the main clause) in the superordinate–subordinate hierarchy.
Proceeding from there, we then identify the sub-clauses and put brackets around
them. Phrase-substitution will help us:
(28) P Od P A P
a. We realised [that someone was following us] [after we had been walking
for about an hour].
Od A
this fact at this time
P Cs A P A P
b. Frank has been out of work [since he lost his job [when the factory closed
down]].
A
[since he lost his job at that time]
Od A
this fact at this time
The multiple sentence 133
P Cs A P A P
b. Frank has been out of work [since he lost his job [when the factory closed
down]].
A
[since he lost his job at that time]
A
since then
A A
c. [Although she went to bed [because she was tired]], Sally could
not sleep.
A
[Although she went to bed for this reason]
A
Despite this fact
This is just a first analysis, in order to establish the core ‘architecture’ of each sen-
tence (a full functional analysis, including the internal functions of the clauses, is
given in the next section below). Each sentence contains three predicators, and
therefore consists of three clauses. In (27)a., for instance, these are:
•• Clause 1: we realised
•• Clause 2: that someone was following us
•• Clause 3: after we had been walking for about an hour.
We number the clauses just for the sake of clarity. Phrase substitution, as dem-
onstrated in (28)a., shows, first, the length of each sub-clause and, second, its
respective function. The resulting simple sentence We realised this fact at this
time shows that the two substituting phrases are independent of one another.
The replaced Clauses 2 and 3 are therefore also independent of each other, but
both dependent, of course, on Clause 1. Clause 1 is therefore the main clause and
subordinates Clauses 2 and 3 separately.
In (27)b. the three clauses appear to be in a similar arrangement:
S P Od S P Od A S P
(29) a. We realised [that someone was following us] [after we had been walking
A
for about an hour].
S P A A S P Od A S
b. Frank has been out of work [since he lost his job [when the factory
P
closed down]].
A S P A A S P Cs S P
c. [Although she went to bed [because she was tired]], Sally could not sleep.
(30) a. We thought that the team would win easily and get into the next round
with no difficulty.
b. As she was a complete stranger and didn´t know her way around the
town, Kelly bought a detailed street map.
The multiple sentence 135
c. If a thunderstorm comes up you must take shelter or get on a bus home
immediately.
d. You can come with us or stay at home until we get back.
In (30)a. the main clause (We thought . . .), has two co-ordinated sub-clauses
(the team would win easily and get into the next round) as direct objects:
Note that the subordinating conjunction that counts as introducing each sub-
clause separately, but is ellipted in the second one (along with the subject and
auxiliary verb).
(30)b. has two co-ordinated sub-clauses (As she was a complete stranger and
didn´t know her way around) as adverbials:
Here too the subordinating conjunction introduces the second sub-clause just as
it does the first one, but is subject to ellipsis.
(30)c. has two co-ordinated superordinate clauses, both of which here are
main clauses:
Note that in this case we must bracket even the main clauses. This is because
there are two of them and they are co-ordinated. What distinguishes them
from the sub-clause is that the sub-clause has a function, here adverbial (A).
This adverbial clause refers to both main clauses. In (30)d. we also have two
co-ordinated main clauses. In contrast to the case in (30)d., however, the
sub-clause refers only to one of the main clauses, i.e. is subordinated only to
that particular one:
(35) a. Jamie had forgotten whether he had told Celia that if she met him in
the pub with the rest of the cast after they had been rehearsing at the
theatre, she should just ignore him and pretend that she had no closer
relationship to him.
b. As the sea was apparently quite calm in fine weather if you looked at it
from a distance, we were surprised when we discovered that the water
became quite rough as soon as we had left the harbour in our small yacht.
c. Although Jane had never spoken to Drury while she was working at the
hospital as an orderly before she took her final medical exams, she now
found that she was soon talking to him in this new situation as if they
had been close colleagues for many years.
We will apply the steps in analysis previously recommended. They are highly
necessary in analysing sentences of this complexity. Taking (35)a. first, we will
first focus on just counting the predicators to give us an idea of how many clauses
the sentence contains:
(36) Jamie had forgotten whether he had told Celia that if she met him in the pub
with the rest of the cast after they had been rehearsing at the theatre, she
should just ignore him and pretend that she had no closer relationship to him.
As we have seven predicators, we can conclude that there are seven clauses, one
of which, of course, is the main clause. Six clauses, then, are sub-clauses; some of
these are probably also superordinate to others. To establish the clause arrange-
ment, we can apply our substitution-by-phrase test. As before, this will also lead
us to seeing clause functions more clearly:
P Od
(37) a. Jamie had forgotten this.
P Od P Od
b. Jamie had forgotten [whether he had told Celia this].
P Od P Od A
c. Jamie had forgotten [whether he had told Celia [that under this
condition. . .
A P A
d. [if she met him in the pub with the rest of the cast then. . .
A P
e. [after they had been rehearsing at the theatre]]. . .
P1 P1 P Od
f. she should just ignore him] and [pretend this]
condition. . .
A P A
The multiple sentence 137
d. [if she met him in the pub with the rest of the cast then. . .
A P
e. [after they had been rehearsing at the theatre]]. . .
P1 P1 P Od
f. she should just ignore him] and [pretend this]
Od P
g. [that she had no closer relationship to him]]].
Transferring this architecture to the linear sentence and filling in the internal
functions, we get:
We will not repeat the steps for (35)b. and c., but just give the final results of the
analysis in (39)a. and (39)b.:
Od
(40) a. I regretted bitterly [what I had said].
Od
b. Mory had forgotten [where he had parked his car].
S
c. [Why she did not turn up at the meeting yesterday] is a mystery.
Cs
d. The question is [who we should invite to our party].
S P A Od Od S P
(41) a. I regretted bitterly [ what I had said].
S P Od A S P Od
b. Mory had forgotten [where he had parked his car].
The multiple sentence 139
S A S P A P Cs
c. [Why she did not turn up at the meeting] is a mystery.
S P Cs Od S P A
d. The question is [ who we should invite to our party].
S P Od P Od
(42) a. Damian regretted [leaving the company].
S P Od P Od
b. Clio wanted [to teach history].
S A P A A P Od A
c. Our teacher once came into class [carrying a small dog in her arms].
Non-finite verbs and their clauses are dealt with in detail in the next chapter.
Exercises
Exercise 1
Analyse the following sentences functionally, putting square brackets around the
separate clauses:
1 For our anniversary I am giving my wife a gold necklace and taking her to a
concert.
2 Tomorrow we will probably just relax on the beach, or sit by the pool.
3 Donna left London early, but ran into a big traffic jam outside Dover and
only just reached the ferry in time.
4 After your long illness, you must take proper rest, do no heavy work and not
walk too far.
5 The children were extremely hungry, for they had not eaten since breakfast.
Exercise 2
Analyse the following sentences functionally:
1 Dan did not know that Connie was going to be at the party.
2 You should call my office if the package doesn´t arrive tomorrow.
3 Nobody had told us that we couldn´t buy tickets on the boat.
4 They got home late because the coach had been delayed by heavy traffic.
140 The multiple sentence
5 That the young couple had no money did not worry them at first.
6 When Kay was getting out of the car, she fell and hurt her ankle.
7 The big problem was that Sandy could not find a cheap flat near the university.
8 The walkers realised that if they did not get down the mountain before dark-
ness fell, they would probably have to spend the night in the open.
9 Stomatos asked me whether I would lend him money if he did not get his pay
at the end of that week.
10 Paula did not understand why the message had not been passed on after she
had rung the firm and explained the situation with her sick child.
Exercise 3
Analyse the following sentences and identify the semantic specification of the
clauses that are adverbial.
•• They can occur without an overt subject, and in fact they generally do.
•• When they do occur with a subject, they do not show concord (i.e. there are no
inflections for subject–verb agreement, as there would be with a finite verb).
•• They are not usually marked for tense. Their time reference is normally
implied in the context, and is generally oriented to the tense form of the
finite verb closest to them (very often the preceding catenative). Non-finites
nevertheless have perfect tense forms. These are used to show ‘pastness’
when a time-level distinction has to be made clear between the non-finite
verb and its nearest finite neighbour.
•• Except for the infinitive, which has a progressive form, they are not marked
for aspect either.
•• With certain exceptions, non-finite verbs are functionally predicates in their
own right, and form separate subordinate clauses.
Apart from these basic clausal considerations, a major syntactic issue addressed
in this chapter is the question of which non-finite structures can actually accom-
pany which kinds of superordinate clause. Compared with other languages,
English makes particularly widespread use of non-finite verbs. Their distribution,
however, is usually not open to random choice, but is fairly rigidly controlled
by both semantic and syntactic factors. A central question here, especially for
the EFL learner, is which kinds of non-finite structure can or must complement
which individual catenatives.
A P
(2)a. We went to the café on the corner [to eat].
A P Od
b. We went to the café on the corner [to eat lunch].
In other words, we analyse the infinitive clause in the same way as any finite
subordinate clause. That is, we mark its external function with regard to the main
clause and then turn our attention to the internal functions. Applying the inter-
nal clause analysis also to the main clause then, we get the following full picture:
S P A A P
(3) a. We went to the café on the corner [to eat].
S P A A P Od
b. We went to the café on the corner [to eat lunch].
The infinitive clause is an adverbial clause of purpose. We can see this just by
adding in order to the infinitive:
A
(4) We went to the café on the corner [in order to eat].
More generally, though, we can establish sub-clause function by the same pro-
cedure as we used with finite clauses, i.e. by reducing the clause to a roughly
equivalent phrase:
A
(5) a. We went to the café on the corner [to eat].
A
b. We went to the café on the corner for this purpose.
Od
(6) We wanted [to eat lunch].
advise (also gerund), agree, allow (also gerund), appear, arrange, ask, attempt (also
gerund), be (also gerund), begin (also gerund), care, cause, compel, consent, dare
(also gerund), determine, encourage (also gerund), expect, fail, forbid, force, for-
get, hate, have (= cause, without to, also past participle), hesitate, hate, help, hope,
intend (also gerund), instruct, invite, lead, learn, let (without to), like (also gerund),
love (also gerund), make (without to), manage, mean (also gerund), need (also
gerund), neglect, oblige, order, permit (also gerund), persuade, prefer (also gerund),
prepare, promise, propose (also gerund), refuse, regret (also gerund), remember
(also gerund), remind, request, seem, show how, start (also gerund), swear, teach
(also gerund), tell, tempt, try (also gerund), urge, want (also gerund), warn.
To these we must add verbs denoting acts of sensory perception (feel, hear, notice,
see, watch, etc., all taking the infinitive without to). These combine alternatively
with present participle clauses. The infinitive without to is dealt with in 7.4.1 below.
144 The complex sentence (I)
We will not for the moment go into the syntactic or semantic implications of
the alternatives given. These are dealt with later in Chapter 8, 8.3.2.1.
S P Od P Od
(7) a. I had forgotten [to post the letter].
S P Od P Od A
b. Terry managed [to pass the exam this time].
The infinitive clause, as indicated, is the direct object of the main verb. Catenative
verbs in this category follow only this pattern. They include:
agree, appear, arrange, attempt, begin, care, consent, determine, fail, forget,
hesitate, hope, learn, manage, neglect, prepare, promise, propose, refuse, regret,
remember, seem, start, swear, try.
With these verbs, then, an intervening object between catenative and sub-clause
is not possible. In most cases the monotransitive character is clear from the lexi-
cal nature of the individual verb. Sentences such as *We hesitated him to go or
*I managed her to come, are obviously meaningless. The semantics of the verbs,
that is, will not accommodate such a syntactic pattern. However, this is not nec-
essarily the case with other members of the group. For example, promise and refuse
can both be ditransitive from the perspective of their semantics. Syntactically,
however, the ditransitive construction with these two verbs is allowed only in
simple sentences. It is not possible when one of the objects is an infinitive clause.
(8)a. is therefore permissible, but (8)b. is not:
advise, allow, forbid, instruct, invite, order, permit, persuade, remind, request, show
how, teach, tell, urge, warn.
The complex transitive pattern (9a.) occurs with verbs that convey some other
kind of force or influence affecting the noun phrase, e.g.:
S P Od P Od
(10) a. Ted wanted [to marry Jane].
S P Od Co P Od
b. Ted wanted Jane [to marry him].
When there is a main-clause object, most verbs here are complex transitive. But
the ditransitive pattern can also occur, as in (11)b.:
S P Od P Od
(11) a. Charlene has asked [to borrow Jake´s car].
S P Oi Od P Od
b. Charlene has asked Tim [to borrow Jake´s car].
ask, dare, expect, hate, help, intend, like, love, mean, need, prefer, want.
As adverbials, infinitive clauses always express the meaning of purpose, and can
invariably be expanded by in order:
S P A A P A
(13) a. Gerald went to Paris [(in order) to be with Michelle].
A P Od A S P Od
b. [(In order) to achieve real success in this job], you need a lot of luck.
In (14)a. Charlene, the subject of the main clause, is also the implied subject of
to borrow. Charlene, that is, intends to borrow Jake´s car herself. In (14)b. the
intended borrower is Tim. Underlying this is the following rule:
Putting it simply, then, the relation across the two clauses is object–subject when
there is a main-clause object present (as in 14b.), and subject–subject when there
is not (as in 14a.). The subject–subject relation applies also when the infinitive
clause functions as an adverbial:
(15) a. The driver of the car braked suddenly to avoid a dog in the road.
b. To get there on time tomorrow, we should leave the house by 7 am.
In (15)a. the subject of both verb phrases (braked and to avoid) is the driver of the
car. In (15)b. the subject of both verb phrases (to get and should leave) is we.
