GRAMMAR
People judge you all the time. And by this process, your life is affected until the day you die. One of the ways people will judge you is by the way that you talk. If someone says to me “I ain’t got no money,” I know what he means. He’s out of cash. But the speaker has also told me something else: He’s a moron.
People will also judge you by the way that you write.
One cannot write a proper academic essay without adhering to the precepts of English grammar. So the subject of grammar is important right now. It will be no less important in college.
But you knew those things.
However, what you might not have considered is this: Knowledge of grammar will be important to you all of your life. In the past I have called correct grammar, “Money English,” because it is the form of English used by those who make the most money in our society. Highly educated professionals – doctors, lawyers, accountants, business executives – all have a firm grasp of proper grammar. And when those people are deciding whether or not you will join their ranks upon your graduation from college, they will look to see (among other things) if you, too, can write and speak correctly. So please don’t kid yourself into thinking that this subject is inconsequential, especially if you find the subject uninteresting. Everyone finds the subject uninteresting – including most English teachers. But it has to be learned. So here it is.
Why do we encounter poor grammar? Most errors in grammar come from a lack of insight into the fact that a wealth of English words take on a particular FORM in order to execute a certain FUNCTION. Why is this problematical? Because, in our language, many words, upon changing their form, do not change their essential meaning. So kindred words of varying forms are frequently used interchangeably, and ungrammatically – yet the speaker or writer is still understood because meaning has not been affected. Perhaps the fact that communication is so often successful regardless of grammatical errors emboldens many to ignore grammar altogether. Surely another reason for poor grammar is the fact that language is not so much learned as it is absorbed. We speak the English we hear around us every day, in the accents in which we hear it. Thus if one is surrounded by bad grammar, one uses bad grammar. On the street, at the movies, while watching TV, when listening to popular music, we encounter bad grammar all of the time. When this process goes on long enough, bad habits of speech and of writing will be formed which will prove very hard to break.
Grammar is not about being understood. It is about having enough respect for the language to write it, and to speak it, as it was intended to be used. It is about having reverence for the artists, the writers, and the scholars who have come before us, and who have forged a grammar for this language which was the result of intelligence, thoughtfulness, and hard work. And love – a love of language itself.
Correct grammar is precise, it is logical; and, when you gain insight into the way in which it functions, you will see that it is beautiful.
Everything that we produce, all of our work, and all of our play has a “secret,” a technique. There is a right way (and thus a wrong way) in regard to all things human. Learn the rules and principles of grammar. Learn to write and speak the right way.
Don’t trust your ear. As often as not, what sounds right is a useless yardstick by which to measure correct grammatical choices. You must know the rules which mandate the use of a specific form of a certain word, in a particular sentence, given the function that that word intends to perform.
This manual does not pretend to cover the subject of grammar completely. No manual could exhaust the subject. What I have attempted to do in this manual is to review the basic grammatical structures that exist in our language – the eight parts of speech; as well as the sentence, the phrase, and the clause – and then go on to cover those areas where, over the years, I’ve encountered the greatest frequency of errors when reading my students’ writing. Yet even though this manual is hardly the final word on the subject of grammar, it is still 77 pages long. There’s a lot of information here. So clearly, this is not a manual that should be read once. It should be read and reread. It should be by your side when you’re writing an academic essay.
Know – going into the study of this subject – that it’s going to take time and that any progress will be slow. I’m a student of grammar, too. Again and again, I find myself learning things about this subject that I either never knew, or understood incompletely. It’s unlikely I’ll ever fully know this subject. You probably won’t either. But you can understand grammar at an advanced level. So, don’t despair. Never give up. Good luck.
THE EIGHT PARTS OF SPEECH
The dictionary has been lying to you. The number of words in the English language is beyond listing. But there are only eight types of words. These eight types of words are called the eight parts of speech. They are listed on the following pages.
Verb
Definition – a verb is a word that denotes an action or a state of being.
♦ The first thing to know about verbs:
The verb is the most important word in any sentence. It’s possible to write a one-word sentence, but that one word must be a verb.
For example:
“Stop!”
The verb is a classic example of the propensity for English words to change their form without changing their meaning. Verbs change their form all the time, yet in so doing they continue to denote the same idea. A verb’s change of form is called conjugation. A verb will conjugate for a number of reasons. The two most prevalent reasons are these:
• A verb will conjugate to denote tense (time).
• A verb will conjugate to denote agreement with a third person, singular subject, in the present tense. This type of conjugation is called subject-verb agreement.
For example, here is the conjugation of the verb “to be” that denotes a change in tense:
I am (present tense)
I was (past tense)
I will be (future tense)
Throughout these three conjugations, the verb has not changed its meaning; it is still the verb “to be,” a verb which denotes existence. What has changed is the verb’s form. The form has changed in order to indicate a change in time. In the above example, the verb has moved through a set of permutations in order to denote three separate time frames: present, past, and future.
Here is the conjugation of the verb “to play” that illustrates subject-verb agreement:
I play
You play
He plays, or She plays, or It plays, or The boy plays, or New York plays, etc.
The salient conjugation – i.e., the important change – regarding subject-verb agreement has come into effect in the third entry of the three examples above. Subject-verb agreement demands that, in the present tense, and when the subject of the verb is both third person and singular, the verb must end in “s.”
Take note of these facts:
• This conjugation transpires in the present tense, only.
• The subject of the verb must be third person and singular for the conjugation shift to take effect.
• “He,” “she,” and “it” are all third person singular subjects – the other pronouns are not.
• Every noun in the English language that names a single person, place, thing, or idea – and, that functions as the subject of a given sentence – is a third person, singular subject.
• The concluding “s,” which is the hallmark of subject-verb agreement, is the changed form of a given verb to denote a changed function for that verb – as is the case with all conjugations of any verb.
• The concluding “s” that denotes subject-verb agreement is not the “s” of plurality. Only nouns can be thought of as being singular or plural. Verbs don’t have number – they will, however, agree with subjects of either singular or plural number.
• The concluding “s” of subject-verb agreement is never to have an apostrophe in front of it.
Yes: plays
Never: play’s
Verbs cannot own things and therefore can never receive the apostrophe “s”
which denotes possession, attachment, or association. Only nouns receive the
apostrophe “s.”
For example:
Dan’s house needs painting.
♦ The second thing to know about verbs:
Verbs have a dual nature which is expressed in three particular areas.
• Verbs are either regular or irregular.
A regular verb forms its past and past participle by ending in “ed.” “Walk” is regular because its past and past participle end in “ed”: “walked.”
An irregular verb does not form its past and past participle by ending in “ed.” “Go” is irregular because its past is “went,” and its past participle is “gone.”
Compared to regular verbs, irregular verbs are few in number; but they are employed with surprising frequency in our speech and in our writing. It is essential that you come to recognize them and know their conjugations.
• Verbs are either transitive or intransitive.
A transitive verb is followed by a noun or pronoun which is called a direct object. (Nouns and pronouns are the only parts of speech that are secondarily identified by the function that they perform in a sentence: nouns and pronouns function as either subjects or objects within a sentence.) The direct object receives the action committed by the subject in the performance of the transitive verb. It is proper to say that a transitive verb takes a direct object.
For example:
“Marty threw the football.
“Football” is the direct object. It is the recipient of the action which was committed by Marty, the subject of the sentence. In light of this, we see that “threw” is transitive in this sentence.
To “test” to see if a verb within any sentence is in fact transitive, we would go through a questioning process. First, we would isolate the complete subject and verb of the sentence under examination. Then, we would follow the words that we have just isolated with either the interrogative pronoun “whom?”, or with “what?”.
For example:
In the sentence above I would ask …
“Marty, threw whom – or what?”
If there is a sensible answer to that question from the sentence under examination, then the sentence has a direct object – and we then know that the verb of the sentence is transitive.
In this case there is a sensible answer to one version of our newly formed question. “Marty threw what?” Answer: He threw the football. In this way I have confirmed that “threw” is transitive, and that “football,” a noun, is the direct object of the transitive verb.
Take note of these facts:
• The process by which one identifies the direct object of any given sentence will create an interrogative sentence (i.e., a question).
• Being a sentence, this new (interrogative) construction must make sense.
• The question that establishes the presence of a direct object has to end with either “whom” or “what,” and no other interrogative pronoun.
• The beginning of the interrogative sentence must be the complete subject and the verb of the sentence that you are analyzing.
• The answer to the question that you have now formed must be a word from the sentence that you are analyzing.
• Whichever word answers your recently formed question will be the direct object of the sentence under examination.
• There does not have to be an answer to the newly formed question.
• If there is no sensible answer to the newly formed question, there is no direct object for the sentence under examination; and thus the verb of the sentence is intransitive. (The explanation of intransitivity will soon be forthcoming.)
Transitivity is not arbitrarily imposed upon a verb. Transitivity is a natural outgrowth of the very nature of any particular verb. For instance, one cannot love without loving someone, or something. There must be a recipient for the action of loving. Thus “love” is transitive. One cannot know without knowing someone, or something. There must be a recipient for the action of knowing. Thus “know” is transitive.
An intransitive verb does not take a direct object.
The verb “to laugh” is intransitive, to cite one of a million examples. Its past tense is “laughed.”
For example:
The child laughed uproariously.
“Uproariously,” is not a noun receiving the action of “laughed.” There can be no receiver for this action since the action is intransitive. “Uproariously” is an adverb, modifying the verb “laughed.” “Uproariously” describes how the laughing was performed.
Intransitive verbs will almost always be followed by a word – or words – but none of those complementary words will be a direct object. An intransitive verb can be followed by a group of words (e.g., a phrase or a clause) functioning as an adverb; and it is inevitable that one will find a noun among those word-groupings. But any noun following an intransitive verb will be performing some function other than that of direct object.
For example:
Danny competed in the marathon.
“Marathon” is a noun. But it is not the direct object of the verb “competed.” It can’t be. “Competed” is intransitive. “Marathon” is the object of the preposition, “in.”
It is not uncommon to find that a particular verb will alternate between being transitive or intransitive depending upon the sense and structure of the sentence in which it appears.
Take the verb, “register,” for example.
Example #1:
The city registered my name on its tax rolls.
Here, the verb “registered” is taking a direct object: “(my) name.” So, here, “registered” is transitive.
Example #2:
You must register for the prize if you hope to win it.
Here, the verb “register” is not taking a direct object. “For the prize” is a prepositional phrase that completes the thought of the first clause in which “register” appears – but there is no noun or pronoun receiving the action. So here, “register” is intransitive.
