Sentences: from simple to complex



Sentences: from simple to complex

 

A simple sentence consists of just one verb phrase (predicate), i.e. it has only one clause:

 

(1) Bees sting.

(2) A large number of people are spending their holidays at home this year.

(3) Fred dropped the heavy sack of potatoes by accident on his stepmother's bad foot.

(4) Under other circumstances she would never have been caught.

 

Simple sentences can be joined to form larger sentences with more than one clause:

 

(5) Sharon is ill and Ruth is on holiday.

 

This sentence has two clauses. They are joined grammatically by the word and (called for this reason a conjunction). The two clauses here are co-ordinate, i.e. independent of one another and having equal syntactic status or "rank". They are on the same level. There is no relation of hierarchy between them. They are therefore both main clauses. A sentence consisting of co-ordinate main clauses is known as a compound sentence. If there are more than two clauses only the final two are usually joined by the conjunction. The others are "joined" (or, in another sense, "separated") by commas only:

 

(6) Bill has left the company, Sharon is ill and Ruth is on holiday.

 

A comma can also be placed before the conjunction, of course. Conjunctions like and which connect clauses in compound sentences are known as co-ordinating conjunctions (or co-ordinators): and, but, or, for.

 

Two clauses can also be joined in such a way that one is grammatically dependent on the other:

 

(7) Bill left the company because he hated the boss.

 

The main clause, Bill left the company, is independent and could stand alone. But the clause ...because he hated the boss is made grammatically dependent on the main clause by the conjunction because. There is now a hierarchical relation betwen the two clauses. The dependent clause is subordinate to the main clause. Conjunctions introducing subordinate clauses are called subordinating conjunctions (or subordinators): because, as, if, when, although, while, where, whereas, since, etc. Sentences with one or more subordinate clauses are known as complex sentences.

Problems:

 

Having said all this, we ought to add that this traditional division of complex sentences into main and subordinate clauses is a little problematical. Although it seems clear enough with an example like (7), the definition of the term "main clause" is a bit troublesome. We said above that the main clause Bill left the company was syntactically independent. This is true in the sense that on its own it would form a complete sentence. There is a problem here, though, if we consider the relation of the subordinate clause to it. If the subordinate clause is grammatically dependent on the main clause (as it is by definition), then the subordinate clause must logically be a part of the main clause. And this is in fact the case. A subordinate clause like the one in (7) has a functional relationship to the main clause (here as an adverbial) and is therefore, strictly speaking, a constituent of it.

 

All this might appear to be purely academic and theoretical. This is because the adverbial subordinate clause in (7) is optional. But take the following example:

(8) Marion believed that Mike was unhappy.

 

Here, quite clearly, Marion believed is not a complete unit of its own. The subordinate clause (which here has the function of direct object) is obviously a necessary complementation of the main verb believed. It therefore cannot be the case that Marion believed constitutes the main clause by itself. The main clause must be regarded as including the subordinate clause. The main clause is not a separate independent entity, but the "casing" or framework around the subordinate clause. (8) illustrates this clearly, but as we have just seen, this applies even where the subordinate clause is optional as in (7). In any case, the concept of main clause should be a consistent and reliable one, applicable in every instance. So we must revise our definition: the main clause is not independent of, or separate from, the subordinate clause. Both parts are dependent on each other. If we come back to example (7) this means that the main clause is not just the unit Bill left the company, but rather the whole sentence. In Quirk/Greenbaum, A University Grammar of English, this is precisely the way in which such sentences are analysed. The whole sentence in (7) would be called the superordinate or main clause, with the subordinate clause regarded as being inside it.

However, this isn't a completely satisfactory solution either. It means that with regard to (7) Bill left the company is not recognized as a syntactic unit, although intuitively we feel that it is one. Another point is that it contradicts our definition of the term "clause". We said that a clause is a unit with one predicate, or verb phrase. But if a subordinate clause is contained within a superordinate clause, then clearly the superordinate clause is a clause unit with 2 predicates. Furthermore the distinction between clause and sentence is now being eroded. We said that a simple sentence consists of one main clause. Now we are forced to say that a complex sentence also consists of one main clause. In other words the term "clause" applies both to whole sentences and to parts of them.

 

This illustrates some of the dilemmas and contradictions involved in traditional concepts. But that is not necessarily an argument against them. For purposes of practical analysis they are very useful. As far as our present problem is concerned, we can say that in a complex sentence the main clause is a kind of "frame" which determines the nature and function of subordinate clauses directly dependent on it. The main verb plays a crucial role here, of course, in determining whether the subordinate clause is compulsory or optional.