The complex sentence (I) 147
Violation of these principles leads to ungrammatical sentences:
In (17)a. and b. our subject–subject rule applies as we would expect from what
was said in the preceding section: that is, in the absence of any objects, the
main-clause subjects Gerald and Sonia are the implied subjects of their respec-
tive infinitive clauses. In (17)c., however, this is not so. Clearly, my job is not
the implied subject of to cook. This has to do with the lexical nature of the verb
be, which here means ‘consist of’ and confers the meaning of equivalence on
the relation of subject to subject complement. Consequently (and in contrast
to a. and b.), subject and subject complement can swap functions, allowing the
infinitive clause to become the subject without changing the basic semantics of
the sentence:
S P Cs
(18) [To cook for the team] is my job.
148 The complex sentence (I)
The message here is that the lexical nature of be suspends the subject-identity
principles which normally apply to main verb complementation by infinitive
clauses, even to those in the subject complement function. The unique charac-
ter of be in this respect is further underlined by other factors: a gerund clause is
also possible in the same meaning and function (My job is cooking for the team,
see Chapter 8, 8.1), and likewise the construction we will meet further below as
extraposition (see Chapter 12, 12.1). Neither of these alternatives apply to other
verbs taking infinitive clauses as subject complements.
So where does this leave us as far as subject interpretation is concerned?
The answer is that if syntactic principles of implication are absent, context and
semantics ultimately decide. Certain references in the sentence may give more or
less foolproof clues, it is true. In (18), for instance, the possessive determiner my
(in my job) clearly indicates the speaker or writer as the subject of cook. However,
signals such as genitives, possessives and other pointers may not be as obvious as
this. Consider the following:
(19) a. The firm´s main strategy this year is to develop new markets abroad.
b. Kate´s idea was to meet at the station.
c. The best solution would be to play Morris and Kinley in midfield.
In (19)a. the s-genitive firm´s appears to indicate beyond all doubt that this noun
is the subject of develop. Actually, however, it is additionally the lexis of strategy
(‘a course of action’) that helps us to conclude this: develop equals a course of
action ‘belonging to’ firm. The context of the sentence (in, say, discourse on
company economics) and our world knowledge that this is the kind of thing com-
panies do, are also factors flowing into our syntactic understanding of the subject
relation. In (19)b. we can likewise assume subject relations from the genitive: the
surrounding context, however, might tell us that Kate is not the only subject of
meet, but that there are others involved in the plan. (19)c. is entirely dependent
on context and/or co-text: whose ‘solution’ is being referred to here? Again, lexis
(play, midfield) and general knowledge about team-sports and club decisions on
player positions before a game also support our understanding of who or what the
subject of the infinitive is.
Having considered all these internal and external factors involved in lan-
guage meaning, we should now add that infinitive subjects can be specified as
such syntactically. This is examined in the next section.
(20) a. Kate´s idea was for Tim and Mike to meet at the station.
b. For us to get away on time tomorrow, the car must be loaded tonight.
c. The best solution would be for the manager to play Morris and Kinley
in midfield.
The complex sentence (I) 149
The for-construction comes into play especially when the infinitive subject is
different from what would otherwise be implied. (19)b., for instance, as we saw,
implies that Kate is at least one of the subjects of meet. (20)a., by contrast, tells
us a completely different story. In this version Kate is definitely not involved
in the meeting. Her ‘idea’ is about a meeting between two other people. These
therefore need to be marked as the subject of the infinitive. (20)b. is a further
way of making the earlier deviant sentence in (16)b. grammatical. Without
the overt introduction of we as the subject, the sentence is ungrammatical, as
previously explained, since it then wrongly implies the car as the subject of the
infinitive. The for-construction redresses the imbalance. (20)c., by contrast, can
be felicitously interpreted in the same way as its predecessor, (19)c., without the
for-construction. Context and ‘experience’, as explained in the previous section,
would allow us to interpret (19)c. quite correctly in its intended sense. Subject-
specification by for simply provides clarification beyond all doubt. In addition, it
emphasises the subject, which could be important for contextual reasons within
the discourse.
The for-construction occurs particularly frequently with extraposition (see
below and Chapter 12, 12.1). But how can the for-construction be represented in
functional analysis? This is still an open question in the theory. For the purposes
of this book, we will give two possible alternatives:
S P Cs A P A
(21) a. Kate´s idea was [ (for Tim and Mike) to meet at the station].
S P Cs S P A
b. Kate´s idea was [for Tim and Mike to meet at the station].
The meaning in these cases is that the whole of the action expressed by the
infinitive verb was perceived, including its end. In (22)a., that is, the onlook-
ers saw the man swim from one riverbank to the other, while in (22)b. the
subject Katie perceived that the person on the stairs started at the bottom
and arrived at the top. The semantics are important, since the same verbs can
be complemented by participles, though then with a different meaning (see
Chapter 9).
S P Od Co P A
(23) a. We do not let guests [smoke in the house].
S P Od Co P A
b. Hunger made the children [hurry home].
Infinitive structures in these cases are stylistically elevated. More neutral are the
equivalent finite clauses with the conjunction that. The infinitive versions are
more commonly used with the catenatives in the passive, especially when the
agent is generalised, or clearly indicated in the context, and can therefore be left
unstated:
(26) a. Passengers are kindly requested to remain seated during the flight.
b. Visitors to the private zoo were forbidden to feed the animals.
c. You have been asked to report to the controller, Mr Simms.
•• Monotransitive catenatives cannot be put into the passive, i.e. the infinitive
clause cannot function as a passive subject:
•• Ditransitive catenatives allow the passive. Only the active indirect object,
however, can become the passive subject. This is because the active direct
object is the infinitive clause, and as just seen in (27), infinitive clauses are
ruled out as passive subjects:
S P Oi Od
(28) a. The Institute asked Empson [to give a lecture]. [active]
S P-pass A Od
b. Empson was asked by the Institute [to give a lecture]. [passive]
S
c. *[To give a lecture] was asked of Empson by the Institute.
152 The complex sentence (I)
•• Many complex transitive catenatives allow the passive, but there are some
that do not. The chief factors in the distinction are lexical, and are
explained below. We will look at the syntax first. As with the passivisation
of all complex transitive verbs, the active direct object becomes the passive
subject, while the active object complement functions as passive subject
complement:
S P Od Co
(29) a. The Institute expected Empson [to give a lecture]. [active]
S P-pass A Cs
b. Empson was expected by the Institute [to give a lecture]. [passive]
Complex transitive catenatives that allow the passive include: compel, encourage,
expect, force, help, intend, lead, mean, oblige, tempt. Semantically, most of these
convey a force or directive influence acting on the referent of the object noun
phrase. The verbs that do not allow the passive express wishes and similar emo-
tional dispositions: hate, like, love, need, prefer, want. None of the verbs followed
by the infinitive without to can passivise in that form; however, three of the
sensory perception verbs (feel, hear and see), plus make, permit passive versions
(though with the addition of to to their infinitives):
(30) a. A man was seen to enter the building just after midnight.
b. A car was heard to pass the house.
c. The cinema-goers were made to wait outside in the pouring rain.
The initial position of the subject clause, as here in (31), is found in formal styles,
but is not generally favoured in neutral or everyday language. The tendency in
this case is to place the infinitive clause in final position, especially if it is an ele-
ment in the sentence that is being introduced into the particular text or discourse
for the first time. This is because medial and final positions in English sentences
are generally rather more profiled or accentuated than initial positions (more
is said on this point below in 7.5.1). The construction needed here to shift the
The complex sentence (I) 153
clause into final position is known as extraposition, and is explained briefly in
the next section.
7.5.1 Extraposition
With extraposition, the subject clause occurs in final position as the ‘real’,
or logical, subject (marked as S-log.), and is represented at the beginning of
the sentence by a grammatical ‘dummy’ subject in the form of it (marked as
S-gramm.):
(32)
S-gramm. P A Cs S-log. P Cs
a. It was always my greatest ambition [to get rich].
S-gramm. P Oi Od S-log. P Od
b. It gave Shelley a bad conscience [to see his relatives
A
in poverty].
(33)
S-gramm. P Cs S-log. P A
a. It was impossible [to swim across the river].
S-gramm. P Cs S-log. P Od A
b. It would be very nice [to see you at the party].
In (35)b., the negative of (34)b., the implication of (34)b. that the car stopped
is no longer given. We do not know now whether the car stopped or not. But in
(35)a. the statement that Rangers did not manage to score . . . not only destroys the
implication Rangers scored . . . in (34)a., but replaces it by the negative implica-
tion Rangers did not score . . . . A similar negative implication occurs in (35)b.
Whether a negative implication arises or not depends on the individual catena-
tive: happen, when negated, as in (35)c., leads to a negative implication, like
manage. So also do bother, dare, remember and take care, when negated. Verbs
of perception, however, to name a further example, behave like force, i.e. their
negatives are not implicative:
The complex sentence (I) 155
(36) a. I saw the three men enter the bank.
→ The three men entered the bank.
b. I did not see the three men enter the bank.
→ The three men entered the bank.
The negation of (36)a., then, leaves it quite open whether the three men (from
the point of view of the speaker) entered the bank or not.
Some catenatives in the positive form have negative implications:
Base form simple Base form progressive Perfect infinitive simple Perfect infinitive progressive
7.7.1 Tense
The perfect infinitive expresses pastness or completion, and can be regarded as
both a ‘perfect’ and a ‘past’ infinitive in one form:
Here we see how the infinitive retains the same form in (40)a. and b., even
though it refers to the present in the first and the past in the second. The dif-
ference in time orientation between the two sentences is signalled through the
tense distinction in the catenative alone. The infinitive tense only changes when
it is oriented to a time prior to that of the catenative. This is the case in (39)
above, now explained in (41):
The complex sentence (I) 157
(41) a. Barry seems to have met Sylvia yesterday.
(present) (past)
(present) (past-present)
We cannot say *. . . seems to meet. . . here because in contrast to the case in (40)
catenative and infinitive do not share the same time-level. The before-relation of
infinitive to catenative requires the perfect infinitive to signal this. In (39)–(41)
the finite equivalents are the past tense and the present perfect. In the following,
the equivalent is the past perfect:
(42) Barry seemed to have met Sylvia the week before/several times already.
(past) (past-past)
(= It seemed that Barry had met Sylvia the week before/several times
already.)
The perfect infinitive thus serves, as it were, as an ‘all-purpose’ past and perfect
tense. It can function like this as it is not speaker-time-related, but merely shows
the discrepancy in time orientation between catenative and infinitive. Separate
infinitive forms for past and past perfect tenses are therefore unnecessary. As it
does not show the full range of tense distinctions of a finite verb, the infinitive
can be called defective in that respect.
7.7.2 Aspect
Whereas the infinitive is defective (i.e. ‘limited’) regarding tense, it manifests
the same aspect relations as a finite verb. The non-progressive forms of the
infinitive are perfective in meaning, i.e. semantically equivalent to finite sim-
ple forms. They express an action as a whole, completed entity. By the same
token, the progressive infinitives are semantically equivalent to finite progres-
sive forms: they are imperfective, and express an action as ongoing, i.e. in the
course of occurrence, at a given or implied point of time:
158 The complex sentence (I)
(43) a. The builders have promised to do the job by next Friday.
(= They have promised to complete the job by next Friday.)
b. The builders have promised to be doing the job by next Friday.
(= They have promised to start the job by next Friday.)
c. She seems to have run away when she saw the tiger.
(= It appears that she saw the tiger and then ran away.)
d. She seems to have been running away when she saw the tiger.
(= It appears that she was already in the course of running away and the
sight of the tiger interrupted this.)
Passive base Passive base form Passive perfect infinitive Passive perfect infinitive
form simple progressive simple progressive
Exercises
Exercise 1
Analyse the following sentences in terms of sentence functions:
Exercise 2
Identify and correct the errors in the following:
Exercise 3
State the differences in meaning between the a. and b. sentences in the following,
and say how those differences arise. Provide possible contexts. How are implica-
tive meanings involved in 3. and 4.?
There is also a passive gerund with the -ing-form of be, plus the past participle of
the full verb, e.g. Jenny likes being asked difficult questions.
Gerunds are not only noun-like in meaning. They also fill the same sentence
functions as noun phrases, as we can see from these examples: subject in (1)a.,
direct object in (1)b. and subject complement in (1)c. For this reason, the gerund
is traditionally called a ‘nominal’ verb form. Modern linguists, though, tend to
regard this view as an oversimplification: the infinitive, after all, can take on the
same functions, yet it is not seen as particularly ‘nominal’ in character. Secondly,
like any other non-finite verb, the gerund always has a predicator function. It
forms a subordinate clause even when it is alone, as in the sentences in (1). And
this demonstrates its verbal character, underlined by the fact that within its own
clause it can take its own verbal complementation:
S P A P Cs
(2) a. [ Jogging along the beach] became her great passion.
S P Od P A
b. Jill hates [shopping in department stores].
S P Cs P Od
c. Their favourite evening activity was [reading the newspaper].
On the other hand, stressing the ‘nominal’ label does have a certain justification
to it, particularly when the gerund is contrasted with the present participle. The
latter is also an -ing-form, but as we will see later has no ‘nominal’ character at
all syntactically. Secondly, even though infinitive clauses can also be noun-like,
162 The complex sentence (II)
gerunds are especially (and more or less exclusively) so. In addition to what might
be called their ‘classical’ sentence functions as subjects and objects, gerunds
A major consideration in the sections following is how the gerund is used in sen-
tences and with what kinds of meaning. A particular issue, as with infinitives, is
the part played in catenative complementation. Which main verbs are followed
by gerunds, as opposed, say, to infinitives, or can be complemented by either type
of clause depending on certain other grammatical and semantic conditions? This
question also poses a teaching problem in EFL which teachers are well advised to
grasp first of all theoretically.