• Verbs are either action verbs or linking verbs.
The vast majority of verbs are action verbs: run, jump, shout, play, hit, etc. These verbs denote observable activity.
There are only a few linking verbs. By far, the most commonly used linking verb is the verb “to be.” This verb denotes existence – “being.” The verb “to be” is called a linking verb because when it is acting alone as THE verb of its sentence, it links the word that follows it to the subject-noun of the sentence. When the verb “to be” is followed by an adjective, the verb links that following-adjective to the subject-noun of the sentence; when the verb “to be” is followed by a noun or pronoun, the verb links that following-noun or pronoun to the subject-noun of the sentence. In the former case, the following-adjective will describe the subject-noun; in the latter case, the following-noun (or pronoun) will identify or rename the subject-noun.
♦ The third thing to know about verbs:
Verbs have four principal parts: present, past, present participle, and past participle. These four principal parts of a verb are the building blocks for all of the conjugations that a verb will go through. These four principal parts will further serve as the source for verbals.
What is a verbal?
A verbal is a word that is derived from a verb: it is conjugated as a verb; it retains the features of a verb (e.g., it can be modified or complemented as a verb is modified or complemented); but it will not function as THE verb of its sentence (or clause).
A verbal can act as an adjective. In this capacity it will be called a participle.
A verbal can also act as a noun. In this capacity it will be called a gerund.
In this we see one of the most confusing aspects of the English language. To clarify our thinking about this topic, we must keep in mind that the concept of “part of speech” is plastic and fluid. A word’s part of speech is not absolute; it is determined on a sentence-to-sentence basis. So a word that the dictionary tells us is a certain part of speech will only be that part of speech when it functions as that part of speech in a particular sentence.
A word, such as “school,” which is commonly thought of as a noun, can be used as an adjective: The school bus is late.
A word, such as “stupid,” which is commonly thought of as an adjective, can be used as a noun: Stupid is as stupid does.
Verbs are verbs. But they can also be adjectives; that is to say, they can be participles. And they can also be nouns; that is to say, they can be gerunds.
Example #1:
Running water is safe to drink.
“Running” is usually thought of as a verb. However, in this sentence, “running” is acting as the adjective to “water.” “Running” is a participle in this sentence.
Example #2:
Running is good exercise.
In this sentence, “running” is the subject of the sentence. It is a noun; it is the idea of running. “Running” is a gerund in this sentence.
To return to where we started … the four principal parts of any verb are these: present, past, present participle, past participle. Now, although these might sound like tenses (especially the first two principal parts) they are not the names of tenses, they are the names of the four elements from which all conjugations derive. In other words these four principal parts lead to the tense forms (and the verbal forms) of any given verb, but are not, themselves, tenses. Here’s a breakdown of the four principal parts of a regular and an irregular verb.
The Verb The Four Principal Parts
Infinitive form │ Present Past Present Participle Past Participle
to walk │ walk walked walking walked
to break │ break broke breaking broken
“To walk” is regular. Its past and past participle forms are identical, and end in “ed.”
“To break” is irregular. Its past does not end in “ed.” Furthermore its past and past participle forms differ (“broke” and “broken”). This is frequently (but not always) the case with irregular verbs.
The present and past principal parts of a verb will always function as verbs within their sentence; they will not take on a helping verb (except in the future tense); they will never function as verbals – in other words, they won’t act as participles (adjectives) or as gerunds (nouns).
Example #1:
I walk the dog every morning.
“Walk,” is the present principal part of the verb “to walk.” From the present principal part of “to walk,” we get the present tense conjugation of this verb – “walk.” “Walk,” alone, is the verb of the sample sentence. In other words, “walk,” as a verb, required no helping verb.
Furthermore you could not use “walk” as an adjective (i.e., as a participle). “Walk” could not modify “dog,” for example. Nor could you use “walk” as a noun (i.e., as a gerund). “Walk” could not be the subject of this sentence, for example. The present principal part of any verb is not one of the building blocks for using that verb as a verbal.
NO!
The walk dog is tired
NO!
Walk is good exercise.
Example #2:
I walked down this block yesterday.
“Walked,” is the past principal part of the verb “to walk.” From the past principal part of “to walk,” we get the past tense conjugation of this verb – “walked.” “Walked,” alone, is the verb of the sentence. In other words, “walked,” as a verb, required no helping verb.
As with the present principal part of the verb, you could not use “walked” (if you’re thinking of the verb in its past principal part) as a participle or as a gerund. The past principal part of any verb is also not one of the building blocks for using that verb as a verbal.
NO!
Walked is good exercise.
Let’s consider the present participle and past participle principal parts of a verb.
Verbs in their present participle and past participle forms can be the verb of the sentence, if they are preceded by a helping verb. By far, the most common helping verbs are the verbs “to be” and “to have.” A helping verb, as its name implies, helps: it helps a conjugation to form, but does not constitute the main idea of the action. For instance, in the sentence, “That teacher has gone for the day,” we have a verb phrase, “has gone.” As with all verb phrases, there is a helping verb (“has”) and a main verb (“gone”). “Has” has helped “gone” in its conjugation, but the idea of the verb phrase (“has gone”) is of the teacher’s “going,” not “having.” “Has” is just a helper. The essential idea is conveyed by “gone”; the essential idea, here, is the “going” of the teacher.
Example #1:
This heavy load is breaking my back.
The verb in this sentence is a verb phrase: “is breaking.” “Is” (a conjugation of the verb “to be”) is merely helping the conjugation along. The main verb of this verb phrase, and the essential idea of the action of this sentence, is “breaking,” the present participle form of the verb, “to break.”
Example #2:
I have broken my promise to you, and I am sorry.
The verb in this sentence is a verb phrase: “have broken.” But “have” (a conjugation of the verb “to have”) is merely helping the conjugation along. The main verb of this verb phrase and the essential idea of the action of this sentence is “broken,” the past participle form of the verb, “to break.”
When present participles and past participles are acting in their capacity as verbals, that is to say, as adjectives (participles) and as nouns (gerunds), they will appear without a helping verb; and they will not function as the verb of the sentence.
Example #1:
The breaking news from California interrupted the regularly scheduled TV show.
“Breaking,” the present participle form of the verb, “to break,” is acting as an adjective to “news.” In this capacity we call it simply a participle – we don’t make the distinction that it is a present participle.
Example #2:
This broken computer is going to be quite costly to repair.
“Broken,” the past participle form of the verb, “to break,” is acting as an adjective to “computer.” In this capacity, once again, we call it simply a participle – we don’t make the distinction that it is a past participle.
Example #3:
Breaking is a one of the most prevalent themes in The Grapes of Wrath.
“Breaking,” the present participle form of the verb, “to break,” is acting as the subject-noun of this sentence. In this capacity we call it a gerund.
Noun
Definition – a noun names a person, place, thing, or idea
♦ The first thing to know about nouns:
Because a noun names an idea, and because all words denote an idea, any word in the English language can potentially act as a noun. But conventionally, words that denote things that one can touch, things that are palpable, are nouns. For example: cat, table, car, Brooklyn Technical High School, etc.
♦ The second thing to know about nouns:
Nouns and their replacements, pronouns, are the only parts of speech that are secondarily designated by their function within a sentence: Nouns and pronouns will act as either subjects or objects within a sentence.
Pronoun
Definition – a pronoun takes the place of a noun.
♦ The first thing to know about pronouns:
Personal pronouns have three different forms – called “cases” – to perform three different functions.
• The Nominative Case – is the form required when the pronoun is functioning as the subject of the sentence or clause. I, You, He, She, It, We, You, They are all in the nominative case.
I am going. We are ready.
You are staying. You must go now.
He is waiting. They have left.
She is impatient.
It is time to go.
In each example above, the personal pronoun in bold-faced type is functioning as the subject of its sentence, and so must be in the nominative case. In grammar, function determines form.
• The Objective Case – is the form required when the pronoun is functioning as an object. There are a number of possible objects within a sentence or clause. The three most common objective functions are these: direct object, object of a preposition, indirect object. Me, You, Him, Her, It, Us, You, Them are all in the objective case.
You hurt me. They spoke to us.
I need you. They were rude to you.
I spoke to him We ignored them.
I taught her.
I lost it.
In each example above, the personal pronoun in bold-faced type is functioning as either the direct object of the sentence, or as the object of a preposition, and so must be in the objective case.
• The Possessive Case – possessive case pronouns are pronouns in name only. In terms of their function, they are actually adjectives. Possessive case pronouns will always appear in front of a noun. They denote possession, attachment, or association. They are adjectival in that they modify a noun by answering the adjective-question “Which one?” My, Your, His, Her, Its, Our, Your, Their are all in the possessive case.
I lost my keys. Bob is our friend.
You need your umbrella. This is your new teacher.
He passed his test. The victims lost their houses in the flood.
Marty knows her sister.
A lion protects its cubs.
In each example above, the personal pronoun in bold-faced type is functioning as an adjective to the noun that follows it. For example, in the sentence “He passed his test,” “his” modifies or describes the noun “test.” “His” is an adjective to “test” and distinguishes the test in question from all other tests.
♦ The second thing to know about pronouns:
Personal pronouns also are designated by “person.” The “person” of a pronoun indicates the individual (or thing) to whom (or to which) the speaker is referring. There are three “persons,” and they are designated by ordinal numbers: First, Second, and Third.
• First Person – is used when the speaker is referring to himself. The first person pronouns are I, Me, My (all singular), and We, Us, Our (all plural).
• Second Person – is used when the speaker is directly addressing another person; i.e., a person in his presence. The second person pronouns are You and Your. Both of these pronouns are capable of being either singular or plural, depending upon the larger context into which they are placed.
• Third Person – is used when the speaker is talking about a person, place, thing, or idea. The third person pronouns are He, Him, His, She, Her, It, Its (all singular), and They, Them, Their (all plural).
Adjective
Definition – an adjective describes, qualifies, or quantifies a noun or pronoun. In the
most general of terms, an adjective is said to modify a noun or pronoun.
♦ The first thing to know about adjectives:
There is a specific manner in which an adjective modifies a noun (or pronoun*). (*From this point on, whenever a stipulation is made relative to a noun, assume that the same thing can be said of a pronoun. A pronoun, since it takes the place of a noun, must be able to perform every function that a noun performs, and be affected in every way that a noun is affected.)