Subordinate clause patterns

 

The complex sentences we have considered so far (examples 7 and 8) have a single subordinate clause which is directly dependent on the main clause. A subordinate clause may however be part of a phrase. In this case it will depend on (or be governed by) the head of that phrase. A common example is the relative clause, which is part of a noun phrase:

 

(9) I like the book that you gave me.

 

If a complex sentence contains more than one subordinate clause, the subordinate clauses may be co-ordinate with each other:

 

(10) If you want a drink or you would like something to eat, we can go to the bistro bar on the corner.

 

Subordinate clauses very commonly have further subordinate clauses inside them:

 

(11) Jane said [that [as she couldn't tell us [when the board meeting [which she was attending] would finish]], we should start the meal without her [if we got hungry]].

 

Such sentences show the principle of syntactic hierarchy particularly clearly. They also show that the terms superordinate and subordinate are relative. A clause is superordinate to any other clause dependent on it (or "inside" it), but subordinate to clauses on which it is dependent itself. Here the clauses in (11) are numbered for identification:

 

(11) Jane said 1[that 2[as she couldn't tell us 3[when the board meeting 4[which she was attending] would finish]], 5we should start the meal without her 6[if we got hungry]].

 

Jane said that as she couldn't tell us when the board meeting which she was attending would finish, we should start the meal without her if we got hungry.

 

Main clause level:

Jane said that as she couldn't tell us when the board meeting which she was attending would finish, we should start the meal without her if we got hungry.

 

First subordination level [1]:

 

...that as she couldn't tell us when the board meeting which she was attending would finish, we should start the meal without her if we got hungry.

 

Second subordination level [2]:

...as she couldn't tell us when the board meeting which she was attending would finish,

 

Third subordination level [3]:

...when the board meeting which she was attending would finish,

 

Fourth subordination level [4]:

...which she was attending

 

First subordination level [5]:

...we should start the meal without her if we got hungry.

Second subordination level [6]:

...if we got hungry.

 

So far we have been looking at finite subordinate clauses. Non-finite predicates also constitute subordinate clauses:

 

(12)

|I want [to see you tomorrow]. |infinitive clause |

|Maureen stood at the window, [watching her children in the garden]. |participle clause with present participle |

|[Cutting grass with a scythe] is hard work. |gerund clause |

 

Functions of subordinate clauses

 

Up to now we have just concentrated on identifying subordinate clauses and understanding their hierarchical relationships. We will now look more closely at their functions. Subordinate clauses which are dependent on other clauses are, as we said above, a functional part of those clauses and have a functional relation to them. In (12), for instance, the infinitive clause is the direct object of the main verb want, the participle clause is an adverbial, and the gerund is the subject of is.

 

In addition, there are separate functional relations within each clause. All the non-finite predicates in (12) have their own complementation. In each case this is a direct object followed by an adverbial. So a full functional analysis would look like this:

S   P        P     Od        A

I want [to see you tomorrow].

        Od

     

      S          P              A                   P              Od                  A

Maureen stood at the window, [watching her children in the garden].

                                                    A

    

      P      Od           A           P      Cs

[Cutting grass with a scythe] is hard work.

S

 

Subordinate clauses can be:

 

|I  adverbial |I was tired as I hadn't slept for days. |

| |I was tired for this reason. (prepositional phrase  =  adverbial) |

|II  direct object |They didn't realize that the last bus had already gone. |

| |They didn't realize this fact. (noun phrase  =  direct object) |

|III  subject |Climbing mountains is her favourite pastime. |

| |This activity is her favourite pastime. (noun phrase  =  subject) |

|IV  subject complement |Her favourite pastime is climbing mountains. |

| |Her favourite pastime is this activity.  (noun phrase after be  =  subject complement)|

|V  object complement |The hot weather made Mrs. Moore feel tired. |

| |The hot weather made Mrs. Moore sleepy. (adjective complementing direct object  =  |

| |object complement) |

 

If you're not sure what the function of a particular subordinate clause might be, replace the clause by a single word or phrase. This might help you to see the functional relation more clearly.

 

Subordinate clauses can also be parts of phrases. A relative clause, for instance, is dependent on the head of a noun phrase. In cases like this we say that subordination takes place at phrase level (rather than at clause level): i.e. the subordinating element is a phrase and not another clause. Adjective phrases and prepositional phrases can also include subordinate clauses (see discussion of separate phrases on next handout).

 

Peter Fenn: Syntax Handout 3; Pädagogische Hochschule Ludwigsburg, SS 2004

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download