To start with, however, we will consider the syntax of the gerund clause, both
internally and externally, in detail.
S P P Cs
(3) a. [Jogging] became her great passion.
S P Od P
b. Jill hates [shopping].
S P Cs P
c. Their favourite evening activity was [reading].
S P Cs
(4) a. This became her great passion.
S P Od
b. Jill hates this activity.
S P Cs
c. Their favourite evening activity was this.
The complex sentence (II) 163
By far the most common sentence functions of the gerund clause are those shown
here, i.e. as subject, direct object and subject complement. Gerund clauses do
not generally occur as adverbials: adverbial -ing-clauses are almost always pre-
sent participle clauses (see Chapter 9). For semantic (and also stylistic) reasons
gerund clauses are rarely indirect objects, though this is not impossible:
S P Oi P Od Od
(5) The company has given [building the new warehouse] top priority.
A word of explanation here: ordinary prepositional verbs (decide on), and phrasal-
prepositional verbs (look forward to) are complemented by direct objects (called
in this case prepositional objects). The verbs congratulate someone on something
and fine someone for something are complex prepositional verbs (see Chapter 5,
5.4.1.4, and SAGE, p. 380). These are mainly ditransitive, as in (6)c., but can
also be complex transitive, as in (6)d. In the first case, the element after the
preposition is the direct object, and in the second the object complement (also a
comparatively rare function of the gerund).
The most frequent types of main verb complementation in which gerunds
occur, as we said above, are those of subject, direct object and subject comple-
ment. And it is these that we will focus on in the next sections. First of all,
though, let us shift the perspective briefly to the ‘inner life’ of a gerund clause,
and consider one particular internal function more closely: the subject of a ger-
und predicator.
In (7)a. it is the activity itself that is in the foreground, and the subject, understood
as ‘anyone’, or ‘people in general’, is unimportant. As the gerund can focus on
actions, it lends itself very easily to generalised references of this kind. The other
examples point to specific subjects. With (7)b., certainly, we could only know who
did the drinking from the situation of utterance or a preceding reference: a speaker
with a headache, say, talking about the party she attended the night before. But
the grammar of the sentence itself contains no actual clue to this. Subject implica-
tion, here, then, depends entirely upon context. (7)c., by contrast, tells us quite
concretely who had been running, even though it is unstated in the gerund clause:
it is the person ‘made breathless’, i.e. the him referred to in the main clause. This
illustrates a general principle of concrete subject implication: unless otherwise
indicated (see further below), the implied subject of a gerund is usually considered
to be identical with a semantically appropriate noun phrase occurring in the main
clause. This principle is seen at its clearest when the gerund clause is in the object
position, i.e. follows the catenative. We will therefore turn our attention now to
this case, and come back afterwards to subject-position clauses like those in (7).
In (8)a. My brother is the subject of both hated and playing; in (8)b. the same
applies to Kiara as regards remember and ordering.
However, this may not be the intended meaning. Let us now assume, as a
variant, that my brother hated it when someone else played rugby, and that what
Kiara does not remember is that not she but I ordered the computer. In cases like
this, when gerund subject and main clause subject diverge, the gerund subject
must be made explicit. Traditionally this is done by inserting the subject between
catenative and gerund, as a genitive noun or possessive determiner:
However, as this is regarded nowadays as rather formal and elaborate style, genitives
and possessives are usually replaced, more neutrally, by an object noun or pronoun:
The complex sentence (II) 165
(10) a. My brother hated his girlfriend playing rugby.
b. Kiara does not remember me ordering this computer.
Od Co
(11) a. My brother hated his girlfriend [playing rugby].
b. Kiara does not remember me [ordering this computer].
The version in (9) speaks against this analysis, however. Syntactically, genitives
and possessives are determiners, which means that they really have their place
inside the sub-clause. This also reflects the semantic relations better. Semantically,
his girlfriend and me in (10) are not objects of the main verb, and the latter does
not create a genuine complex–transitive relation between an object and a sub-
clause. What was respectively ‘hated’ and ‘not remembered’ were actions, not
people. The persons involved feature simply as agents. For these reasons we will
favour the following functional version for both (10) and (11):
S P Od S P Od
(12) a. My brother hated [his girlfriend(´s) playing rugby].
S P Od S P Od
b. Kiara does not remember [my/me ordering this computer].
Here we have essentially the same principle operating as in (8), but reversed. As
the gerund clause is now the subject of the main verb, its own implied subject in
the main clause must be the object, i.e. here it is the object of the main clause
that is the implied subject of the gerund. Here, in other words, we have subject–
object congruity: him is the implied subject of running, me of working and Lucy of
smoking, respectively.
Let us now look at the case discussed in the previous section of what we will
now call subject divergence. Here, with examples like those in (9)–(12), the
gerund subject diverges in reference from the main clause object. So, again, the
gerund subject must be made explicit: a genitive noun or possessive determiner is
introduced, as previously, before the gerund:
166 The complex sentence (II)
(14) a. The children´s running so fast surprised their parents.
b. My working overtime at weekends bothers my wife.
c. Lucy´s smoking so heavily disturbs her family.
But there is still a general preference in standard varieties for the genitive/
possessive versions, as in (14), when the gerund clause begins the sentence as
it does here.
Another question that arises with gerunds in initial position involves minor
violations of the congruity rule, which, in some cases and with some speakers,
seems to be less stringently applied than it does when the gerund clause follows
the main verb. Consider:
(16)a. is correct on the reading that my wife is the gerund subject. It is gram-
matically wrong, however, if it is meant in the same way as (15)b., since then
there would be a discrepancy between the implied subject and the main clause
object. On the same grounds, (16)b., c. and d. would also be ungrammatical
(especially so as there is no alternative reading possible as with (16)a.). The
subjects of running, smoking and driving are intended, respectively, to be chil-
dren, Lucy and Freddie, even though these are actually not the heads of the
main clause object noun phrases. What these sentences say, strictly speaking,
is that the children´s faces were ‘running’, Lucy´s heart was the smoker and the
tyres on Freddie´s vehicle did the driving: all nonsensical and unintended,
of course. But we give the examples question marks here rather than stars as,
in our estimation, though doubtful for some speakers, they are not impossible
for others.
S-gramm. P Cs S-log. P A
(18) a. It was very restful [lying on the beach].
S-gramm. P Cs S-log. P A
b. It will be fun [running over the dunes].
Stylistically, to emphasise the point, sentences like these are felt to be col-
loquial. When spoken, they usually include a slight pause before the gerund,
shown in writing by a comma. The pause suggests that the gerund reference
has been mentioned before and is now being repeated as a kind of clarifying
afterthought.
(20) a. I hate jogging (I´ve done it a couple of times and disliked it).
b. Jill doesn´t enjoy shopping for clothes (although she is forced to do it
occasionally).
c. Meeting Kenny at the fair last Saturday was a coincidence (= We met
Kenny at the fair last Saturday and it was a coincidence).
As a result, gerunds are attracted to contexts that we call factive, i.e. ones con-
taining expressions that presuppose (symbol ») the truth or factual status of other
things referred to (see SAGE, pp. 496f.). Typical factive verbs are catenatives like
resent, regret and appreciate:
(21) a. Our neighbours resent us buying a bigger car (= . . . resent the fact that
we bought . . .).
» We bought a bigger car.
b. Tom now regrets leaving the firm last year (= . . . regrets the fact that he
left . . .).
» Tom left the firm last year.
c. We appreciate your coming to see us (= . . . appreciate the fact that you
have come . . .).
» You have come to see us.
(22) a. Our neighbours think we have more money (*. . . think our hav-
ing . . . /*. . . the fact that we have . . .).
b. Tom now says he left the firm last year (*. . . says leaving . . ./*. . . the
fact that he left . . .).
Significantly, gerunds are not possible in these cases. Non-factive verbs cannot
generally take gerunds as complementation, whereas factive verbs usually do.
This is not a hard-and-fast rule, and there are several exceptions. Nevertheless,
it is a general principle.
By no means all factive verbs express comments or feelings:
Catenatives taking the gerund are listed below. Those that in addition can have
infinitive complementation are commented on individually. We will then return
to the concept of factivity in contrasting gerund and infinitive meanings (see
8.3.2.2 below).
advise, agree (also that), allow, attempt, bear, begin, consider (also that), continue,
decide (also that), go on, hate, intend, like, love, mean (also that), need, permit, prefer,
propose (also that), recommend (also that), regret (also that), remember (also that),
remind (also that), start, stop, try, understand (also that), want, warn (also that).
With these verbs the choice of complementation is oriented to one of the three
following factors:
•• Lexical semantics: the catenative has different meanings, and these require
different complementation-types. In the following we distinguish between
the ‘gerund meaning’ and the ‘infinitive meaning’ of individual catenatives.
•• Syntax: considerations of grammar determine the choice (e.g. presence of a
main clause object, possible conversion of the catenative into a prepositional
verb, and so on).
•• The choice is essentially free, though subject in some cases to certain
collocational restrictions.
•• Consider:
•• Bear:
•• Go on:
•• Prefer:
{{ Catenative meaning with gerund: ‘do both actions but like one of
them more’; factive.
•• Remember:
•• Regret:
(31) b. We regret to tell you that you have failed the test.
{{ Catenative meaning with infinitive: ‘be sorry about the message fol-
lowing’; non-factive.
{{ With the infinitive regret is used purely as a set-phrase accompany-
ing the introduction of bad news.
{{ Pattern: infinitive.
•• Mean:
(32) a. A job like hers means travelling all over the world.
•• Propose:
•• Stop:
S P A P A
(34) c. She stopped [(in order) to talk to her next-door neighbour].
•• Try:
{{ We deal here with the infinitive version first, as this is the most
common of the two structures:
•• Understand:
•• Want:
Implicative and factive meanings appear to have certain similarities. Let us com-
pare the factive verb regret with the implicative verb manage:
Both sentences ‘say’ that we sold the house. That is, they both contain the same
hidden meaning. But there is a significant difference in the respective relations
to the main verb:
Again, this is a tendency only, and not a rule. Apart from anything else, of course,
infinitive-bearing catenatives are by no means all implicative. Nevertheless, this
is an interesting systematic dimension of semantic difference between the two
complementation types with the same verb, and is yet another illustration of the
deep intertwining of syntax and meaning.
When there is an object (generally indirect) in the main clause, the infinitive is
required:
(44) a. The company does not allow people to smoke inside the building.
b. My friends advised me to call the police.
178 The complex sentence (II)
And in terms of functions, for the sake of clarity:
S P Oi Od P A
(45) a. The company does not allow people [to smoke inside the building].
S P Oi Od P Od
b. My friends advised me [to call the police].
The infinitive remains even when the catenative is passivised and the main
clause object is thus lost:
S P-pass A Od P A
(46) a. People are not allowed (by the company) [to smoke inside the building].
S P-pass A Od P Od
b. I was advised (by my friends) [to call the police].
What this rule essentially boils down to is that the infinitive is required when the
agent of the non-finite clause (i.e. the direct object) is referred to: people, friends
(45)/(46).
When there is no object in the active main clause (i.e. when there is no refer-
ence to the agent of the non-finite clause), the gerund is required:
(47) a. The company does not allow smoking inside the building.
b. My friends advised calling the police.
And functionally:
S P Od P A
(48) a. The company does not allow [smoking inside the building].
S P Od P Od
b. My friends advised [calling the police].
Catenative passivisation is possible here as well, with the gerund clause becoming
the subject:
S P A P-pass A
(49) a. [Smoking inside the building] is not allowed (by the company).
S P Od P-pass A
b. [Calling the police] was advised (by my friends).
This is a different case. These verbs can combine with prepositions to become
prepositional verbs; as far as they have non-finite complementation, they then
require the gerund:
When there is an object (generally indirect) in the main clause, the infinitive is
required:
Basically, (53)a. and b. and (53)c. and d. are interchangeable. However, there
are contextual preferences, depending mainly on the type of action expressed by
the non-finite verb. The more neutral form is always the infinitive. The gerund
180 The complex sentence (II)
is chosen for process-like actions, especially when intensity and duration are
stressed. In fact, we could insert the words the process of in (53)a. and c.: Our
neighbour began the process of mowing . . .; We will not attempt the process of
installing . . . .
The infinitive is also much preferred with stative verbs and passive forms:
(II) DREAD:
This is a slightly different case. The basic meaning of dread (= be very afraid) is
the same in each case, but the infinitive is restricted to certain collocations with
verbs denoting ‘mental visions’, such as think, imagine, envisage, etc. Otherwise
the standard form is the gerund:
Infinitive collocations such as that in (55)a. lend to the basic lexis of dread
the connotation dare not, making it implicative in a negative sense: I do not
think . . . (because I am afraid of imagining the consequences). With the gerund,
dread might be called factive in the same sense that we applied the term to verbs
like avoid and risk. (55)b. expresses ‘meeting Paul in the town’ as a given possibil-
ity (i.e. as a presupposition) that ‘Cathy’ was afraid of.
(III) NEED:
In this case there is no difference at all in terms of catenative meaning, nor indeed
in the choice of gerund vs. infinitive as such. Equivalence, however, depends
on the morphological distinction of passive vs. active. The following sentences
mean the same:
(56)b. shows the same construction and meaning as example (37)a. above with
want. That is, the main clause subject your hair is from the semantic perspective
the direct object of the sub-clause verb cutting. As with want, we might alter-
natively express this by saying that the gerund in (56)b. has passive meaning.