An adjective modifies a noun by addressing one (or more) of four questions, called the adjective-questions. The adjective-questions are “Which one?”, “What kind?”, “How many?”, and “How much?”.
For example:
Each word in bold-faced type in the examples below is an adjective. The parenthetical addition following each example points out the adjective question that is addressed and answered.
My best friend … (Which one?)
The gentle doctor … (What kind?)
The five cars … (How many?)
Her many questions … (How much?)
♦ The second thing to know about adjectives:
A predicate adjective is exceptional. A predicate adjective appears in a sentence with a linking verb (usually some conjugation of the verb “to be”); it is the complement (completing word) of its sentence; it is linked to the subject-noun of its sentence by the linking verb.
For example:
“My neighbor is nice.”
“Nice” is a predicate adjective in this sentence. “Nice” is linked to, and describes, “neighbor” by virtue of the linking capacity of the verb in this sentence – “is” (a conjugation of the verb, “to be”).
However, all other one-word adjectives (i.e., adjectives other than predicate adjectives) appear directly in front of the noun that they are describing.
♦ The third thing to know about adjectives:
There are certain words that might prove difficult to recognize as adjectives, though that is exactly what they are. Examples of such adjectives are listed below.
• Possessive pronouns
Possessive pronouns have already been covered in the “Pronoun” section of this manual, but the manner in which they function bears repeating here. Their form is that of a pronoun, but their function is that of an adjective.
For example:
My friend is coming to visit.
“My” is a possessive pronoun. It is possessive to “friend.” Possessive pronouns denote possession, attachment, or association. In this case, “my” denotes association. The writer, in using “my,” is conveying the idea of his association with another person – his friend.
“My” is directly in front of the noun, “friend,” so it satisfies the placement rule of adjectives (“adjectives appear directly in front of the noun that they are describing”); secondly, “my” modifies the noun, “friend,” by answering the adjective-question, “Which one?” – i.e., “Which friend?”. Answer: My friend. In these ways, “my” satisfies the definition of an adjective – as all possessive pronouns do.
• Demonstrative pronouns
Like possessive pronouns, their form is that of a pronoun, but their function is that of an adjective. The demonstrative pronouns are, “this,” and “that,” which are singular; and “these,” and “those,” which are plural. As their name suggests, demonstrative pronouns demonstrate. They are the written (or verbal) equivalent of pointing to the person or thing to which one is referring.
For example:
That desk needs to be removed from the room.
“That” is a demonstrative pronoun. It is demonstrative to “desk.”
“That” is directly in front of the noun, “desk,” so it satisfies the placement rule of adjectives (“adjectives appear directly in front of the noun that they are describing”); secondly, it modifies the noun “desk” by answering the adjective-question, “Which one?” – i.e., “Which desk?”. Answer: That desk. In these ways, “that” satisfies the definition of an adjective – as all demonstrative pronouns do.
• Articles
There are three articles: “the,” “a,” and “an.”
Articles function as adjectives in that they satisfy the placement rule of adjectives – they will appear directly in front of the noun that they are modifying – and they will modify that noun by answering one of the adjective-questions.
“The” tends to denote the idea of “this one, and only this one.” It is called a definite article.
For example:
“I want the chocolate doughnut.”
“The” is an article to “(chocolate) doughnut.”
“The” is positioned directly in front of the noun, “(chocolate) doughnut,” so it satisfies the placement rule of adjectives; secondly, “the” modifies the noun “doughnut” by answering the adjective-question, “Which one?” – i.e., “Which doughnut?”. Answer: the chocolate doughnut – which is most probably the one and only chocolate doughnut in the box of doughnuts. In these ways, “the” satisfies the definition of an adjective – as all articles do.
The other two articles, “a,” and “an” tend to denote the idea of “one – but any one.” That is to say, no particular one. They are called indefinite articles.
For example:
I want a doughnut.
“A” is an article to “doughnut.”
“A” is positioned directly in front of the noun, “doughnut,” so it satisfies the placement rule of adjectives; secondly, “a” modifies the noun “doughnut” by answering the adjective-question, “How many? – i.e., “How many doughnuts (do you want)?”. Answer: a doughnut – that is to say: one doughnut, but any one doughnut in the box of doughnuts. In these ways, “a” satisfies the definition of an adjective – as all articles do.
“An” is no different from “a.” The only time it is used is when the noun that follows it begins with a vowel (a, e, i, o, u). “An” exists only to make the enunciation of such a pairing easier.
For example:
An apple …
An egg …
An iceberg …
An orange …
An umbrella …
Adverb
Definition – an adverb usually describes or qualifies a verb. In some cases, an adverb
describes or qualifies another modifier in the sentence (i.e., an adjective or
adverb). In the most general of terms, an adverb is said to modify either a
verb or another modifier.
♦ The first thing to know about adverbs:
The specific manner in which an adverb modifies a verb (or other modifier) is by addressing one of four questions, called the adverb-questions. The adverb-questions are “Where?”, “When?”, “How?”, and “To what extent?”.
For example:
Each word in bold-faced type in the examples below is an adverb. The parenthetical addition following each example points out the adverb question that is addressed and answered.
Martin! Come here! (Where?)
Martin! Come here now! (When?)
Martin! Come here now quickly! (How?)
Martin! Come here now very quickly! (To what extent?)
Take note of the fact that as we add each new adverb to the original sentence, the preceding adverb in no way loses its identity. The preceding adverb will still act as an adverb. It is a feature of English grammar that a series of modifiers can be “stacked up,” contiguously, yet each modifier in the stack will continue to modify the same word at the end of – or at the beginning of – the stack. For instance, in the third entry of the examples above (“Martin! Come here now quickly!”) “here,” and “now,” and “quickly” are all adverbs to the verb, “come.”
This principle is also true of adjectives. In the sentence, “That strong, healthy, beautiful dog took first place in the dog show” – “that,” and “strong,” and “healthy,” and “beautiful” are all adjectives to the noun, “dog.”
♦ The second thing to know about adverbs:
Of all the parts of speech, the two that are most kindred in spirit and meaning are adjectives and adverbs. Evidence of this is most simply seen by the fact that an uncountable number of adjectives can be made into adverbs by the addition of an “ly” at the end of the word. Thus the adjective “quick” becomes an adverb by merely changing the word to “quickly.” Despite the change, both forms of the modifier mean the same thing.
But there are some differences between adjectives and adverbs.
• Unlike adjectives, adverbs do not have to appear directly in front of the word that they modify. (If the adverb is modifying a verb.)
For example:
Quickly, he headed for the mailbox.
He quickly headed for the mailbox.
He headed quickly for the mailbox.
He headed for the mailbox quickly.
Each sentence is essentially the same; but in each sentence the placement of the adverb, “quickly” is different; yet, in each sentence, “quickly” is still modifying the verb, “headed.”
Of course, non-ly adverbs can – and do – perform in this manner as well.
• In 99 out of 100 cases, words that end in “ly” are adverbs. When an “ly” word is an adverb it always answers the adverb-question, “How?”
For example:
He headed for the mailbox quickly.
The adverb is “quickly.” It is modifying the verb, “headed.”
“Quickly” answers the adverb-question, “How?” – i.e., How did he head for the mailbox?. Answer: quickly.
♦ The third thing to know about adverbs:
There is a subset of adverbs called intensifiers. These are the adverbs that do not modify verbs; but, instead, modify other modifiers – adverbs, and adjectives. These are the modifiers that will always – and only – answer the adverb question, “To what extent?” Unlike adverbs that modify verbs, intensifiers must appear directly in front of the adjective or the adverb that they are qualifying.
Example #1:
I ran down the block very quickly.
“Very” is an adverb, but it has nothing to do with “ran,” the verb in this sentence. After all, it would be ridiculous to say, “He very ran,” wouldn’t it? However, “very” has everything to do with “quickly.” “Very” modifies the adverb “quickly” by addressing the idea of “To what extent” the subject was quick. The subject was very quick. “Very” intensifies “quickly” by elevating the degree to which we envision the quickness: hence the term for this type of adverb – intensifier.
Many (but not all) modifiers have three degrees of comparison – positive, comparative, and superlative … for instance: good, better, best.
An intensifier moves the describing word that it modifies from its current degree of comparison to its next, and higher, degree of comparison. “Quickly” is positive; “more quickly” or “very quickly” is comparative; “most quickly” is superlative.
Example #2:
My girlfriend is very beautiful.
In this case, “very” is intensifying the adjective “beautiful” (“To what extent” is the subject’s girlfriend beautiful? She is very beautiful.); and is bringing our idea of the girlfriend’s beauty from its positive degree, to its comparative degree. The three degrees of the idea of “beauty” (i.e., its positive, comparative, and superlative degrees) would be “beautiful,” “more beautiful” – or in this case, “very beautiful” – and “most beautiful.”
Preposition
Definition – a preposition denotes physical relationships. Additionally, a preposition
creates grammatical relationships. It does so by generating a phrase to
which it gives its name: the prepositional phrase. The prepositional phrase
will then go on to function, in its entirety, as either an adjective or an adverb
♦ The first thing to know about prepositions:
Prepositions are difficult to understand through their definition alone. It is much easier to merely recognize a preposition when you see it, and to further realize that the preposition is in the sentence for a purpose – to create a phrase. So, a preposition should never be thought of as a separate entity in a sentence, but rather as the “kick-off” word to a group of words – known as a prepositional phrase. In light of this phenomenon, one must look beyond the preposition and be cognizant of the entire phrase that the preposition is forming.
Below is a partial list of prepositions. Take note of the fact that prepositions are typically short words, and that they seem to indicate the idea of where something or someone is – and in this way they satisfy the part of their definition that states that prepositions “denote physical relationships.”
The most common prepositions:
Of, From, To, With, At, For, In, On, By
Some others:
About Before Down Off Till
Above Behind During Onto Toward
Across Below Except Opposite Under
After Beneath Inside Out Underneath
Against Beside Into Outside Until
Along Between Like Over Up
Among Near Past Upon
Around Since Within
As Through Without
Throughout
Compound prepositions:
According to By means of Instead of
Ahead of In addition to In view of
Apart from In back of Next to
As of In front of On account of
Aside from In place of Out of
Because of In spite of Prior to
Here is an illustration of how a preposition typically functions within a sentence:
My friend from New Jersey is visiting.
In the sentence, above, “from” is the preposition. “From” signifies that there is a physical relationship between “friend,” and “New Jersey.” Another way to think of this is simply to turn the idea around: New Jersey is where the speaker’s friend is from – that is where the friend is physically located. As the very definition of a preposition suggests, this preposition, “from,” in initiating the idea of “where,” has denoted a physical relationship.
In examining the role that this preposition plays in this sentence, we see that there is more than just a physical relationship between “New Jersey” and “friend” – there is also a grammatical relationship between the two nouns. To appreciate this fact, we must look beyond “from” to take note of the phrase that the preposition is creating: “from New Jersey.” The entire phrase, “from New Jersey,” is modifying the noun-subject, “friend,” by answering the adjective-question, “Which one?” – i.e., “Which friend?”. Answer: the friend from New Jersey.
The entire prepositional phrase, “from New Jersey,” is acting as an adjective to “friend.”
This grammatical relationship was entirely generated by the preposition, “from.”
♦ The second thing to know about prepositions:
Since, by their nature, prepositions are supposed to create phrases – since they’re supposed to be followed by a noun acting as their object – grammarians insist that one must not end a sentence with a preposition. If a preposition is the last word in its sentence, it can’t form a phrase and it can’t take an object, so, in ending a sentence with a preposition, the very nature and purpose of the preposition has been obviated.
Most grammarians would consider the following sentence to be incorrect …
Is this the book you spoke about?
Here is how it should be rewritten …
Is this the book about which you spoke?
A note of caution:
This is more of a guideline than a hard and fast rule. Sometimes, taking this principle to extremes can result in a horribly convoluted and even ridiculous sentence. In poking fun at this rule, Winston Churchill once said, “Ending a sentence in a preposition is something up with which I will not put.”
Use your judgment.
Conjunction
Definition – a conjunction is a word that joins two words, phrases, or clauses that are
grammatically identical in their nature and/or function.
“Con” means “with.” That which “conjoins” joins one element of the sentence with another. Conjunctions are classified in three ways.
• Coordinating conjunctions
Coordinating conjunctions bring together grammatically equal elements within a sentence – be those elements words, phrases, or clauses. The most common coordinating conjunctions are these …
for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so
For example:
My father and my mother are coming to visit this afternoon.
The coordinating conjunction “and” joined the noun-subject “father” to the second noun-subject “mother” to create what is called a compound subject – i.e., the subject of this sentence is both “father” and “mother.”
Coordinating conjunctions create compound constructions.
One can compound any two elements in a sentence that are grammatically identical. One can compound a pair of adjectives (The kind and gentle man is admired by everyone); a pair of adverbs (The soldiers ran swiftly and silently); a pair of verbs (The children hopped and skipped across the lawn), etc.
Even two sentences can be compounded (I will be going to the beach but you will be going to summer school). These two sentences-within-a-sentence are called clauses. They are both independent clauses to be exact. And the larger sentence, in its entirety, would be referred to as a compound sentence.
• Correlative conjunctions
Correlative conjunctions bring together grammatically equal elements within a sentence in order to underscore their relationship (and often their differences). The most common correlative conjunctions are these …
both…and; not only…but also; either…or; neither…nor; whether…or
For example:
Neither the stars nor the extras could stand the director of the movie that they were working on.
Correlative conjunctions travel in pairs and co-relate (as their name suggests) two grammatically identical elements in a sentences. Correlative conjunctions function in the exact same manner as do coordinating conjunctions – they create compound constructions.
• Subordinating conjunctions
Subordinating conjunctions will introduce a clause within a complex sentence
and will establish that the clause that it has introduced is grammatically lesser
in nature (i.e., subordinate) than its companion clause in the complex sentence
– i.e., the independent clause.
Subordinating conjunctions can be single word. Some common one-word
subordinating conjunctions are these …
after, because, since, if, while.
Subordinating conjunctions can be more than one word – they can be
compounded. Some common compound subordinating conjunctions are
these …
only if; whether or not; in order that
Some things to know beforehand:
There are two types of clauses: independent and dependent.
Independent clauses are strong.
Dependent clauses are weak.
A clause can be a valid sentence, in effect.
Independent clauses are valid sentences.
Or, a clause can be a sentence-like.
By sentence-like, one means that the clause in question will have a subject, a verb, and, usually, a complementary word or phrase; but would not be able to stand on its own as a sensible sentence if removed from the complete, original sentence of which it (the clause) is a part.
Dependent clauses are sentence-like.
There are two types of sentences with clauses: compound and complex.
A compound sentence has two independent clauses. That is to say, it is comprised of a valid sentence conjoined to a second valid sentence.
On the other hand, a complex sentence usually has an independent clause and a dependent clause.
In a complex sentence, the independent clause, being strong, would be able to stand on its own as sensible sentence if removed from the complex sentence.
In a complex sentence, the independent clause is the core idea: it is necessary in order that the entire complex sentence make sense.
In a complex sentence, the dependent clause, being weak, would not be able to stand on its own as a sensible sentence if removed from the complex sentence.
Subordinating conjunctions are used to introduce a type of dependent clause that is alternately known as a subordinate clause. This particular type of clause will function as an adverb. (This will be more fully explained in the section on “The Clause.”)
For example:
I constructed this one-family house while I was waiting for you to show up for our date.
There are two clauses in the sentence above – “I constructed this one-family house,” and “while I was waiting for you to show up for our date.” “While” is a subordinating conjunction in this sentence. “While” both announces that it is introducing a dependent (and subordinate) clause, and joins said clause (“while I was waiting …”) to the initial, independent clause (“I constructed …”).
“While,” being a subordinating conjunction, indicates that the entire clause of which it is a part (and which it introduces) is functioning as an adverb to the verb, “constructed” – the verb that lies within the initial, independent clause. Furthermore, “while” indicates that the second clause, since it is functioning as an adverb, is lower in grammatical order to the first clause: hence the term sub (lower) ordinating (in grammatical order) conjunction.
The first clause, the independent clause, is the core idea of the entire construction. It is the main idea that, if removed from the complex sentence, could still stand on its own as a sensible sentence. Without it, the sentence as a whole would not make sense – in other words, there would be no sentence.
In this section, the list of coordinating conjunctions and correlative conjunctions is fairly complete. The list of subordinating conjunctions is only a partial one.
Interjection
Definition – an interjection is a word or phrase that denotes strong emotion. An
interjection exclaims, protests, or commands. Interjections often appear as a
separate, one-word idea, followed by an exclamation point.
For example:
The interjections are in bold-faced type.
Oh! I thought you weren’t coming with us, but here you are.
Gosh! I wish I had remembered to take my address book with me on this trip.
THE THREE MAJOR WORD-GROUPINGS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
The Sentence
The Phrase
The Clause
THE SENTENCE
It is sometimes the case that a single word in a sentence or in a paragraph (or in a conversation) can function independently and prove to be of vital importance.
For example:
Little boy: “I want that puppy.”
Kennel worker: “Which puppy?”
Little boy: “The brown puppy.”
“Brown,” an adjective, specified exactly which puppy the boy wanted by answering the adjective-question, “Which one?” That single word made all the difference in effectively communicating the little boy’s desire. One could make the case that, in this example, the solitary word, “brown,” was the most important element of the conversation.
But, given the syntax of our language, it is far common that word-groupings will take precedence over single, solitary words in communicating key ideas. A word-grouping is a combination of contiguous words that make sense as a group. These word-groupings will convey a single idea, or perform a single grammatical function.
To state the obvious, the sentence is essential in conveying meaning in composition.
Definition – A sentence is a complete thought. A sentence makes sense.
The model of the ideal sentence is S-V-C: Subject-Verb-Complement.
The subject of the sentence is a function, not a part of speech. But it is a function that will always be carried out by one, or another, of the same two parts of speech. Either a noun or a pronoun will always – and only – function as the subject of a sentence (or clause).
The subject of a sentence (or clause*) is ‘who’ or ‘what’ that sentence is about. (*From this point on, whenever a stipulation is made relative to a sentence, assume that the same thing can be said of a clause. A clause will have a subject, a verb, and [usually] a complement; and will either be a sentence in every regard, or be sentence-like.)
The subject of any given sentence can be identified by means of a questioning process.
Say, for instance, that I wanted to locate the subject of the following sentence:
The students in my school are incredibly bright.
I would first identify the predicate of the sentence – the verb and every word that follows the verb. In this sentence, the predicate is, “are incredibly bright.” To identify the subject, I would then take the now-isolated predicate of the sentence under examination and precede it with one of two possible interrogative pronouns: with “who?”, or with “what?”.
For instance, I would ask, in analyzing the sentence currently under examination,
“Who – or What – are incredibly bright?”
There is a sensible answer to one of the two possible versions of my newly formed question.
The answer to “Who are incredibly bright?” is “(The) students.”
The end result of my questioning process has strongly suggested to me that “students” is the subject of this sentence.
To confirm that I have, in fact, identified the subject of this sentence, I would further ask myself, “Is “students” a noun?”
The answer is “yes.”
I would go on to ask myself, “Is the sentence about “(The) students”?”
The answer is “yes.”
In this way I have satisfied myself that the subject of this sentence is “students.”
Take note of these facts:
• The process by which one identifies the subject of any given sentence will create an interrogative sentence (i.e., a question).
• Being a sentence, this new (interrogative) construction must make sense.
• The question that establishes the subject has to begin with either “who” or with “what,” and no other interrogative pronoun.
• Following “who” or “what,” the remainder of the interrogative sentence must be the predicate of the sentence that you are analyzing.
• The answer to the question that you have now formed must be a word from the sentence that you are analyzing.
• Whichever word answers your recently formed question will be the subject of the sentence under examination.
The verb of the sentence is the construction’s most important word. It is the lifeblood of any sentence. Verbs are either action words, or they denote a state of being. The verb “to be” is an example of the latter type of verb.
The complement of the sentence comes after the verb, and is the word, or phrase, or clause that completes the meaning of the sentence. As a mnemonic device, note that the first six letters of the word, “complete,” are the first six letters of the word, “complement.” The complement finishes off the sentence – it completes the thought. Do not confuse this word with its homonym, “compliment,” which means to praise someone, or something.
In the sentence, “The students in my school are incredibly bright,” “incredibly bright” is the complement.
It would be worth our while to consider the concepts of strong and weak when it comes to the parts of speech. Of the eight parts of speech that were listed at the beginning of this manual, the first six are by far the most important, and will be our focus in the study of grammar throughout the year. As it happens, those six conveniently fall into two groups: strong and weak. Nouns, pronouns, and verbs are strong. Adjective, adverbs, and prepositions are weak.