The complex sentence (II) 181
In fact the semantic equivalence to (56)a. (with the passive infinitive) seems to
suggest this strongly. Rather curiously, however, we cannot replace the active
gerund by the passive gerund here: *Your hair needs being cut. So which is the most
likely interpretation? The same question will arise later when we discuss the false
subject construction with the infinitive (see 12.2). But we will leave the issue
open here, and simply say that the active gerund following need is understood
Whichever explanation we favour, though, the facts of the case with example
(56) are clear: the two sentences are only identical in meaning if the infinitive
version is in the passive voice and the gerund version in the active voice.
The passive equivalents here would be being eaten (see the beginning of this chap-
ter) and having been eaten. The passive form of the perfect progressive (having been
being eaten) is felt to be clumsy, and is usually avoided for stylistic reasons.
As with the infinitive, the perfect forms indicate pastness or completion, usu-
ally in relation to the catenative, but also with reference to other elements in
the sentence. As the base form can also express this temporal relation there is
a considerable degree of overlap, making the perfect largely redundant. In a few
contexts, it is nevertheless necessary. Before discussing these, we will look briefly
at time reference with the base form.
From the going-to form in (57)a. it is clear that the gerund is future-oriented,
while in (57)b. it follows from the past tense of the main verb that walking refers
to a past action. This would also normally be underlined by particular contexts of
utterance, here perhaps a general discussion of a future plan in the first instance,
and conversation on ‘past weekend experiences’, say, in the second.
An additional time factor can be implied in the lexical character of individual
catenatives. Consider the following:
(58) a. Cathy regrets going to the party (= Cathy regrets that she went . . .).
b. I remembered seeing Tom on the beach (= I remembered that I had
seen . . .).
The finite versions in brackets indicate explicitly that each catenative is ori-
ented to a later time than its respective gerund. The time-level distinction
comes about in part lexically, as the catenative itself entails a retrospective
view of the gerund action. A further factor is the systematic factive character of
gerund meaning (see 8.2 above); the occurrence of the gerund action is presup-
posed as a fact, underlining the retrospective meaning of the catenative and thus
the priorness of the gerund action temporally.
There is no grammatical necessity for the perfect gerund here, however, because
the base form (as we have seen) does the job nicely on its own. The use of perfect
forms where base forms express the same is regarded in general as a little stilted,
and in neutral style is normally avoided. The (58) versions, then, would be pre-
ferred to those of (59). In contexts like these, the perfect gerund is therefore a
redundant form. In other situations, however, the priorness interpretation of the
base form may be ruled out if the catenative–gerund relation is not retrospective,
or other time factors in the sentence contradict it. Use of the perfect gerund is
then essential for the past meaning. Compare the following:
The perfect may also be needed when the relation between catenative and gerund
action is not retrospective, as in (61)a. and b., or is ambiguous in that respect, as
in (61)c.:
(61)a. and b. obviously point to distinct objects of anticipation: in the first case
that the subjects would begin to eat at the stated time, and in the second that
they would then already have done so. In (61)c. it is left open whether the
subject´s resentment already arose during the act of spending or did not actually
occur until after it. (61)d. comes down clearly in favour of ‘afterwards’. It there-
fore has a disambiguating function with respect to the possible retrospective
interpretation of (61)c.
In finite terms, then, the simple form of the perfect gerund (having spoken) is
equivalent to the past simple, while the progressive form of the perfect gerund
(having been speaking) corresponds to the past progressive. There are two things to
point out here: firstly, for stylistic reasons the finite progressive is often preferred
to the perfect progressive gerund, which can sound stilted and is in any case ‘a bit
of a mouthful’; secondly, the base form can replace having spoken in (62)a. (I regret
speaking . . .), but not having been speaking in (62)b.: *I regret speaking to Rodney
when you called. This links to the point made previously that base form gerunds
are usually construed as perfective. The imperfective variant is the perfect pro-
gressive gerund, i.e. the missing base form progressive is compensated for by using
the perfect progressive (where this is possible) or, alternatively, using a finite
progressive, as illustrated in the brackets in (62)b. In other words, to repeat the
point, the imperfective partner of the base form gerund is the perfect progressive:
as long, that is, as the base form is retrospective in the given context. Compare:
(63) a. She remembered going down the stairs when she heard the noise in the
kitchen.
(= She heard the noise in the kitchen and then went down the stairs.)
b. She remembered having been going down the stairs when she heard the
noise in the kitchen.
(= She was already in the process of going down the stairs when she
heard the noise.)
A context for (63)a. might be that the subject was upstairs when she heard a
noise below and then went down to investigate. (63)b. is a framework situation.
The subject is already on the way down when she hears the noise (and, say, then
runs back upstairs to her mobile phone to call for help). A more common way of
expressing this (only (63)b., though!) is simply in a that-clause with the progres-
sive: She remembered that she was going down the stairs when . . .).
As the action nominal profiles the action itself and its procedure more than the
gerund, it is the action nominal that is invariably chosen for reference to the
manner in which something occurs. The gerund, on the other hand, is usually
taken to express the fact that something occurs. Subject specification with an
action nominal requires an s-genitive noun or possessive determiner, which is
also one of the gerund options, of course:
(66) a. I did not like Jerry´s riding of the horse. He was not very gentle with it.
[action nominal: the way in which he rode it]
b. I did not like Jerry´s riding the horse. Celia should have ridden it. It was
her turn.
[gerund: the fact that he rode it]
As both constructs can be used with intransitive verbs, there may be ambiguity,
e.g. if we leave out mention of ‘the horse’ in (66).
(67)a. can then mean either (67)b., or (67)c.:
This ambiguity only occurs here also because both gerunds and action nomi-
nals can be preceded by genitives and possessive determiners. However, only the
gerund allows reduction to a noun or object pronoun, whereas only the action
nominal allows a definite article before it:
186 The complex sentence (II)
(68) a. I did not like the riding.
[action nominal interpretation only: the way the rider rode]
b. I did not like Jerry riding.
[gerund interpretation only: the fact that Jerry rode]
To sum up, here is an overview of the syntactic contrasts between the two forms:
Exercises
Exercise 1
Analyse the following sentences in terms of sentence functions:
Exercise 2
Fill in the gaps, using the gerund or infinitive forms of the verbs in brackets. Any
nouns or pronouns in the brackets indicate the subject of the verb:
The complex sentence (II) 187
1 Some maths teachers do not permit ……. (their pupils, use) pocket calculators.
2 Tony suggested ……. (we, consult) a child therapist in London.
3 Somehow Paul can never avoid ……. (upset) people, although he never
means ……. (do) so.
4 You may not remember …….. (meet) me at the party, but you definitely
liked ……. (listen to) my jokes.
5 As Kate did not like ……. (enter) the building alone, she put off ……. (go in)
until other police officers arrived.
6 If you need ……. (see) a particular doctor at the clinic, it could mean …….
(wait) for some time.
7 Let us now stop ……. (talk) about Scottish history and go on …… (look at)
the present condition of the country.
8 Tony and Geoff are considering ……. (go) to Morocco for their holidays, but
as Geoff hates ……. (be) in the sun all day, I have discreetly advised …….
(they, try) Finland instead.
9 I don´t deny ……. (watch) Chelsea on certain occasions, but I much prefer
… (see) Arsenal play, and will go on ……. (support) them as usual, even if
they do badly.
Exercise 3
State the differences in meaning between the a. and b. sentences in the following,
and provide possible contexts.
Both participle types feature in perfect and passive progressives, though the past
participle in the perfect progressive and the present participle in the passive are
solely forms of be (i.e. been and being respectively):
The complex sentence (III) 189
(2) a. We have been painting the kitchen door.
b. The door is being painted.
All these cases are dealt with fully in Chapters 10 and 11 on Complex phrases.
What interests us in this chapter are participles used in a similar way to that
described in the two preceding chapters on gerunds and infinitives: that is, as
predicators introducing sub-clauses at sentence-level:
(3) a. Taking her child tightly by the hand, Claire left the room.
b. The king entered the scene followed by three servants.
With certain exceptions, participle clauses are not closely tied to particular
main clause verbs. Subject to constraints of meaning, they can appear with
almost any verb in the main clause. This syntactic independence means that
they are not generally part of the main verb complementation, and the main
verb therefore does not have a catenative relationship to the participle. In this
respect participles differ from a large body of usage with gerunds and infinitives,
where the individual main verb, as we have seen, can have a strong determin-
ing effect on the type of non-finite clause following it. In the case of participles,
this kind of relationship is confined mainly to verbs of perception, as we will
see further below.
A P Od A A S P Od
(4) a. [Taking her child tightly by the hand], Claire left the room.
S P A A P Od
b. A man came into my office [carrying a large briefcase].
190 The complex sentence (III)
It is the adverbial function that distinguishes participle clauses syntactically from
gerund clauses. Gerund clauses function in the same way as noun phrases, i.e. as
S, Oi, Od, Cs or Co. They are also ‘attracted’ to prepositions, as we will see when
we come to discuss prepositional phrases. But they can rarely be adverbial clauses.
Participle clauses, on the other hand, are only adverbial in function. This also
points to the fact that present participles and gerunds differ radically from each
other in terms of meaning, as we will see further below.
The adverbial function accounts for the basically flexible position of the
participle clause, which in principle can precede or follow the main clause, as
shown in the examples.
(S) S
(5) a. [ Taking her child tightly by the hand], Claire left the room.
S (S)
b. A man came into my office [ carrying a large briefcase].
The presence of a direct object in the main clause, as in the example in (4)a. and
(5)a., does not alter this basic principle:
S Od (S)
(6) a. Joe greeted Dick [ standing on one leg].
S Od (S)
b. I washed the dog [ using the garden hose].
This does change, however, when the participle clause becomes part of the main
verb complementation and a catenative relation arises:
S Od (S)
(7) a. Joe saw Tim [ going into the lift].
S Od (S)
b. I noticed the dog [ playing with the garden hose].
The complex sentence (III) 191
In this case it is the main clause object that is understood as the subject of the
participle clause. Even here, though, the sense may allow a non-catenative inter-
pretation as an alternative, in which case the subject–subject relation kicks in.
This is unlikely in (7), but certainly possible, giving (as alternatives) the respec-
tive meanings Joe saw Tim as Joe was going into the lift and I noticed the dog as
I was playing with the garden hose. The ordinary way of avoiding such ambiguity is
to start with the participle clause when the subject–subject meaning is intended:
(S) S Od
(8) a. [ Going into the lift], Joe saw Tim.
(S) S Od
b. [ Playing with the garden hose], I noticed the dog.
We deal with catenative cases and their possible ambiguities later in the
chapter, in particular when we take a more detailed look at ‘perception con-
structions’ like those in (7). What we wish to emphasise for the moment is
that in the absence of a catenative interpretation the implied participle subject
must be identical with that of the main verb. If this is obviously not the case,
the sentence is ungrammatical:
These examples show what are called misrelated or (rather less formally) ‘dangling’
participles. The grammar clashes with the sense, often creating, as here, a grotesque
or comical effect: people do not ‘rain heavily’, nor do yachts lose control of them-
selves, though in fact that is what these sentences express according to their syntax.
As we will see in the following section, there is a certain tolerance of misrelated
participles in a few closely defined cases. Generally, though, if the subjects of the
two clauses are distinct, we have to change the syntax.
Another solution is simply to add the separate subject to the participle clause.
(12) a. We ran for shelter, with the rain pouring down heavily.
b. With Daly´s crew losing control of the sails, the yacht turned on its side.
(13) a. With Charles and Julia getting married, we won´t be going on holiday
this year.
b. They felt forced to sell the house, with developers buying up the land
around them.
(14) a. He´s dissatisfied with his performance, judging by the look on his face.
b. Considering how long she has been learning French, her pronunciation
is poor.
c. Strictly speaking, you need a special pass to enter the building.
Informally, they are also tolerated in certain impersonal constructions, when the
subject is referred to elsewhere in the sentence, or with passives when there is a
clear link to a stated or implied by-agent:
(16) ● Now
▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫
writing a letter
▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫
I was writing a letter
In essence, the present participle has the same aspectual meaning and can be
represented in the same way:
▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫▫
playing tennis/getting out of the car
In fact, participles can appear with time conjunctions, especially in more for-
mal style, to emphasise this time-frame sense ( . . . while playing tennis; . . . when
getting out of the car). The basic framework meaning is not necessarily always
given in this strict sense. It can often glide over into a more general sense of
‘ongoingness’ and suggest a parallel action to the activity or state expressed in
the main clause. In this case it may then imply ‘throughout’:
(20) a. Bryant left for work still wearing his carpet slippers.
b. Be careful climbing those cliffs!
c. Passengers must remain seated going through the tunnel.
Despite this, however, participle clauses are usually regarded primarily as adver-
bial clauses of time (if specification is required), since the prominent meaning
is the simultaneous or parallel one. We have already seen that participles can
appear with conjunctions. These can in fact specify other meanings of the clause
in addition to the time factor in the participle:
The complex sentence (III) 195
(23) a. Although wearing a suit, I was not admitted to the hotel restaurant.
[concession]
b. If intending to cross the Channel by ferry this weekend, travellers must
be prepared for long delays. [condition]
The sequence of acts is understood as being in the order in which they are
mentioned. Public media commentaries make considerable use of point-telic par-
ticiples, where appropriate, as they can ‘economise’ on language volume. The
resulting sentences, though, are often incomplete (i.e. without a main clause):
(25) a. Rover Boy there jumping the fourth slightly ahead of Time Out and
What´s Up, but landing awkwardly and losing ground as Time Out chal-
lenges strongly on the far side.
b. The Queen leaving the plane now in front of Prince Philip and coming
down the gangway to greet the Mayor of Berlin.
(26) a. Thinking the banknotes were forged, Ray contacted the police.
(= As he thought . . .)
b. Trusting the salesman´s promise, we bought the car immediately.
(= Because we trusted . . .)
c. Feeling rather ill, I drove to the local doctor´s surgery.