The adjective needs the noun; the noun does not need the adjective. “Yellow” is an adjective. If I say, “I see a yellow” this “sentence” makes no sense. The adjective, “yellow,” which is weak, cannot stand on its own. It absolutely needs a noun to follow it. Change the construction to, “I see a yellow car,” and the sentence now makes sense. But the sentence would also make sense if the noun “car” appeared without any adjective at all: “I see a car.” The adjective (in this case, “yellow”) needed the noun (in this case, “car”), and not vice-versa.
The noun is strong, the adjective is weak.
As the replacement to the noun, the pronoun is also strong, relative to the other weak parts of speech; however, the pronoun is not as strong as the noun.
The adverb needs the verb; the verb does not need the adverb. “Quickly” is an adverb. If I say, “He quickly,” this “sentence” makes no sense. The adverb, “quickly,” which is weak, cannot stand on its own. It absolutely needs a verb to modify. Change the construction to “He quickly ran,” and the sentence now makes sense. But the sentence would also make sense (in certain contexts) if the verb “ran” appeared without any adverb at all: “He ran.” The adverb (in this case, “quickly”) needed the verb (in this case, “ran”), and not vice-versa.
The verb is strong, the adverb is weak.
In the section on the “Conjunction,” and specifically subordinating conjunctions, it was stipulated that, in a complex sentence, there is a weak clause that needs to be announced as such by the insertion of a subordinating conjunction at its forefront. The weak clause in question is alternately known as either a dependent clause or as a subordinate clause. Subordinate clauses, in their entirety, are meant to function as an adverb to the verb within the independent clause.
The subordinate clause (i.e., sub [lower] ordinate [in order]) is lower – lesser – weaker – in nature compared to its counterpart, the independent clause, because the subordinate clause functions as an adverb.
Adverbs are weak, verbs are strong.
Prepositions are designed to start phrases. In and of themselves, prepositions can do nothing to convey the idea of these phrases to which they give their name (i.e., prepositional phrases). Prepositions must be followed by a noun or a pronoun that will serve as the object of that preposition. Then, seen as an entity, the entire phrase – preposition, object, and (often) modifiers to the object – and only the entire phrase will make sense. If I say, “I was talking about” this “sentence” makes no sense. The preposition, “about,” absolutely needs the completion of the phrase which it was designed to merely introduce. (I guess you could say that, like many people, the preposition cannot finish what it starts.) Change the construction to “I was talking about English grammar” and the sentence now makes sense, because the preposition has launched a phrase: “about English grammar.”
Prepositions usually need the context of an entire phrase. A lone preposition often means nothing without accompaniment. By itself, a preposition would usually be nonsensical within (what hopes to be) a sentence.
The “sentence,” “I was talking about,” would make perfect sense if you omitted “about” altogether: “I was talking.”
Prepositions, by themselves, are weak; they need a strong word – a noun or a pronoun – to act as their object, and to complete the prepositional phrase.
A sentence’s S-V-C – absent any modification – is the core of that sentence. And the core of anything or anyone must be strong if that thing or person is to survive and thrive. Following the logic of this, it becomes obvious that the core of any sentence must be comprised of strong words: nouns, pronouns, and verbs.
For example:
Mary loves him.
We have here a very simple, but perfectly valid sentence. Its composition is comprised of one particular S-V-C model which happens to be devoid of any modification. It is “all core,” so to speak.
The subject is “Mary.” The verb is “loves.” And the complement (in this case a direct object, since the verb, “loves,” is transitive) is “him.”
The entire sentence above consisted solely of the strongest words in the English language: a noun (“Mary”), a verb (“loves”), and a pronoun (“him”).
No modifying words were needed to convey a complete thought.
Strong words have the capacity to stand on their own without modification; whereas weak words – modifiers and prepositions – need to justify their placement within their sentence by affixing themselves to strong words.
Herein lies the lesson!
When you compose any sentence think long and hard about your choice for the core words – especially the subject and the verb. Prefer a noun as opposed to a pronoun when you choose a subject, because nouns are even stronger than pronouns – they are more specific. When picking a subject, pick a noun that has impact. (To paraphrase George Orwell, “All nouns are strong, but some nouns are stronger than others.”). When you choose a verb, choose a vibrant verb – a true action word! For verbs, too, are not created equal.
For instance, “moved” is not a vibrant verb. In the sentence, “Robert moved across the field,” one would have to modify “moved” to add a sense of urgency and vibrancy to the sentence: “Robert moved rapidly across the field.” Had the writer started with a vibrant verb – “dashed,” for example – no modification would have been necessary: “Robert dashed across the field.”
If you choose your core words carefully, you won’t need to prop up your sentences with modifying words, phrases, and clauses.
I’m not suggesting that the writer should eliminate modification completely. I would not care to write– nor would I be able to write – without modifying and descriptive elements. But modifying and descriptive elements cannot save a sentence that’s gotten off to a bad start. Uncomplicated sentence structure is the goal of good writing. Short sentences with specific, well-chosen core words have power; they have clarity; and they have beauty. This is why vocabulary work is part of the English curriculum: Because knowing a wealth of words provides the writer with a myriad of options; and, in turn, those options can lead to strong, simple core sentences … and better writing.
Here is a simple rule:
For the most part, compose short, simple declarative sentences. Begin each sentence with the subject of the sentence – that is to say, have the subject be the first word, or one of the first words, of the sentence. Make strong, specific choices in selecting your subject and your verb.
THE PHRASE
We need to precede this section by talking about the concept of enumeration in English grammar. Like the binary system of computer language (i.e., 0 and 1) the English language, grammatically, has two numbers: singular (one) and plural (not one, i.e., more than one). If I say, “The people are unhappy,” I could be referring to two people, or two hundred million people. In the absence of a larger context, it would be impossible to know how many people are being referred to. Given this sentence, the reader would only know that more than one person is being referenced. This fact has a bearing on the definition of a phrase.
Definition – a phrase is more than one word that functions, in its entirety, as a single part
of speech.
A phrase is a plural construction. Given the principle of grammatical enumeration, we see that, though a phrase is not one word, neither is it (necessarily) two words. A phrase can consist of three, four, five, or more words. But a phrase cannot be said to be a phrase, by definition, unless it is comprised of at least two words.
• The Verb Phrase
The past, present, and future tenses are very simple. However, when a sentence needs to denote an action that is subtle and complex, these three tenses won’t suffice: a verb phrase is needed.
Definition – a verb phrase consists of a helping verb, or verbs (which will come first in
the construction), plus a main verb, functioning, together, as THE verb of the
sentence.
Example #1:
I am going to the store.
The verb phrase is “am going.” “Am” is the helping verb. “Going” is the main verb. But THE verb of the sentence is “am going.” This verb is in the present progressive tense. All of the progressive tenses employ the verb “to be” – in some one of its conjugations – as their helping verb. The progressive tenses always have the same type of main verb: they employ the present participle form of the verb, the form that always ends in “ing.”
The Progressive Tenses:
The progressive tenses denote action that is (or was, or will be) ongoing – i.e., in progress: hence the name “progressive.” The sense of this tense is subtle and more complicated than those tenses that do not require a helping verb. With the progressive tenses, the action is on-going, often protracted, and even, at times, habitual.
The past progressive conjugation of the verb phrase most recently considered would be, “I was going to the store.”
This phrase’s future progressive conjugation would be, “I will be going to the store.”
So we see that the progressive tense is past progressive when the helping verb is past (“was”); it is present progressive when the helping verb is present (“am,” “are,” or “is”); and, it is future progressive when the helping verb is future (“will be”).
There is a past, present, and future permutation of this tense in order to accommodate various perspectives on the action.
The writer might be remembering an ongoing event; and so would need the past progressive. With “I was going to the store,” the action is (or, more correctly, was) ongoing from a past perspective.
The writer might be experiencing or alluding to an ongoing event that is current, or that has extended into the present time; and so would need the present progressive: “I am going to the store.” The action is ongoing from a present perspective.
The writer might be imagining or anticipating an ongoing event; and so would need the future progressive. With “I will be going to the store,” the action is (or, more correctly, will be) ongoing from a future perspective.
It is important to understand that the ongoing action of the progressive tenses stands in contrast to the action of the simple present tense. The simple present tense is discrete: the action is committed within a narrow time frame, and the subject will not return to that action (as a general rule). However, the progressive tenses denote an action that is more complex than this.
Example #2:
I have gone to the store.
The verb phrase is “have gone.” “Have” is the helping verb. “Gone” is the main verb. But THE verb of the sentence is “have gone.” The verb is in the present perfect tense. All of the perfect tenses employ the verb “to have” – in some one of its conjugations – as their helping verb. The perfect tenses always have the same type of main verb: the main verb will be conjugated in its past participle form. If one is conjugating a verb in one of the perfect tenses, and if the verb is irregular, as is the verb in this sentence (go, going, went, and gone), then one must take care to choose the past participle (gone) and not the past (went) for the main verb. When a verb is regular, this is not an issue since the past and past participle forms of regular verbs are always identical. For example: “I walked down this block,” and, “I have walked down this block.”
The Perfect Tenses:
The perfect tenses denote action that is (or was, or will be) past, completed, finished. When something is finished it is perfected. Hence the perfect tenses refer to an action that has been perfected, in the sense that we use that word to mean “finished.”
The sense of this tense is subtle and more complicated than those tenses that don’t require a helping verb. With the perfect tenses, the action is protracted, or the action is relative to a second past action, or the action is habitual – or all three.
The past perfect conjugation of the verb phrase most recently considered would be, “I had gone to the store.”
This phrase’s future progressive conjugation would be, “I will have gone to the store.”
So we see that the perfect tense is past perfect when the helping verb is past (“had”); it is present perfect when the helping verb is present (“have” or “has”); and, it is future perfect when the helping verb is future (“will have”).
There is a past, present, and future permutation of this tense in order to accommodate various perspectives on the action.
The writer might be remembering a completed event; and so would need the past perfect. With “I had gone to the store,” the action was completed from a past perspective.
The writer might be experiencing or alluding to an event that has just been completed, or that has extended into the present time but is now over and done with; and so would need the present perfect: “I have gone to the store.” The action was completed from a present perspective.
The writer might be imagining or anticipating a completed event; and so would need the future perfect. With “I will have gone to the store,” the action was (or, more correctly, will be) completed from a future perspective.
It is important to understand that the completed action of the perfect tenses stands in contrast to the completed action of the simple past tense. The simple past tense is discrete: the action is committed within a narrow time frame, and the subject will not return to that action (as a general rule). However, the perfect tenses denote an action that is more complex than this.
• The Prepositional Phrase
A prepositional phrase takes its name from the part of speech that will always
begin the phrase: a preposition. Prepositional phrases should not be seen as a conglomeration of separate and distinct words, but rather as a plurality of words that are performing as a single entity. Prepositional phrases function as modifiers.
Definition – A prepositional phrase begins with a preposition, and ends with a
noun or pronoun that is termed the object of the preposition.* (*Remember
that nouns, and their replacements, pronouns, always function as either
subjects or objects.) If a prepositional phrase goes beyond two words in
length, the word (or words) between the initial preposition and the final
object of the preposition will be a modifier, or modifiers, to the object of the
preposition. The entire prepositional phrase will function as either an
adjective or as an adverb. Prepositional phrases are, in effect, multi-word
adjectives or adverbs.
Terms
Adjectival Phrase – a prepositional phrase functioning, in its entirety, as an adjective
Adverbial Phrase – a prepositional phrase functioning, in its entirety, as an adverb
For example:
My sister from Maine is moving to Connecticut next year.
The bold-faced words comprise a prepositional phrase. Specifically it is an adjectival phrase. The phrase is functioning as an adjective to “sister.” It modifies “sister” by answering the adjective-question “Which one?” – i.e., Which sister? Answer: the subject’s sister from Maine.
You will recall, from the section on the adjective that one-word adjectives are always placed directly in front of the noun that they modify (with the exception of the predicate adjective).
For example:
The adjectives are in bold-faced type, and each parenthetical addition stipulates which adjective-question is being asked and answered.
My best friend … (Which one?)
The gentle doctor … (What kind?)
Conversely, adjectival phrases are always placed directly after the noun that they modify. While their placement may be different, adjectival phrases, like one-word adjectives, will modify a noun by answering one of the adjective-questions: “Which one?”, “What kind?”, “How many?”, and “How much?”.
For example:
The adjectival phrases are in bold-faced type, and each parenthetical addition illustrates how these phrases perform as one-word adjectives do.
The window behind the couch needs repair. … (Which one?, Which window? – the one
behind the couch)
A person in need is often desperate. … (What kind?, What kind of person? – the kind of
person in need)
It is very important not to view the words within a prepositional phrase as a number of separate and distinct ideas. Rather, the entire phrase should be viewed as one thing, one entity. So the phrase, “behind the couch,” should not be looked at as … “behind,” a preposition; and, “the,” a modifier, and an article to “couch”; and, “couch,” a noun, and the object of the preposition, “behind.” The phrase should be looked at as an adjective to “window,” which is saying, “behindthecouch.” (If I may steal a page from e.e. cummings’ book.)
Term
Syntax – the order of words in a sentence, and the meaning that that word order creates.
Whether a prepositional phrase is to be viewed as an adjective, or as an adverb will depend upon the syntax of the sentence.
Example #1:
My brother from Denver is arriving early today.
The bold-faced portion of the sentence is a prepositional phrase. Specifically it is an adjectival phrase. The phrase is functioning as an adjective to “brother.” It modifies “brother” by answering the adjective-question “Which one?” – i.e., Which brother? Answer: the subject’s brother from Denver.
Here, the adjectival phrase is positioned directly after the noun that it modifies – as must be the case with all adjectival phrases.
Example #2:
My brother is arriving early today from Denver.
This sentence doesn’t seem to be very different at all from Example #1, the sample sentence that illustrated the idea of an adjectival phrase. But this is a different sentence, grammatically speaking. In this sentence the prepositional phrase, “from Denver,” has become an adverbial phrase. The phrase is functioning as an adverb to the verb, “is arriving.” (Which is a verb phrase, actually.) “From Denver” now modifies “is arriving” by answering the adverb-question “Where?” – i.e., “Where is the subject’s brother arriving from?” Answer: Denver.
Why is, “My brother from Denver is arriving today,” different than “My brother is arriving today from Denver”? How did this happen?
Syntax.
Syntax is our most important consideration when we are studying phrases and clauses. A different placement of a phrase or of a clause will often create a different meaning. In the sentence, “My brother is arriving today from Denver,” “from Denver” can no longer modify “brother” because it is not placed directly after “brother.” It is the syntax of the latter sentence that forbids us from reading that sentence in the way that we read the former sentence. When the subject says, “My brother from Denver is arriving early today,” he has told you that his brother – who is a Denver resident – gets into town today. The subject has used the prepositional phrase “from Denver” to specifically stipulate which brother he is talking about. But when the subject says, “My brother is arriving early today from Denver,” he is now stipulating only that a brother of his – not necessarily the one who resides in Denver – gets into town today by way of Denver … and not Houston, or Los Angeles, for example. In the former construction, the syntax of the sentence is specific to which brother the subject is speaking about. In the latter construction, the syntax of the sentence is specific only to the place from which one – unidentified – brother has departed. In the second sentence, we no longer know exactly which brother is being referred to.
How is it that “from Denver” can only modify the noun, “brother,” when it is placed directly after “brother”; yet that same prepositional phrase, in a slightly altered sentence, can modify “is arriving” even though, now, the prepositional phrase is not placed directly alongside “is arriving”?
The precepts of the principle of proximity can answer that question.
The Principle of Proximity
The grammatical principle of proximity suggests that a modifier should be placed directly alongside the word that it modifies. Thus a modifier should be in proximity to the word that it modifies – hence we have the principle of proximity.
Adverbial modifiers – one-word adverbs, adverbial phrases, and adverb clauses – have the option of following the principle of proximity, at times; and of going their own way at other times.
♦ Adverbial modifiers adhere to a lax principle of proximity.
Adverbial modifiers can range throughout their sentence, while still modifying the verb of their sentence.
On the other hand …
Adjectival modifiers – one-word adjectives, adjectival phrases, and adjective clauses – follow the principle of proximity very closely.
♦ Adjectival modifiers adhere to a strict principle of proximity.
They must be placed directly alongside the noun that they modify.
One-word adjectives must be placed directly in front of the noun that they modify (with the exception of the predicate adjective).
Adjectival phrases and adjective clauses must be placed directly after the noun that they modify (with the exception of an introductory participial phrase).
The failure to follow this principle in regard to adjectival modifiers will almost always result in either one of two things: the sentence will say something other than the writer intended; or the sentence will be ridiculous.
― Watch out for Misplaced Adjectival Phases ―
It stands to reason that if a modifier whose nature is adjectival has a mandate as to where it must be placed (i.e., directly alongside the noun that it modifies), then that same type of modifier can be misplaced.
A misplaced adjectival phrase belongs to a type of error that has its own overall
category: the misplaced modifier. A misplaced modifier is a mistake. It is ungrammatical.
For example:
The words in bold-faced type comprise an adjectival phrase.
I want to show you my new car parked by the hydrant with the leather upholstery.
Misplaced as it is, the adjectival phrase, “with the leather upholstery” must be seen as describing the hydrant. (A hydrant upholstered in leather!) Due to this error in syntax, the sentence has been rendered ridiculous. The prepositional phrase intends to modify “car” and therefore should come directly after “car.”
The correct syntax:
I want to show you my new car, with the leather upholstery, parked by the hydrant.
Adverbial modifiers, since they adhere to a lax principle of proximity, do not have to appear directly alongside of the word that they modify. (The exception to this is the adverb-intensifier. Intensifiers [e.g., “very,” “extremely,” “so”] must appear directly in front of the adjective or adverb that they are modifying.)
A one-word adverb, for instance, can be placed in any number of positions throughout its sentence and still modify the verb.
For example:
Quickly, he headed for the mailbox.
He quickly headed for the mailbox.
He headed quickly for the mailbox.
He headed for the mailbox quickly.
Each sentence is essentially the same, and in each case “quickly” is modifying the verb, “headed,” by answering the adverb-question, “How?” – i.e., “How did he head for the mailbox? Answer: “quickly.”
As with one-word adverbs, adverbial phrases will usually modify the verb in the sentence, and will do so by addressing one of the adverb-questions: “Where?”, “When?”, “ How?”, and “To what extent?”.
For example:
In each example, the words in bold-faced type comprise an adverbial phrase. In each example, the subsequent parenthetical information illustrates how the phrase operates as an adverb.
I went to the Yankee game. … (Where? Where did the subject go? – to the Yankee
game.)
I went to the Yankee game on Friday. … (When? When did the subject go the Yankee
game? – on Friday)
I arrived at the Yankee game out of breath. … (How? How did the subject arrive at the
Yankee game? – out of breath.)
And, as with a one-word adverb, an adverbial phrase does not have to appear in direct proximity to the verb that it modifies. An adverbial phrase can be placed in any number of positions throughout its sentence and still modify the verb.
For example:
In the morning, I run around the reservoir.
I run in the morning around the reservoir.
I run around the reservoir in the morning.
Each sentence is essentially the same, and in each case “in the morning,” an adverbial phrase is modifying the verb, “run,” by answering the adverb-question, “When?” – i.e., “When does the subject run?” Answer: “in the morning.”
Take note of this fact:
In the first of the three entries above, the prepositional phrase, “in the morning,” is set off by a comma. When you begin a sentence with a prepositional phrase, that phrase will always be adverbial, and it must be set off by a comma.
• The Participial Phrase
You will remember from the section on verbs that a verb has four principal parts: present, past, present participle, and past participle.
For example:
break, broke, breaking, and broken.
As is the case with every verb, the latter two principal parts – the present participle and the past participle – act as verbs when they appear in conjunction with a helping verb.
For example:
is breaking, and has broken.
Yet, these latter two principal parts, when they appear by themselves, act as verbals within a sentence.
Terms
Verbal – a verb form that functions, not as the verb of its sentence, but rather as an
adjective, or as a noun
Participle – a verbal that functions as an adjective; it can be derived from either the past
participle or the present participle of a given verb
Gerund – a verbal that functions as a noun; it can only be derived from the present
participle of a given verb – therefore it will always end in “ing”
Participial Phrase – a participle, along with its modifiers and/or its complement,
functioning, in its entirety, as an adjective
For example:
Breaking is a theme of The Grapes of Wrath. (“Breaking” is the subject-noun of the
sentence. We have, in this example, the
verbal use of the present participle form
of the verb, “to break.” Specifically,
“breaking” is a gerund in this sentence.)