(= As I was feeling . . .)
196 The complex sentence (III)
In general, this semantic relation also remains when the participle clause follows.
However, some stative verb participles in this position can alternatively convey
the parallel (‘accompanying’) meaning:
(27) a. Ray contacted the police thinking the banknotes were forged.
(= When he contacted . . ., he thought . . .)
b. I drove to the local doctor´s surgery feeling rather ill.
(= During the drive I felt . . .)
c. We bought the car immediately, trusting the salesman´s promise.
(= When we bought the car, we trusted . . .)
A lot depends here on the individual verb and whether its lexical meaning is
amenable to the idea of an ‘accompanying circumstance’. Sometimes, as in (27)a.
and b. with think and feel, the parallel meaning is furthered especially when there
is no pause (and in writing no comma) before the sub-clause.
As indicated above (see 9.1.1.1), a separate participle subject introduced by
with strongly underlines causal meaning; and this is particularly so with stative
participles:
(28) a. With Jonathan being out of work, we won´t be going on holiday this year.
b. The house in the town is very convenient, especially with Cathy having
no car.
Note again what was said about subject relations and catenatives in 9.1.1: here
the direct object of the main clause is the implied subject of the participle.
The infinitives in (30)a. and c. show the simple form meaning of completion,
i.e. the whole act was perceived in each case: Charlotte swam from one river
bank to the other and Ron ate the whole sandwich. The present participles, on
the other hand, only express the respective acts as in progress, i.e. there is no
entailment in (30)b. that Charlotte actually reached the other river bank, nor in
(30)d. that Jamie ate all of the sandwich. This basic distinction leads to a com-
mon preference for the participle when the process of the action or its manner of
occurrence is in focus, while the infinitive tends to stress a whole ‘occasion’ of the
action or the fact that it occurred:
Note that although participle clauses are adverbial after verbs of perception,
infinitive clauses function as object complements:
S P Od Co P A
(32) a. Hannah watched Charlotte [swim across the river].
S P Od Co P Od
b. Jamie saw Ron [ eat a sandwich].
This is because they do not refer to the circumstances of perception (an adverbial
relation), but to part of its object.
One or two intransitive verbs belong here also, e.g. remain, stay, and get in the
sense of ‘become’:
Base form (present participle) Perfect participle (simple) Perfect participle (progressive)
As with the other non-finite perfects, the perfect participle indicates pastness or
completion, generally speaking relative to the time level attached to the main
verb and manifested in its tense form. It is equivalent, that is, to the finite past
tense, the finite present perfect, or the finite past perfect, depending on context.
As might be expected, perfect participle clauses are adverbial in function, like
their base form equivalents:
(38) a. I don´t really feel like any food now, having been eating for most of the
afternoon. (= . . . as I have been eating . . .)
b. Having been cooking when you called yesterday, I did not hear the
phone. (= As I was cooking yesterday . . .)
A further point that we can see from (38) is that the perfect participle can be
used to express causal meaning, or at least causal overtones. The conjunction as
makes this clear in the finite paraphrases. This is a contextual (and/or lexical)
connotation. It is not part of the participle meaning as such, but results simply
from the close nature of the time relation between the two clauses. Causal mean-
ing is essentially decided by the overall semantic relation between the two clauses,
i.e. whether what they respectively refer to can be regarded logically as causally
linked or not. Despite the heavy role of context here, though, perfect participles
are very often favoured when causal meaning has to be expressed, especially if
a stylistically less direct and rather more incidental and nuanced reference to
causality is intended.
Passive present participle Passive perfect participle (simple) Passive perfect participle
(progressive)
being eaten having been eaten (?) having been being eaten
Adverbial (A): Lennie lay on the couch Subject (S): Reading improves one´s mind.
reading.
Never subject, object, or Direct object (Od): I like reading.
complement.
Subject complement (Cs): My favourite pastime
is reading.
Never adverbial (apart from the exceptional
case of go shopping/swimming/jogging, etc.)
As we will see later, there are also clear distinctions at phrase level.
S P A A P A
(39) a. The children lay on the grass, [exhausted after their energetic games].
(S)
A P A S P
b. [Surprised by the changes in the area], we decided on a little
Od
(S) exploration.
•• the present participle is active (in terms of voice), and imperfective (in terms
of aspect);
•• the past participle is generally passive (in terms of voice), and always perfective
(in terms of aspect).
202 The complex sentence (III)
The past participle, in other words, expresses a state (and not an action) as an
‘accompanier’ to the reference in the main clause. The state, however, results
from a previous action and therefore can be said to imply one. With transitive
verbs, the implied subject of the past participle is the patient of this implied
action. The past participle thereby confers a passive sense on the participle
clause, and in many (if not most) cases can be understood as a kind of ‘passive
participle’ shortening an implied passive construction. This is underlined by
the fact that paraphrase by a finite verb usually requires the passive form:
(40) a. Re-decorated in brighter colours, this room would be ideal for children.
(If it is re-decorated . . . )
b. Jeremy´s bicycle stood against the fence, covered by a sheet of plastic.
( . . . , and had been covered . . . )
The ‘beforeness’ element in examples like these can often be expressed alterna-
tively by a perfect participle: but notice that here also we need a passive form:
Having been decorated . . . ; . . . having been covered.
Passive meaning, then, is strongly associated with the past participle. However,
there is not always a direct and automatic link to the passive in syntactic terms.
The most prominent semantic factor in the past participle is the state itself. As
we will see further below, there are cases where this cannot really be said simply
to derive from a passive verb form alone. Apart from this, past participle use also
extends to a small number of intransitive verbs. With these, there is no passive
meaning at all. The term ‘passive participle’ is therefore not 100% appropriate,
and is thus better placed in inverted commas, as we have done. The semantics of
state, however, always apply when the past participle occurs.
(41) a. When freshly painted, furniture must be placed in the drying room.
[time]
b. Children under 10 are not allowed in the pool, unless accompanied by
an adult.
[condition]
c. Although just serviced, the car has broken down again.
[concession]
(43) a. With the famous tower closed for repair, Blackpool has attracted fewer
visitors this summer. (As the famous tower is closed . . . )
b. The team is much less effective with Braeburn and Dawley injured.
( . . . , as Braeburn and Dawley are injured.)
(44) a. I would like the food (to be) delivered on Saturday morning, please.
b. The boss wants this package (to be) sent off immediately.
As the infinitives in brackets indicate, either the passive infinitive can be used
in full, or alternatively be reduced to the past participle alone. Other catenatives
belonging to this group are desire, require and prefer.
A second catenative group consists of verbs of perception:
We dealt above with verbs of perception followed by the present participle or the
infinitive without to (see 9.1.3.1). The difference, to re-cap, is aspectual, with
the present participle as the imperfective partner (= finite progressive form), and
the infinitive as the perfective one (= finite simple form). The examples in (45)
are the passive versions of active infinitive clauses, i.e.:
204 The complex sentence (III)
(46) a. Peter listened to Marie tell a joke about politicians.
b. Joey saw Leicester City beat his favourite team in the Cup last week.
The past participles in (45), that is, have the same perfective meaning as the
active versions with the infinitive in (46). A point to note here is that the alter-
natives with passive infinitives, as in (44), are not an option in (45). This is
because the active infinitive clause with a verb of perception needs an infinitive
without to, and this has no passive equivalent. We cannot say *Peter listened to
a joke be told . . . , or *Joey saw his favourite team be beaten . . . . Reduction to the
past participle is therefore mandatory here.
Functional analyses are as follows:
As was said above, it is important to note here that the participle clause is func-
tionally an object complement. This corresponds to the active interpretations
with the infinitive, e.g.:
The same functional labelling of the sub-clause would apply also to an active
rendering of (47)a., such as The boss wants you to send off this package immediately.
Catenatives with causative meanings also fit this pattern. As they have one or
two further syntactic characteristics of their own, we deal with them in a separate
sub-section immediately below.
The sub-clause active equivalents, like the examples discussed in 9.2.3.1, use the
infinitive without to:
Agent relations here can vary according to context. In (51)a. the case is the
same as with have, i.e. the task expressed by the participle is not performed by
the subject of the main verb. In (51)b., however, the agent is identical with the
subject of the main verb. Have does not allow this interpretation. This makes no
difference to the functional syntax, though.
Another meaning of the same construction with get and have is ‘to experience
something negative’, often with the connotation of the subject being careless or
otherwise partly responsible:
Zadie had her mobile phone stolen on a train; Tom got a fishbone stuck in his
throat.
Finally, there are one or two fixed idiomatic expressions with make that follow
the same pattern: to make something/oneself heard/understood/felt. Examples:
Because of the howling wind we could not make ourselves understood; The influ-
ence of the new law is slowly making itself felt; John wants to make his voice heard in
the art world.
Functional relations are the same as for the examples in the previous section:
In these cases the participles have no verbal character and therefore no predica-
tor function. Consequently, they do not form sub-clauses, but remain as adjective
phrases at main clause level. Like any other kind of adjective phrase in the same
position, the participles here function as subject complements:
206 The complex sentence (III)
A S P Cs A
(54) a. In storms walkers get lost on the moors.
S P Cs A
b. All the shops in the city centre remained closed after the riots.
The ‘state’ meaning of past participles makes them particularly suited to an adjec-
tive role, so much so, in fact, that distinguishing between verbal and adjectival
character is difficult in certain cases. This is especially so after the verb be. The
following are ambiguous in both meaning and syntax:
These may mean, firstly, that the respective subject is described as being in a par-
ticular condition, e.g. the eggs on the plate were in a fried state (and not raw or
scrambled), and the park gate was not open but shut, so that nobody could enter.
Here be is a full verb followed by an adjective as Cs:
S P Cs
(56) a. The eggs were fried.
b. The park gate is closed.
The other interpretation involves an action: someone fried the eggs and someone
closes the gate, e.g. The eggs were fried in this pan; The park gate is closed punctually
every day at 6 pm. In this case be is an auxiliary verb forming the passive:
It is important to note that this ambiguity arises only with be. No other verbs
can take on the role of an auxiliary in passive constructions. Get in (54)a., for
instance, must be viewed as a full lexical verb with the meaning of become (hence
the subject complement following).
9.2.4.1 ‘Are we finished now?’: adjectival past participles with ‘active’ meaning
The answer to the question is ‘Not quite, but almost’. Finally, we must include
a remark on past participles with an ‘active’ meaning. First, though, a note of
explanation and reminder: all past participles discussed so far have been those
of transitive verbs. This is logically so, as the kind of state meaning we have
been talking about is ‘passive’ in nature, even when the participle is an adjec-
tive: fried eggs, that is, are eggs that have been fried, and a closed gate is one that
has been closed. In other words, the entity that the participle describes is (or was)
the patient of an action and the potential subject of a passive verb (as pointed
The complex sentence (III) 207
out at the beginning of the chapter). However, there is a handful of adjectival
past participles, formed mainly from intransitive verbs, which convey an ‘active’
meaning. The noun involved here is the potential subject of an active verb and
refers, classically, to the agent of an action:
(58)d. is a rare transitive example, and can only occur in this sense predicatively.
The others are intransitive. Further examples (also intransitive) are the follow-
ing: fallen apples, a faded colour, an advanced student, an experienced guide, a departed
soul. Most of these potential subjects refer to the experiencer of an action, rather
than the agent. But we will not pursue that point here. In their adjective roles,
most of these participles can be used either predicatively or attributively, but one
or two are restricted: fallen and escaped, for instance, are generally avoided in pre-
dicative position, while finished in attributive position takes on passive meaning
(a finished product). A common predicative-only example is gone, as in My money
is gone.
Exercises
Exercise 1
Analyse the following sentences in terms of sentence functions:
1 Wiping his forehead with a handkerchief, the gardener put down his
spade.
2 A woman was sitting at the bar sipping a cocktail.
3 Shouting angrily, the couple pursued the bicycle thief out of the park.
4 Cleo got onto the train thinking it was the 4.30 to Hendon.
5 Seeing the water boiling, I turned off the gas.
6 When walking up to her front-door one evening, Soraya heard a loud noise
coming from behind the house.
7 With our only van broken down, we unfortunately can´t make home deliveries.
8 Although bored by the disc-jockey, Cindy and Clive stayed dancing at the
club for another two hours.
9 The singer returned to the stage followed by his band.
10 Astonished by the scene at the bank, we just stood there, staring at the police
cars.
11 With their sirens blaring, four fire engines raced into the park.
12 Sue always has her hair done by the stylist in Market Street.
13 You cannot use the country club dining room unless invited by a member.
208 The complex sentence (III)
Exercise 2
State the differences in meaning between the a. and b. sentences in the following,
and say how those differences arise. Provide possible contexts.
(1) a. The man sitting next to Jane spilt his coffee over her.
b. Jane was sure that he did it on purpose.
c. She left without saying a word.
The clause itself, of course, will have its own internal sentence functions, just like
any other sub-clause:
P A
(2) a. . . . sitting next to Jane . . .
S P Od A
b. . . . that he did it on purpose . . .
P Od
c. . . . saying a word . . .
210 The complex phrase (I)
However, a preliminary word on analysis conventions is necessary here. In just
a sentence-functional analysis, we will indicate clauses subordinated at phrase
level by slants or backslashes (/ /), and show the head of the phrase by an arrow
( ).
S P A P Od A
(3) a. The man /sitting next to Jane/ spilt his coffee over her.
S P Cs S P Od A
b. Jane was sure /that he did it on purpose/.
S P A P Od
c. She left without /saying a word/.
Note that this is not a full internal analysis of phrases. It is a functional sentence
and clause analysis which is basically of the kind we have been doing in the
previous chapters. We are introducing the slant convention here to distinguish
sub-clauses at phrase level from those at clause level (for which we will continue
to use square brackets, as we have done so far). A more detailed analysis of phrase
functions, as shown in Chapter 4, is best done separately. This point will be taken
up again later in the chapter.
(4) a. The strange girl who Jenny had noticed on the train was standing out-
side the café.
b. Jenny had a vague idea that the girl was in some kind of trouble.
c. Two boys playing football in the street saw Mrs Belford leave her
house.
The clauses in bold type are part of the same phrase as the noun which they
follow. The noun is the head of the phrase, but in its relation to the postmodifica-
tion it is traditionally called the antecedent:
The complex phrase (I) 211
Noun phrase
If we were analysing the sentences in (4) just in terms of sentence and clause
functions, we would do this in the way that we showed above in (3):
S Od S P A P A
(5) a. The strange girl /who Jenny had noticed on the train/ was standing outside
the café.
S P Od S P A
b. Jenny had a vague idea / that the girl was in some kind of trouble/.
S P Od A P Od Co P Od
c. Two boys /playing football in the street/ saw Mrs Belford [leave her house].
(6) a. The strange girl who Jenny had noticed on the train . . .
The strange girl (ø) Jenny had noticed on the train . . .
b. The car which/that I bought last month . . .
The car (ø) I bought last month . . .
S
(7) a. Mandy did not know the person /who (that) had sent her the flowers/.
Od
b. The car /which (that, ø) I am going to buy/ is not yet in the showroom.
The complex phrase (I) 213
Od
c. Tony and Christine are the people /who (whom, that, ø) we see most
often socially/.
A
d. That is the house /in which my father was born/.
Cs
(8) a. The kind of man /that (which, ø) Simon had become/ shocked us pro-
foundly.
Co
b. I will not repeat the names /that (which, ø) the boss called you/ in his rage.
A S P-pass
(9) a. That is the house /in which my father was born/.
P1 Od S P1
b. The opportunity /for which I had been waiting/ came along surprisingly
quickly.
Notice that in (9)b. the preposition and relative pronoun have the same posi-
tions as those in (9)a., and appear to form a unit in the same way: however,
this is not so. The preposition for is part of the prepositional verb wait for, and
therefore part of the predicator, from which it is split off and placed before the
relative pronoun. When one predicator is split like this, we mark each part as
P and give it the same subscript numeral to indicate that the two parts belong
together as one unit (see also 5.4.2).
This initial position in the relative clause is not the only possibility for prepo-
sitions. There is an alternative: final position, i.e. at the end of the clause. This
counts for both prepositional verbs and prepositional phrases:
214 The complex phrase (I)
A1 S P-pass A1
(10) a. That is the house /which my father was born in/.
Od S P
b. The opportunity /which I had been waiting for/ came along surprisingly
quickly.
In (10) we have a reversal of the situation in (9). A phrase-split has now occurred
in the prepositional phrase in (9)a., whereas that in the verb phrase in (9)b. has
been removed. In actual fact, this final position of the preposition in relative
clauses is the preferred one in everyday language. The initial position is regarded
as stylistically elevated.
Position of the preposition also affects the choice of relative pronoun. Only
which and whom are permitted when the preposition is initial, as in (11)a. and b.
When the preposition is final, as in (11)c. and d., all relative pronouns (includ-
ing the zero pronoun) are possible:
A S P-pass
(11) a. Mrs Quinn is the teacher /to whom the anonymous letters were sent/.
(not *to who . . . )
A S A P
b. The bus stop /at which the children usually wait/ is by the station.
(not *at that . . . , or *at ø . . . )
A1 S
c. Mrs Quinn is the teacher / who (whom, that, ø) the anonymous letters
P-pass A1
were sent to/.
A1 S A P A1
d. The bus stop /that (which, ø) the children usually wait at / is by the station.
A1 A1
Mrs Quinn is the teacher /whom anonymous letters were sent to Mrs Quinn/.
Od
(13) a. We visited a friend in Bournemouth.
Od
The friend /that we visited the friend/ lives in Bournemouth.
Od
b. Vincent has taken a job in a factory.
Od
The job / ø Vincent has taken a job/ is in a factory.
Relative clauses with the zero pronoun, as in (13)b., seem especially to provoke
error as the Od is not overtly present in the sentence at all. The temptation
to insert a ‘false’ personal pronoun (instead of simply repeating the full noun
wrongly) is particularly prevalent, e.g. here *The job Vincent has taken it is
in a factory.
The ‘empty slot’ phenomenon is found also with other clause types, as we will
see in Chapter 12.
216 The complex phrase (I)
10.1.5 The concept of restriction
Restriction was introduced in Chapter 4, 4.1.2.1 as being fundamental to all
forms of postmodification, which show two basic kinds of meaning relation
to the antecedent: restrictive and non-restrictive. The concept of restriction
is particularly relevant to relative clauses, which is why it is taken up here
again.
All the relative clause examples so far have been restrictive. This means that
they identify the antecedent. Consider again:
The relative clauses here answer the question Which one(s)? Thus the ‘car’ meant
in (14)a. is ‘that one (and only that one) which I am going to buy’. Similarly,
the particular ‘people’ referred to in (14)b. are ‘those that we see most often
socially’ and no others. The antecedents alone could refer to any cars or people.
The relative clause restricts the choice to the individual or group which fits the
description. By contrast, a non-restrictive relative clause does not have this iden-
tifying or defining function. It simply gives added information. Consider (15)a.
and (15)b. The only semantic difference between them is that the relative clause
in the first is restrictive, whereas in the second it is non-restrictive (signalled here
by the commas):
(15) a. The crew members who were still on the ship were rescued by helicopter.
b. The crew members, who were still on the ship, were rescued by helicopter.
The version in (15)a. identifies which crew members were rescued by helicop-
ter: that is, those (and only those) who were still on the ship. What is implied
here is that other members of the crew were not rescued in this way (for exam-
ple, because they had already escaped and were in safety): the restrictive relative
clause here selects a particular group of crew members from the total number.
In (15)b., however, all the crew members are meant. We can express this in the
two sentences: The crew members were still on the ship. They were (then) rescued
by helicopter.
If we do the same for (15)a., we have to say: Some of the crew members were still
on the ship. They were (then) rescued . . . .
The non-restrictive relative clause in (15)b. is a kind of parenthesis, i.e. a
clause conveying extra information not necessary to understand the anteced-
ent. We can therefore take it out of the sentence (as we did just above) without
altering the identity of the antecedent: The crew members were still on the ship.
The parenthesis-character is shown by the commas. These also reflect pronun-
ciation. Commas in writing usually signal pauses in speech. Here, slight pauses
are made before and after the relative clause, and the clause itself has a separate
intonation pattern:
The complex phrase (I) 217
(16) The crew members, who were still on the ship, were rescued by helicopter.
Restrictive relative clauses, by contrast, are pronounced with no pause and in the
same breath as the rest of the noun phrase:
(17) The crew members who were still on the ship were rescued by helicopter.
•• only who(m), which and whose are possible in non-restrictive relative clauses;
•• the use of that and the zero pronoun is confined to restrictive relative clauses.
Three final points: firstly, non-restrictive relative clauses are more common in
formal rather than in informal language styles. Secondly, non-restrictive post-
modification occurs more commonly with relative clauses than with most other
postmodification types; it is therefore especially relevant to relative clauses.
Thirdly, an analytical question: do restrictive and non-restrictive clauses have
the same syntactic status? Phonologically and semantically, as we have seen,
non-restrictive clauses are separate from their antecedent phrase. For this rea-
son they could be regarded also as syntactically separate. They would then be
clauses which are directly subordinated at sentence level (see SAGE, pp. 535f.).
What speaks against this, however, is that the relative pronoun still has the
head of a noun phrase as its antecedent (here: crew members), suggesting that
the phrase relation is the same as in the restrictive case. This is what we will
assume here also.
(16) is then analysed in the same way as (17):
S S P A A P-pass A
(18) a. The crew members, /who were still on the ship/, were rescued by helicopter.
S S P A A P-pass A
b. The crew members /who were still on the ship/ were rescued by helicopter.
The normal requirement for indirect objects is that they should be positioned
between the predicator and the direct object. With the relative pronoun as Oi
this would not be possible, of course, as the relative pronoun has to introduce the
clause. The only solution therefore lies in the prepositional phrase. A similar rule
applies to interrogative pronouns (see 3.1.3).
(21) a. The table whose legs were badly scratched cost far too much.
b. The table of which the legs were badly scratched cost far too much.
c. The table, of which the legs were badly scratched, cost far too much.
d. The table with the badly scratched legs cost far too much.
In certain marked styles (e.g. elevated or emphatic) of-genitives can occur with
person referents. The relative clause version is of whom, used like of which mainly
in non-restrictive clauses. An often preferred syntactic variation with of-genitive
relative clauses is to place the belonging noun before the of-genitive relative
pronoun, as in (22)b. and (22)c.:
A
(23) a. Thursday afternoon is a time /when (at which) we are very busy in the
office/.
A
b. There was a violent robbery yesterday in the street /where (in which)
Rod works/.
A
c. I can´t think of a reason /why (for which) Jason should have been here
yesterday/.
Why can also be omitted (i.e. replaced by the zero pronoun) in less formal English:
I can´t think of a reason Jason should have been here yesterday. This does not gener-
ally apply to when and where, however.
S
(24) a. She invited me to her party, / which was nice of her/.
Od
b. Her husband whistles and hums in public, /which she finds
embarrassing/.
The two-way arrow indicates that the whole clause is the antecedent.
S P Od A A S P Oi Od
(25) a. Kay met a friend at the station yesterday /who gave her a lift home/.
S P Od A A Od S P
b. I found several old photo albums in the attic last week /that I had not
A
seen before/.
Constructions like this are only permissible when there is semantically no doubt
about what the antecedent is. A sentence like the following would probably be
avoided:
(26) (?) Bennet married a girl from a midlands town that he wasn´t exactly in
love with.
This is not grammatically wrong, but humorously ambiguous: was it the girl or the
town that Bennet was not in love with?
S P Od Od S P A S P A A
(27) a. She married a man/ ø she had met [while she was on a cruise in the
Caribbean]/.
S S P Od S P Cs A S P Od
b. A guest /who complained [that the steak was tough [after he had ordered it
Co P1-pass A P1-pass Od P1-pass
well done]]/ was later given his money back.
(28) a. An old friend that I had forgotten to contact phoned me the day after
my wedding.
b. Cleaning the flat is the task that I hate doing most.
c. The woman who the police thought had committed the crime was
arrested in Harlow.
The complex phrase (I) 221
The relative pronouns in these examples introduce relative clauses in the normal
way. However, they have no functional relation within the main relative clause.
They are syntactically part of a subordinate clause inside the relative clause. In
(28)a., for instance, the relative pronoun that appears to be the direct object of
had forgotten, but in fact it is the direct object of the infinitive sub-clause to con-
tact. Similarly, that in (28)b. is the direct object of doing, not hate, while in (28)c.
who, although apparently the direct object of thought, is actually not: it is in fact
the subject of had committed. Analytically, this looks as follows:
S Od S P Od P
(29) a. An old friend /that I had forgotten [to contact ]/
P Od A
phoned me the day after my wedding.
S P Cs Od S P Od P A
b. This is the job /that I hate [doing ] most.
S S S P Od P
c. The woman /who the police thought [ had committed
Od P-pass A
the crime]/ was arrested in Harlow.
We can consider this best in terms of the ‘empty slot’ idea introduced in 10.1.4
above. There we said that a phrase made into a relative pronoun is removed from
a later position in the clause and leaves an empty slot there. In these cases, the
empty slot is not left in the main relative clause, but in a sub-clause, indicated by
the arrows in the examples. The fronted pronoun has been ‘taken out’ of that sub-
clause. This phenomenon is what we call here secondary fronting. It is unknown
in many other languages, and often strange to EFL learners. It is nevertheless very
common in English, especially in speech and informal styles.
S P Od P A
(31) a. Two men /wearing face-masks/ burst through the door.
[= two men who were wearing . . . ]
S P Od P Od
b. All passengers /possessing European passports/ should join queue number 3.
[= all passengers who possess . . . ]
(33) a word meaning ‘rubbish’ (= a word that means ‘rubbish’); anyone seeing
that picture for the first time (= anyone who sees . . . ); a bottle containing
colourless liquid (= a bottle which contains . . . ).
Principally involved here are stative verbs that belong to the semantic categories
of possession and perception (see also SAGE, p. 324).
Past participles in postmodification represent passive forms in the equivalent
relative clauses:
The complex phrase (I) 223
S P A P A A
(34) a. The truck /parked across the street/ has been there for a week.
[past participle = the truck that has been parked . . . ]
S P Od P A
b. We ate beef /cooked in wine/.
[past participle = beef that had been cooked . . . ]
Here again the antecedent is always the implied subject of the participle.
These are rather different from participle postmodifiers. Infinitives are not a sim-
ple alternative to relative clauses in the way that participles are. There are two
special semantic elements involved in (35):
Here are more examples of what we call the modal relative infinitive:
224 The complex phrase (I)
(Od)
S P Cs P A
Modal relative infinitives are especially common with indefinite pronouns, such
as something, anything, everything, etc.:
S P A
(38) a. The book on the table belongs to Carron.
S S P A P A
b. The book /which is on the table/ belongs to Carron.
The implication in (40)a. would be that Tim has more than one sister, and in
(40)b. that Tina Simms is not the only maths teacher at the school in question.
Restrictive apposition commonly occurs when there is semantic focus on the
appositive noun, and the antecedent characterises it by reference to category or
type: the actor Salvatore Caldero; the word ‘sanctuary’; the herb oregano; the Greek
letter sigma.