Stand by for breaking news. (“Breaking” is an adjective to “news.” We have, in
this example, the verbal use of the present participle form
of the verb, “to break.” Specifically, “breaking” is a
participle in this sentence.)
Be careful of the broken window. (“Broken” is an adjective to “window.” We have, in
this example, the verbal use of the past participle
form of the verb, “to break.” Specifically, “broken”
is a participle in this sentence.)
Take note of these facts:
• A verbal can retain important aspects of its identity as a verb, even though it does not function as the verb of its sentence.
• A verbal can be modified by a one-word adverb, or an adverbial phrase.
• A verbal can take a complement (which is analogous to a direct object) if the verb from which the verbal originated is transitive.
As we see from the most recently listed terms, when a participle takes on modifiers and/or a complement, we have what is called a participial phrase. As with any phrase, a participial phrase should be viewed as a single entity, functioning as a single part of speech. Participial phrases always – and only – function as adjectives.
Let’s consider the verb “to walk.”
Like any verb, it has four principal parts: walk, walked, walking, and walked. Its past and past participle principal parts are identical because it is a regular verb. As with all verbs, its present participle can be either a noun (a gerund), or an adjective (a participle); its past participle can only be an adjective (a participle).
For example:
Walking is good exercise. (The present participle, “walking” is the noun-subject of this
sentence. It is a verbal, specifically it is a gerund.)
An Irish walking stick is called a shillelagh. (The present participle, “walking” is an
adjective to “stick.” It is a verbal,
specifically it is a participle.)
A walked dog is a happy dog. (The past participle “walked” is an adjective to “dog.” It
is a verbal, specifically it is a participle.)
Beyond these relatively simple constructions, “walking,” in its capacity as a participle, can function as the seminal word within a participial phrase. (Just as the preposition is the seminal and introductory word of a prepositional phrase).
For example:
Walking through the park in autumn, I was astounded when I looked at the trees and saw the array of colors
The participle “walking,” a verbal, is modified by the adverbial phrases “through the park” and “in autumn.” Respectively, the adverbial phrases just mentioned describe where and when the walking took place. In turn, the entire participial phrase, “walking through the park in autumn,” acting in its capacity as an adjective, is modifying the pronoun-subject, “I.”
― Watch out for Misplaced Participial Phrases ―
A misplaced participial phrase, as with a misplaced adjectival phrase, comes under the category of “misplaced modifier.”
As previously mentioned, a misplaced modifier is a mistake. It is ungrammatical.
Most of the stipulations that you will find below have been covered earlier, but the reiterated material bears reviewing at this point:
The principal of proximity pursuant to all adjectival
modifiers, states that such modifiers must be
placed directly alongside the noun or pronoun that
they intend to modify.
A participial phrase is an adjectival modifier.
Thus, the principal of proximity is very strict in regard to
participial phrases: They must be placed directly alongside
the noun or pronoun that they intend to modify.
It stands to reason that if a modifier whose nature is
adjectival has a mandate as to where it must be placed
then that same type modifier can be misplaced.
Participial phrases can be misplaced.
For example:
I was astounded when I looked at the trees walking through the park in autumn.
This sentence bears a close resemblance to our most recent sample sentence, and, as with that sentence, “walking through the park in autumn” is a participial phrase. But erroneously placed as it is, now, the participial phrase can only be viewed as an adjective to “trees” – the noun to which the participial phrase stands in direct proximity. Due to this grammatical error, the sentence is saying that the trees were walking through the park. Thus the sentence has been rendered ridiculous, because the modifier was misplaced. The syntax of the sentence has been garbled.
This is an object lesson about rule #1 in grammar and composition. A sentence does not say what you were thinking; it does not say what you originally meant to say. What a sentence says is determined by the vocabulary, the grammar, and the syntax of your sentence. Unless you’re in control of these elements of composition, you will continually say something other than what you intended; and more often than not, you will write ridiculous sentences.
Here is a simple rule:
In a sentence with an interior participial phrase (i.e. a participial phrase that does not begin the sentence), the noun preceding the participial phrase must be capable of performing the action of the verb from which the verbal (i.e., the participle within the participial phrase) is derived.
NO!
We saw a family of squirrels riding along the back roads of Massachusetts.
(The squirrels weren’t doing the riding. This is wrong.)
Yes:
Riding along the back roads of Massachusetts, we saw a family of squirrels.
NO!
Nick kept his eye on the basket dribbling up the court.
(The basket wasn’t doing the dribbling. This is wrong.)
Yes:
Dribbling up the court, Nick kept his eye on the basket.
NO!
My cousin marveled at the New York Skyline driving over the 59th St. Bridge.
(The skyline wasn’t doing the driving. This is wrong.)
Yes:
Driving over the 59th St. Bridge, my cousin marveled at the New York skyline.
NO!
My brother saw a tugboat running along the East River.
(The tugboat wasn’t doing the running. This is wrong.)
Yes:
My brother, running along the East River, saw a tugboat.
― Watch out for Dangling Participles ―
Although almost all adjectival phrases and clauses – when correctly applied – are placed after the noun that they intend to modify, there are exceptions.
There are almost always exceptions to the rules of English grammar.
On occasion, a participial phrase will begin a sentence. But if the noun or pronoun immediately following this introductory participial phrase doesn’t act in accord with the logic of the adjective-noun relationship, the introductory participial phrase is then left dangling with nothing sensible to modify.
The result of this occurrence is called a dangling participle.
A dangling participle is a mistake. It is ungrammatical.
A dangling participle is a specific type of misplaced participial phrase. It is a participial phrase that has been placed at the beginning of the sentence, but that is not followed by the noun or pronoun that it intends to modify.
The mandate for an participial phrase that begins a sentence is clear: Introductory participial phrases must be placed directly in front of the noun or pronoun that they intend to modify.
For example:
Walking through the park in autumn, the trees astounded me.
This is a reconstruction of a sample sentence that we have very recently been working with. “Walking through the park in autumn” is, again, the participial phrase. But since the phrase has now been placed directly in front of “trees,” it is currently modifying “trees.” Once again, the writer is saying that the trees were walking through the park – a ridiculous proposition. This sentence has been rendered absurd because the participial phrase violated the principle of proximity. The participial phrase, an adjective, was not placed directly alongside the pronoun that it truly meant to modify. In this case, that aforementioned pronoun is the speaker of the sentence: the “I” of the original sentence.
The correct syntax:
Walking through the park in autumn, I was astounded by the trees.
Here is a simple rule:
When one begins a sentence with a participial phrase, the noun or pronoun immediately
following that phrase must be capable of performing the action of the verb from which
the verbal (i.e., the participle within the participial phrase) is derived.
In the corrected version of this sentence – “While walking through the park in autumn, I was astounded when I looked at the tree and saw the array of colors” – we find several nouns and pronouns outside of the participial phrase: I, trees, array, and colors. But only “I” would be able to walk (the verb from which the verbal, “walking,” is derived) – so “I” must be the word to immediately follow the participial phrase.
NO!
Flying at the end of a long silken cord, we saw a beautiful Dragon kite.
(If the participle within the introductory participial phrase is a derivative of the verb, “to fly,” the immediately following noun or pronoun must be capable of flying. The subjects of this sentence [“we”] were not doing the flying – the kite was flying. This is wrong.)
Yes:
We saw a beautiful Dragon kite flying at the end of a silken cord.
NO!
Running along the beach, the shells there all seemed so beautiful and unusual to my brother.
(If the participle within the introductory participial phrase is a derivative of the verb, “to run,” the immediately following noun or pronoun must be capable of running. The shells weren’t doing the running – the brother was running. This is wrong.)
Yes:
Running along the beach, my brother saw some very beautiful and unusual shells.
NO!
Laughing uproariously, The Producers is a play that my friends really enjoyed.
(If the participle within the introductory participial phrase is a derivative of the verb, “to laugh,” the immediately following noun or pronoun must be capable of laughing. The play, itself, wasn’t doing the laughing – the subject’s friends were laughing. This is wrong.)
Yes:
Laughing uproariously, my friends really enjoyed the play, The Producers.
THE CLAUSE
Definition – a clause is a sentence – or a sentence-like structure – within a larger
sentence. It will have a subject, a verb, and (often) a complement.
To Review (from pp. 17 and 18)
There are two types of clauses: independent and dependent.
Independent clauses are strong.
Dependent clauses are weak.
A clause can be a valid sentence, in effect.
Independent clauses are valid sentences.
Or, a clause can be a sentence-like.
By sentence-like, one means that the clause in question will have a subject, a verb, and, usually, a complementary word or phrase; but would not be able to stand on its own as a sensible sentence if removed from the complete, original sentence which it (the clause) is a part of.
Dependent clauses are sentence-like.
There are two types of sentences with clauses: compound and complex.
A compound sentence has two independent clauses. That is to say, it is comprised of a valid sentence conjoined to a second valid sentence.
On the other hand, a complex sentence usually has an independent clause and a dependent clause.
In a complex sentence, the independent clause, being strong, would be able to stand on its own as sensible sentence if removed from the complex sentence.
In a complex sentence, the independent clause is the core idea: it is necessary in order that the entire complex sentence make sense.
In a complex sentence, the dependent clause, being weak, would not be able to stand on its own as a sensible sentence if removed from the complex sentence.
When a grammarian (or a student of grammar) stipulates that there is a clause within a sentence, it becomes immediately understood that there are at least two clauses in that sentence. Upon occasion, there are three or more clauses in a sentence, but one should not use the term “clause” without recognizing the fact that at least two clauses exist in the sentence in question. A clause is similar to a phrase; but a clause should not be mistaken for a phrase.
A phrase is a group of words that should be seen, grammatically, as a single entity.
This is also true of a clause.
A phrase functions as a single part of speech.
This is also true of most clauses.
But a phrase is not sentence-like; a phrase will not have a subject and a verb.
A clause is sentence-like; a clause will have a subject and a verb.
As stipulated above, there are two basic types of clauses: independent, and dependent. Let’s focus on a few points, given above, as a means of review. It is necessary to go backwards, in this way, before we can go forwards.
• The term “independent” means not (in) weak (dependent).
• An independent clause does not function as a part of speech.
• An independent clause could be removed from the original sentence in which it appears and stand on its own as a complete, valid sentence.
For example:
I am going to the beach but you are going to summer school.