Analytically, apposition should remain unmarked at sentence level, as it is not
clausal and therefore has no internal sentence functions. However, in the case of
non-restrictive apposition, there is a need for the sake of clarity to indicate that
it is part of the preceding noun phrase. This will be done using the arrow conven-
tion showing the antecedent. With the restrictive type we will simply place the
sentence function marker in such a way as to show that the postmodifying noun
phrase is included. Here are three examples from above. All sentence functions
are shown:
P1 S P1 Od
(41) a. Have you met Mrs Stanmore, our restaurant manager?
S P Od
b. My brother, an accomplished musician, has joined the local chamber
orchestra.
S P A
c. Tim´s sister Beth goes to Clongarth High School.
(42) a. I saw the new maths teacher, Tina Simms, in town last Thursday.
b. I saw the new maths teacher, who is Tina Simms, in town last Thursday.
226 The complex phrase (I)
The relative clause in (42)b. suggests that the listener or reader already knows the
person Tina Simms, but the appositive version in (42)a. does not.
As no clausal element is involved, the kind of apposition discussed so far
does not create a complex phrase. We will see below, however, that apposi-
tion can also include clauses, and indeed that particular types of apposition are
entirely clausal.
10.3.1 Partitives
Apposition can also express just a part of the antecedent. The appositive noun is
then often a numeral or quantifier used as a pronoun:
(43) a. Only about fifty delegates, many fast asleep, were present at the dis-
cussion.
b. A whole troop of police, some of them with dogs, searched the train.
Here too, there is a semantic connection to the relative clause, and in fact a
relative clause may be included in the appositive noun phrase: . . . many of
whom were fast asleep . . . . Note in this case, though, that the relative clause
postmodifies the appositive pronoun, and has no direct syntactic relation to the
antecedent of the apposition. The same is true of participle clauses:
(44) a. Four young men, two of them carrying knives, were arrested yester-
day after an affray outside La Dolce Vita coffee bar in Townley High
Street.
b. The three escaped convicts, one of them considered very dangerous,
are still at large in the Manchester area.
Of course, clause structures introduced like this into the appositive noun phrase
make it a complex postmodification of the antecedent noun.
Part relations are also involved when certain members of a group are speci-
fied or singled out as representatives. Focusing expressions, such as for example,
particularly, like, etc., then usually accompany the apposition:
(45) a. Many low-income workers, especially women in retail jobs, are now
suffering under the recession.
b. The new trade restrictions will affect several important sections of the
economy, for example, car manufacture or chemical engineering.
Here are two examples from above given full sentence analysis:
S P Od P-pass A
(46) a. Four young men, two of them /carrying knives/, were arrested yesterday . . . .
The complex phrase (I) 227
S P1 A
b. Many low-income workers, especially women in retail jobs, are now
P1 A
suffering under the recession.
Note that in (46)a. the participle clause is a second postmodification inside the
first. As it is clausal, we place it in slants.
(47) a. I did not like the idea that we might run out of petrol in the middle of
the desert.
b. The fact that Fred has bought an expensive car reveals something about
his income.
Here again we can apply the equivalence test: Brian´s hopes were of marrying Babsi;
Wendy´s intention was to go to the beach.
Appositive clauses are usually restrictive, as in the examples. The most
common non-restrictive type occurs with the gerund clause as direct post-
modifier (i.e. without a preposition):
(49) a. Sadly, Ken´s great hobby, keeping bees, ended with the move to a flat.
b. Caitlyn refused to give up her first love, painting landscapes.
(50) a. Sadly, keeping bees, Ken´s great hobby, ended when he had to move to
a flat.
b. Caitlyn refused to give up painting landscapes, her first love.
This looks analytically as follows. Note again that the purpose of the two-way
arrow is to show the whole clause as the antecedent:
A S P Od P A
(51) a. Sadly, [keeping bees, Ken´s great hobby,] ended with the move to
a flat.
S P Od P Od P Od
(52) a. We had to make our escape in full moonlight, a problem nobody seemed
to have envisaged.
b. Tommy said that he hadn´t been informed, a complete lie actually.
c. To rehearse the whole play so early, the producer´s first idea, would have
been impossible.
Exercises
Exercise 1
Analyse the following sentences in terms of sentence functions:
Exercise 2
Comment on the syntax of the -ing-forms in the following:
1 A man carrying a newspaper came out of the shop whistling the Welsh
national anthem.
2 I remember Helen telling us to send her our manuscript on time.
3 After searching all the farm buildings, the police eventually found the shotgun
standing against a tree in the garden.
4 Any person behaving suspiciously should be reported to Security immediately.
5 A bag containing dangerous chemicals was discovered lying under the sofa.
Exercise 3
State the differences in meaning between the a. and b. sentences in the follow-
ing, and say how those differences arise. Provide possible contexts.
1 a. The spectators who were not standing under cover left because of the
rain.
b. The spectators, who were not standing under cover, left because of the
rain.
2 a. The police-officer sitting on the bed examined Stacy´s diary.
b. Sitting on the bed, the police officer examined Stacy´s diary.
3 a. Jenny found a meal cooking slowly in the oven.
b. Jenny found a meal to cook slowly in the oven.
4 a. The conductor, Craig Lucas, is retiring.
b. The conductor Craig Lucas is retiring.
5 a. I saw mail piled up on Steve´s desk.
b. I saw mail piling up on Steve´s desk.
230 The complex phrase (I)
Exercise 4
In what way are the following sentences ambiguous, and why?
(1) a. On sitting next to Jane the man promptly spilt his coffee over her.
b. Jane was sure that he did it on purpose.
These examples echo those at the beginning of Chapter 10, with (1)a. slightly
amended to fit the topic in this chapter. In the first case we have a gerund
clause as the prepositional complement of on, and in the second a that-clause
as adjectival complement of sure. Analytically we will deal with these at the
sentence-function level in the same way as with the complex noun phrase, i.e. by
putting the clausal phrase complements in slants (//). Functionally, the sentences
in (1) then pan out as:
As shown in Chapter 10, the arrows indicate that the clauses in slants belong
to the same phrase as the immediately preceding word, and that this is the head
of the phrase. The sentence function shown above the head is the function of
the phrase as a whole in the sentence concerned. In other words, on sitting next
to Jane in (2)a. is a prepositional phrase functioning as A in the sentence as a
whole, with on as the head and the gerund clause sitting next to Jane contained
inside the phrase as prepositional complement. In (2)b. we have the adjective
phrase sure that he did it on purpose functioning as Cs in the larger sentence, with
sure as the head and the that-clause as adjectival complement. We will now look
at such phrases individually and in detail.
232 The complex phrase (II)
11.1 The complex prepositional phrase
A clause inside the prepositional phrase occurs always as prepositional complement:
As pointed out in previous chapters, a triangle indicates that the particular unit
(here the gerund clause) could be analysed further. (4) gives a more comprehen-
sive breakdown of the phrases involved, together with the sentence functions, as
shown already in (2)a.:
head (gerund)
sitting next to Jane
The complex phrase (II) 233
Gerund clauses, with their ‘nominal character’ (see Chapter 8), are particularly
drawn to prepositions:
S P Od P A
(6) a. Valerie insisted on [sitting by the window].
S P Od P Od
b. I did not think of [contacting the police].
11.2.1 that-clauses
These particularly accompany adjectives that convey various mental states and
attitudes, such as feelings, knowledge, prediction, etc.
The that-clause expresses the semantic object of the attitude, i.e. what is per-
ceived, known or thought, or what causes the emotion.
The complex phrase (II) 235
11.2.2 Complex prepositional phrases and wh-clauses
Prepositional phrases are a common form of adjectival complement (see
Chapter 4, 4.3), and gerund clauses, as seen in 11.1, are a ‘natural extension’,
so to speak:
(11) a. I´m not certain why you are asking me this question.
b. Jamie was unsure whether he should apply for the job.
And as seen above in (7)a., prepositions can occur before the wh-clause, making
it into a complement in a complex prepositional phrase:
Wh-clauses are not always indirect questions. As we will see in the next chapter,
they may also be nominal relative clauses, in particular with what, and sometimes
also with where:
(13) a. Jill was generally not interested in what her husband was writing.
b. I was shocked at where Sonya had to sleep.
The difference between indirect questions and nominal relative clauses is not
important at this point. It is explained fully in Chapter 12.
Sentence-analytical representation looks like this (taking just (10a.) and
(12a.) as examples):
S P Cs S Od
(14) a. Yasmin is good /at /helping other people//.
S P Cs A S P
b. I am not quite clear/on/where we are going to meet//.
head (gerund)
helping
other people
b. Adjective phrase
This does not change the meaning, but it does change the structural syntax.
Instead of comparative phrases, we now have comparative clauses. Adding a
verb, that is, has turned the phrase into a subordinate clause, which now requires
internal analysis in terms of sentence functions. The comparative particle fol-
lowing the adjective has become a conjunction, as it now introduces a clause.
The clause is still the adjective complement, but our simple adjective phrases in
(16) have now in (17) become complex adjective phrases:
than Paul is
b. Adjective phrase
as
as June is
Comparative clauses are taken up again further below in connection with adverb
and noun phrases.
•• the cause of a reactive feeling: Brian was glad to meet Penny again;
•• the object of a prior volitional attitude: The couple were unwilling to sell their
house;
The complex phrase (II) 239
•• the consequence of a condition present in a certain degree: Harriet was too
drunk to walk straight;
•• the specifier of a particular characteristic: Tommy is quick to criticise others;
•• the possessor of a particular characteristic: The book is easy to read; It is easy
to read the book.
In the sentences of the first four categories, the subject of the main verb is also
the implied subject of the infinitive. Significantly, this is not the case with the
two examples in the last category. As we will see further below, the infinitives
here cannot be regarded as part of the adjective phrase at all. (The last example
sentence is an extraposition, a structure we have already talked about to some
extent in 7.5.1 and which we come back to below.)
Now for one or two more detailed considerations on the syntax and semantics
of these adjective-infinitive relations.
The feeling, in other words, is the result of the action, as indicated by the para-
phrases in brackets. In logical-semantic terms, the event reference is a factive
presupposition of the emotion reference (see Chapter 8, 8.3.2.2): i.e. the sen-
tences in (20) show the following presuppositional structure:
Notice that for (24)a. (with too) a positive main verb implies that the infinitive act
does not take place, i.e. X → not-Y. Negating the main verb, on the other hand,
will imply that the infinitive act does take place, i.e. the implication is reversed:
not-X → Y. For (24)b., with so, by contrast, the implication is positive-positive:
X → Y. Negating the main verb here implies also negation of the infinitive act:
not-X → not-Y. The same applies to sentences with enough, as in (23)b.
b. Adjective phrase
too
to drive in heavy traffic
242 The complex phrase (II)
11.2.4.5 Infinitive clauses as specifiers
This relates to sentences of the type Tommy is quick to criticise others (given in
the introduction to 11.2.4 above). At first glance the adjective phrase quick to
criticise . . . may appear similar in its internal semantic and syntactic relations
to the ones with a volitional adjective, such as eager or ready. A second glance,
though, reveals differences. For one thing, quick to criticise creates an implicative
relation, but there is none with volitional adjectives:
Neither (29)b. nor (29)c. make sense. Both are ungrammatical with the adjective
quick. If we swap this for easy, of course, we do get grammatical sentences, as we
have already seen in (28). Then, however, the pattern in (29)a. would not work,
as shown in (30), which actually reverses the previous pattern of acceptability:
The second important point about the extraposition version of (28)a. in (28)b. is
this: it shows the book syntactically as the direct object of the infinitive. To re-cap
on the sentence functions involved in extraposition (see also Chapter 7, 7.5.1),
we will give a full function version of (28)b.:
S-gramm. P Cs S-log. P Od
(31) It is easy [ to read the book].
We will not comment generally on the function pattern here (this is taken up
again later in Chapter 12). What interests us now is the book as direct object of
read. If (28)a. means the same, we have to account for the fact that here the same
noun phrase (the book) appears as the subject of the sentence. The answer to the
problem lies in recognising that this is a ‘false’ subject semantically. As we will
see later, false subject constructions are a regular pattern in English, and require
the following analysis:
(32)
S-gramm. P Cs S-log. P Od-log.
The book is easy [ to read ].
The infinitive clause itself is the ‘real’ or logical subject (S-log.), but is antici-
pated by a ‘dummy’ grammatical subject, as with extraposition. The difference to
extraposition is that here the ‘dummy’ subject has a real function in the infini-
tive clause. ‘Dummy’ subjects help to avoid beginning the sentence with an
infinitive clause, which is grammatically possible, but is usually regarded in com-
municative terms as undesirable (see also Chapter 7, 7.5). Extraposition and
false subject constructions are discussed more fully in the next chapter, when we
return from phrase- to sentence-level and consider the syntax and communica-
tive purposes of these and other ‘special’ syntactic constructions.
244 The complex phrase (II)
The point to be made here, in the context of phrase syntax, is this: with
extraposition and false subject constructions, the infinitive clause does not
belong to the adjective phrase (see the use of square brackets). We are tempted
to think that it does, when we read a word sequence such as easy to read: but it
is a syntactic deception, a case of a ‘false’ complement. The infinitive clause,
therefore, is not an adjectival complement at all, but a separate and independent
part of the sentence.
With that we pass back to the sentence level. In the next chapter we will
consider extraposition, false subject constructions and other special clausal forms
in more detail.
Exercises
Exercise 1
Analyse the following sentences in terms of sentence functions:
1 The tourists left the café without paying for their drinks.
2 After settling in at your hotel you will receive a visit from our travel repre-
sentative.
3 Carmen was not sure about what she should wear to the wedding.
4 Geoff was fined for driving too fast along Brighton promenade.
5 On returning to the camp-site, we were shocked to discover that our tent had
been stolen.
6 Politically, Folthorpe never recovered from being defeated in the election.
7 Adam and Roberta had a big argument over where to go for their holidays.
8 The company is certain that it is going to be successful in developing this
new far-eastern market.
9 The trainer was happy to see that his players were so confident about win-
ning the next game.
10 Although she is keen to pass the exams, she has always been reluctant to
work at improving her practical skills.
11 The town planners are angry at receiving so little public support for building
the new shopping-centre.
12 As we were too exhausted to leave our hotel after arriving in London, we
decided on having an early night.
13 My partner was more surprised to hear the result of the competition than
I was.
14 Mother is just as relieved as I am that our new neighbours are much quieter
than our old ones.
15 When it is necessary to have spare parts delivered immediately, Jones is
slower to react than our other suppliers.
The complex phrase (II) 245
Exercise 2
Do complete phrase analyses of the following:
Exercise 3
Using appropriate symbols, give the implicative meanings or presuppositions
contained in the following:
12.1 Extraposition
We have met extraposition so far with infinitive clauses (7.5.1, 11.2.4.6) and
gerund clauses (8.1.2). It is also common with finite clauses (usually that-clauses,
but occasionally other types that are mentioned further below). Here are some
summarising examples, together with their common function pattern. Note that
the Cs slot can also be filled by a noun phrase:
12.1.2 Attributive of
Infinitive clause extraposition is very common with evaluative adjectives, those
that comment on people´s actions and behaviour. Here, the agent of the action
(i.e. the implied subject of the infinitive verb), is usually specified by an of-phrase.
Syntactically, this is then the adjectival complement:
S-gramm. P Cs S-log.
(3) a. It was silly of Robert [to park the car there].
S P Od-gramm. Co Od-log.
b. We thought it kind of Mrs Morley [to look after the children].
Semantically, this not only specifies the agent (Robert and Mrs Morley in the
respective examples), but also allows the judgement on the action to reflect on
the person as well.
248 Selected clause constructions
12.2 False subject constructions
This kind of construction was briefly introduced in Chapter 11, 11.2.4.6 in dis-
cussing infinitive clauses following certain types of adjective. The example given
was (32) The book is easy to read, in which the apparent subject of the sentence
(the book) is to be understood semantically as the direct object of the infini-
tive (to read), and it is then the infinitive clause as a whole, i.e. with the ‘real’
Od added (to read the book), which must be seen as the intended subject of the
sentence. These ‘real’ functional relations behind the apparent syntax of the
sentence were clarified in the paraphrase by extraposition (see example (28)).
In fact we could also show these relations by quite simply placing the infini-
tive clause in initial position. The following three sentences then all mean the
same, with the meaning of the first two shown at its clearest in (4)c. (this is not
favoured stylistically, as we have said, but is still a grammatical sentence):
(5)
a. This camera is difficult to use. [= It is difficult to use this camera.]
b. My horse is great to ride. [= It is great to ride my horse.]
c. The film is good to watch [= It is good to watch the film on a
on a winter´s evening. winter´s evening.]
(7) a. It is not polite to say things like that. [*Things like that are not polite
to say.]
b. It is usual to give a dog bones. [*Bones are usual to give a dog.]
Generally speaking, the kind of false subject construction discussed in this sec-
tion occurs with evaluative adjectives (such as bad, exciting, fantastic, good, great,
lovely, nice, pleasant, wonderful, etc.), and in particular with a sub-group that refers
to levels of ease or difficulty (awkward, hard, simple, impossible, etc.). Ultimately,
however, the precise syntactic possibilities have to be learnt in connection with
the individual adjective.
(8)
a. My old boss was awful to [= It was awful to work for my old
work for. boss.]
b. Henry is nice to talk to. [= It is nice to talk to Henry.]
c. The table is all right to look at [= It is all right to look at the table,
but bad to write on. but bad to write on it.]
In this and the preceding false subject pattern, noun phrases can also occur as
subject complement, e.g.:
250 Selected clause constructions
(10) a. My old boss was an awful person to work for.
b. This is a difficult camera to use.
c. Henry is a pleasure to talk to.
This alters the possibilities a little with regard to extraposition. If the noun itself
expresses the evaluation or comment, as in (10)c., extraposition will work. In
cases like (10)a. and b., where the adjective still expresses the evaluation and the
noun is just a ‘neutral’ insertion, extraposition is not possible:
Finally, there are certain types of adjectives within the broad evaluative range
which cannot occur alone in false subject constructions, but are nevertheless
acceptable if accompanied by a noun. (12)a. and c. are permissible because
the evaluating adjectives premodify nouns. Without the nouns, however, as in
(12)b. and d., the sentences are not acceptable:
The kinds of adjectives to which this applies are typically those expressing degrees
of appropriateness and normality (right, normal, strange, odd, peculiar, etc.).
At first glance this does not seem to be different from the ordinary S + P + Cs
sequence with adjectives like happy or keen. After all, the main clause subject is
generally understood as the subject of the infinitive if there is no further noun
phrase in the main clause:
Selected clause constructions 251
(14) a. Grandma was very happy to give you that money.
b. Grandma was very keen to give you that money.
c. Grandma was very generous to give you that money.
In all of these, ‘Grandma’ is the subject of the main clause and the implied sub-
ject of the infinitive, as we would expect also with catenative sentences such as
Grandma wanted to give you that money. Insofar as this, (14)c. is a standard case,
like (14)a. and b. However, there is a fundamental difference. The adjectives
keen and happy relate entirely to the subject: they attribute characteristics to her.
In (14)c., however, the adjective generous gives a value judgement on Grandma´s
action. The difference is indicated once more by the paraphrase potential: extra-
position, i.e. making the infinitive clause into the logical subject, can only be
applied to (14)c. As it was Grandma´s action that was ‘generous’, and not her
character or person, Grandma in (14)c. is a false subject, whereas in (14)a. and b.
it is a genuine one. The analytical pattern in (13) is then the following:
S-log.2
S-gramm. P Cs S-log.1 P
(15) a. Grandma was very generous [ to give you that money].
b. You would be foolish [ to pay so much for a bungalow].
c. Dick was thoughtless [ to leave the dog without water].
Notice that we have two S-log. positions in this case: one for the main clause
subject and one for the infinitive clause subject.
False subject constructions of this kind are very common with the speculative
adjectives bound, certain, likely, sure:
Two points are of note here. Firstly, extraposition is only possible with a that-
clause. It does not work if the infinitive is kept, quite simply because we cannot
then accommodate the infinitive subject in an of-phrase: *It is certain of them to
arrive tomorrow. Secondly, bound does not permit extraposition at all: *It is bound
that Jonah will get lost on the moors.
As the term suggests, existential sentences state that an entity ‘exists’. This can
apply in a general way, as with (17)a., or in a more specific and defined sense, as in
the rest of the examples: (17)b. refers to the existence of entities (books) in a cer-
tain local physical position; (17)d. does the same, but with additional reference
to an activity which the entities named (children) are performing. Note that for
these last two we can produce approximate paraphrases (or neutral equivalents)
just by substituting main parts of the noun phrases for there in initial position:
However, this depends for its success on the lexis and syntax of the individual
elements involved. It will not work, for instance, for (17)a. or c.: *Many different
varieties of apple are; *A train is at 11am. A unified solution, in accordance with
our explanation above, is to assume that the literal meanings of the sentences in
(17) should be represented in the following way:
S-gramm. P S-log.
(20) a. There were [four books on the table].
b. There is [a train at 11 am].
c. There were [three children /playing on the village green/].
Selected clause constructions 253
Generally speaking, only be is acceptable as the main verb. Exceptions are certain
catenatives expressing appearance (seem, appear) and ‘chance’ (chance, happen,
turn out). However, be must then follow as the sub-clause infinitive. What would
normally be the Cs of the sub-clause is then the S-log. of the main clause:
S-gramm. P Cs P S-log.
(21) a. There seemed [to be no alternative to the plan].
b. There happened [to be a train at 11 am].
S P Cs S P Od
(23) a. It was the lorry driver /who caused the accident/.
S P Cs Od S P A
b. It is tomatoes /that I need for the recipe/.
In contrast to the case with extraposition, there are no ‘double functions’ such
as S-gramm. and S-log. involved here. The initial it is an impersonal pronoun.
Though there is some type of postponing effect on the highlighted noun (especially
in cases like (23)a.), the pronoun itself does not replace anything that comes later
in the sentence. Syntactically, cleft sentences are emphasis-marking paraphrases
of neutral, ‘unmarked’ sentences. A comparison of (23)a. and b. with their corre-
sponding neutral versions shows what changes occur to produce the cleft variants:
Points to note:
•• Everything said under the previous point applies also to last year in (25)e.,
with the relative pronoun standing here for when:
S P A A S P Od A
It was last year /that Jill was studying marine biology in Sydney/.
Finally, let us come back for a moment to considerations of content already men-
tioned above: communicatively speaking, the profiled element in a cleft sentence
conveys new information, while the relative clause usually expresses something
known or presupposed. This becomes clear if we think of a cleft sentence as the
answer to a wh-question, e.g. Who caused the accident? What do you need for the
recipe? In communicative terms, therefore, the neutral sentence underlying a
cleft sentence has an ‘information gap’. If we call this X, we must say that (25)b.
derives from X was studying marine biology in Sydney last year, (25)c. from Jill was
studying X in Sydney last year, and (25)d. from Jill was studying marine biology X last
year. In other words, X varies in position according to what the cleft sentence
highlights. From this point of view (25)b.–e. derive, strictly speaking, from dif-
ferent sentences. These are all versions of (25)a., certainly, but with a different
element missing in each case.
S P Od Od S P Oi A
(27) a. Bobby didn´t like [ what we gave him for Christmas].
S Od S P P Od
b. [ What you have said] might interest the police.
S Cs S P A P Od A
c. [What you become in adult life] does not depend on your upbringing alone.
256 Selected clause constructions
Like ordinary relative pronouns, what can complement prepositions. The prepo-
sition is then always sent to the end of the clause:
S A1 S P A1 P Cs
(28) a. Careful! [What you´re sitting on] doesn´t look very stable.
S Cs1 S P Cs1 P Od
b. [What I am interested in] doesn´t interest my husband.
Several of these are actually not pronouns, but adverbs: they function inside their
clauses as adverbials, and are called nominal relative adverbs:
S P Cs A S P
(30) a. Home is [where the heart is].
S A S P P Od
b. [Whenever the plane lands] counts as the arrival time.
Like its cleft counterpart, the pseudo-cleft variant splits a simple sentence into
two clauses, one of which is subordinated as a relative clause: in this case the
relative clause is a nominal relative clause, as shown in (31). The structural and
functional pattern is as follows:
S Od S P A P Cs
(32) a. [What I need right now] is a good meal.
S S P Od A P Cs
b. [What worries me a little] is Phil´s lack of experience.
This changes the emphasis. It is now the what-clause that is profiled, lending
emphasis to the verb phrases need and worries, again through postponement into
a later position.
Pseudo-cleft sentences are generally well suited to predicator profiling.
Through the use of ‘dummy do’ in the what-clause (essentially an extended form
of do-support) an action-reference is given end-focus. The usual emphasis through
postponement is enhanced by the anticipation effect of do-support:
Sentences like this tend to be confined to speech and informal language, probably
because creating a second sub-clause to equate to the first (i.e. the what-clause) is
felt to sound a little awkward:
258 Selected clause constructions
S Od S P A P Cs P Cs
(35) a. [What Jim did then] was [(to) get drunk].
S Od S P A P Cs P Od
b. [ What we´re doing on Saturday] is [decorating the bedroom].
Note that the verbs in the second sub-clause are non-finite: an infinitive is
required as the equivalent of a simple aspect in the what-clause and a gerund as
the equivalent of a progressive.
Here the what-clauses are interrogative clauses, and what itself is used as an interroga-
tive pronoun. Unfortunately, a functional analysis will not help us tell the difference
between interrogative and nominal relative clauses, as interrogative clauses are also
‘nominal’ in character and their pronouns and adverbs fill similar functions:
The usual way of identifying an interrogative clause is to insert the phrase the
answer to the question before what, and then to form a direct question from the
indirect original. If this works syntactically and semantically then the clause is an
interrogative one. Applying this test to (36), we get:
(38) a. You know the answer to the question, ‘What must I do next?’
b. The answer to the question, ‘What did Jim do then?’, is a mystery.
c. They had not told her the answer to the question, ‘What is being dis-
cussed at the meeting?’.
The inserted phrases reflect the essential semantic role of an interrogative clause:
it is referred to by elements in the main clause (e.g. verbs like know and tell) as
representing a factor of knowledge to be possessed or communicated.
Selected clause constructions 259
Applying the test phrase to nominal relative clauses like those, for instance, in
(26) above is clearly not possible:
(39) a. *Bobby didn´t like the answer to the question, ‘What did we give him
for Christmas?’
b. *The answer to the question ‘What have you said?’ might interest the
police.
c. *The answer to the question ‘What do you become in adult life?’ does
not just depend on your upbringing.
Exercises
Exercise 1
Analyse the following sentences in terms of sentence functions, and name the
type of sentence construction:
Exercise 2
Where possible, turn the following into false subject constructions. (Careful! You
may have to add nouns in some cases!) If it is not possible at all, just leave the
sentence as it is:
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E. (1999) The Longman
Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.
Fenn, P. (2010) A Student Advanced Grammar of English. Tübingen: Narr Francke
Attempto.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. and Svartvik, J. (1972) A Grammar of Contemporary
English. London: Longman.
Quirk, R. and Greenbaum, S. (1973) A University Grammar of English. London: Longman.
Index
If not mentioned otherwise, terms are only indexed where they occur for the first time or
when explained or defined in a more detailed way.