There are two clauses in this sentence. Both are independent. The first is “I am going to the beach.” The second is “you are going to summer school.” These two clauses could stand on their own, outside of the complete, original sentence, as perfectly valid sentences in their own right. Two independent clauses brought together in one sentence, and joined by a conjunction (in this case, “but”), result in what is called a compound sentence.
While compound sentences are not unheard of, it is far more common to find that one of the two (or three) clauses in a sentence is dependent. Such a sentence is called a complex sentence.
• A dependent clause, as its name suggests, is weak.
• A dependent clause does function as a part of speech.
• A dependent clause could not be removed from the original sentence in which it appears and stand on its own as a complete, valid sentence.
For example:
I have the book which you ordered.
There are two clauses in this sentence. I stipulate this only because sentences sometimes carry three (or more) clauses. If there is a clause in a valid sentence there must be (at least) two clauses in that sentence. The first clause in this sentence is “I have the book.” It is independent. It is strong. It could be removed from the original sentence and still function as a valid sentence in its own right. The second clause is “which you ordered.” It is dependent. It is weak. It could not be removed from the original sentence and still function as a valid sentence all by itself. Were I to come into a room and begin speaking by saying, “Which you ordered,” you’d wonder what in the world I was talking about.
Let’s concentrate on dependent clauses.
Dependent clauses, in addition to being relatively weak, function as a single part of speech. Dependent clauses function as nouns, or as adjectives, or as adverbs.
• The Noun Clause
The noun clause functions as any one-word noun would function: that is to say, it acts as either a subject, or as an object. Typically, a noun clause comprises one half of a complex sentence. The noun clause will be the dependent clause within that complex sentence. By the process of elimination, we would expect the companion clause to the noun clause to be independent. This is how it should work …in theory. However, the companion clause to the noun clause is often hard pressed to appear as being truly independent because, without its attendant noun clause, the “independent” clause often winds up missing an essential component of its thought: its subject, or its direct object. Subsequently, the “independent” clause in a complex sentence containing a noun clause seldom strikes the analyst as truly independent.
For example:
I don’t know what you are talking about.
“I don’t know” is the “independent” clause; and “what you are talking about” is a noun clause that is functioning as the direct object to the transitive verb phrase, “do (not) know.” However, “I don’t know” hardly seems like a sentence. It only skirts being independent.
Noun clauses can also function as the subject of their companion clause within a complex sentence.
For example:
What you need is a solid, reliable assistant.
“What you need” is a dependent clause, and the subject of the sentence. Of course, without this clause, the rest of the construction – “is a solid, reliable assistant” – hardly seems independent, does it?
Here we have an important lesson regarding grammar. We create rules for grammar to be consistent and precise in our speech and in our writing. Grammar allows us to say what we truly mean. But grammar doesn’t always neatly fit into the limits and definitions that we create for it.
The rules of grammar are consistently broken.
• The Adjective Clause
The adjective clause functions as any one-word adjective would function: that is
to say, it acts as a modifier to a noun by addressing one of the four adjective questions: “What kind?”, “Which one?”, “How many?, and “How much?”.
The adjective clause refers back to the noun immediately in front of it, and will modify that noun. The modified noun in question is one that will be lodged within the independent clause of the complex sentence.
An adjective clause always begins with a certain type of word that is known as a relative pronoun. These relative pronouns are “clause indicators.” They indicate that a clause – in this case, an adjective clause – is about to begin.
The relative pronouns are these …
which, that, who, whom, and whose.
The relative pronoun has a dual function. For example, “who,” as well as being a clause indicator, will function, within the adjective clause itself, as the clause’s subject. “Whom,” as well as being a clause indicator, will function, within the adjective clause itself, either as the clause’s direct object, or as the object of a preposition. “Whose,” as well as being a clause indicator, will function as an adjective to some noun within the adjective clause itself.
“That” and “which” operate in the same manner – with one exception: they cannot be adjectival, as can “whose.” But as with “who” and “whom,” “that” and “which” are both clause indictors which function, at the same time, as either the subject, or as an object, within the very clause in which they reside.
For example:
Here is the book that you ordered.
The relative pronoun is “that.” It is indicating that an adjective clause has begun. The adjective clause is “that you ordered.” The entire clause is an adjective to “book.” It answers the adjective question “Which one?” – i.e. “Which book?” Answer: the book that you ordered. Furthermore, “that” is functioning as the direct object within the adjective clause itself. The clause is inverted; in other words, it is transposed, it is flipped around. If one uninverts the clause, it would read, “you ordered that.” “You” is the subject of the clause; “ordered” is the clause’s transitive verb; and the pronoun, “that,” is the direct object of “ordered.”
“That,” a pronoun, is functioning both as the direct object of its clause, and as the relative pronoun for its clause.
Adjective clauses that begin with the relative pronoun “that” are called restrictive clauses. They are necessary to the sentence. They are seldom set off by a comma, or a pair of commas.
For example:
Have you seen the computer that has a flat screen monitor?
The relative pronoun is “that.” It is indicating that an adjective clause has begun. The adjective clause is, “that has a flat screen monitor.” The entire clause is an adjective to “computer.” It answers the adjective question “What kind?” – i.e., “What kind of computer?” Answer: the kind that has a flat screen monitor. Furthermore “that” is functioning as the subject of the adjective clause itself.
“That,” a pronoun, is functioning both as the subject of its clause, and as the relative pronoun for its clause.
The adjective clause in this sentence is a necessary one. Without it, how would one know which computer was being referred to? As a necessary clause – i.e., as a restrictive clause – the clause must begin with “that”; moreover, this restrictive (adjective) clause, as is typical, is not set off by a comma.
Adjective clauses that begin with the relative pronoun “which” are called non-restrictive clauses. They are unnecessary to the sentence. They are usually set off by a comma, or a pair of commas.
For example:
“The Godfather,” which is my favorite movie, is playing on cable this Saturday.
The relative pronoun is “which.” It is indicating that an adjective clause has begun. The adjective clause is “which is my favorite movie.” The entire clause is an adjective to “The Godfather.” It answers the adjective question “Which one?” – i.e., “Which movie is my favorite?” Answer: “The Godfather.” Furthermore, “which” is functioning as the subject of the adjective clause itself.
“Which,” a pronoun, is functioning both as the subject of its clause, and as the relative pronoun for its clause.
The adjective clause in this sentence is an unnecessary one. Remove it from the sentence, and the essential idea that the writer intended to convey is in no way lost. As an unnecessary clause – i.e., as a non-restrictive clause – the clause must begin with “which”; moreover, this non-restrictive (adjective) clause, as is typical, is set off by commas.
As previously stipulated, there are five relative pronouns. In addition to “that” and “which,” the three additional relative pronouns are these …
who, whom, and whose.
Example #1:
Mark Twain, who is my hero, wrote one of the greatest books in American literature, Huckleberry Finn.
The relative pronoun is “who.” It is indicating that an adjective clause has begun. The adjective clause is, “who is my hero.” The entire clause is an adjective to “Mark Twain.” It answers the adjective question “Which one?” – i.e., “Which man is my hero?” Answer: Mark Twain. Furthermore “who” is functioning as the subject of the adjective clause itself.
“Who,” a pronoun, is functioning both as the subject of its clause, and as the relative pronoun for its clause.
Example #2:
The speaker, whom you well know, is about to address the audience.
The relative pronoun is “whom.” It is indicating that an adjective clause has begun. The adjective clause is “whom you well know.” The entire clause is an adjective to “The speaker.” It answers the adjective question “Which one?” – i.e., “Which speaker?” Answer: the speaker you know well. Furthermore “whom” is functioning as the direct object of the adjective clause itself. The clause is inverted. “You” is the subject of the clause. If one were to uninvert the clause, “whom” would appear at the end of the clause: “you [well] know whom.” Viewed in this way, it becomes clearer that “whom” is the clause’s direct object regardless of its location in the original construction.
“Whom,” a pronoun, is functioning both as the direct object of its clause, and as the relative pronoun for its clause.
Example #3:
My mother, whose plane arrives this afternoon, will be happy to see all of her children again.
The relative pronoun is “whose.” It is indicating that an adjective clause has begun. The adjective clause is “whose plane arrives this afternoon.” The entire clause is an adjective to “My mother.” It answers the adjective question “Which one?” – i.e., “Which mother?” Answer: the mother arriving by plane this afternoon.
To accept the grammar of this particular example, one must allow for a certain prior assumption: that an individual can be a different person within different situations. The subject’s mother this time – that is to say, this mother, in this situation – is the one whose plane arrives this afternoon.
“Whose” is functioning as a modifier to “plane” within its own clause. Thus, it’s a pronoun in form, but an adjective in function – and in this regard is exactly akin to any other possessive pronoun – for “whom” is in the possessive case, too.
“Whose,” a pronoun, is functioning both as a modifier (to “plane”) within its clause, and as the relative pronoun for its clause.
Let’s consider for a moment two recent examples from those given above: “Here is the book that you ordered,” and “The speaker, whom you well know, is about to address the audience.” In these two examples the adjective clauses were “that you ordered,” and “whom you well know,” respectively.
These two clauses did not follow the natural order of sentence construction. The natural order of a sentence is as follows: Subject – Verb – Complement. The natural order for a sentence whose verb is transitive is as follows: Subject – Transitive Verb – Direct Object. (A direct object is a specific sort of complement; one that is indigenous to a sentence with a transitive verb).
But the order in both the examples under consideration was transposed: Direct Object – Subject – Transitive Verb.
When a sentence (or in this case a clause) is transposed, it is said to be inverted. This will happen, for example, with an interrogative sentence (a question). The statement, “You are ready,” becomes the question, “Are you ready?” The natural order of the sentence, wherein one expects the sentence to begin with its subject, is turned around.
But these clauses weren’t questions. So why was their order inverted?
♦ An adjective clause must begin with its relative pronoun.
The relative pronoun must be placed at the beginning of its clause, regardless of the alternate function that the relative pronoun is performing within the clause itself. An object, (e.g., both a direct object and an object of a preposition) will always appear at the end a sentence or clause that is constructed in natural (i.e., uninverted) order. However, when an object-pronoun is alternately functioning as the relative pronoun for its clause, the natural order of the clause must be inverted to serve the overriding consideration of positioning the relative pronoun at the front of the clause. In such a case, the object of the clause will appear first, not last. So, you (subject) ordered (transitive verb) that (direct object) becomes inverted: “that you ordered,” so that the relative pronoun, “that,” might be placed at the front of the clause. You (subject) [well] know (transitive verb) whom (direct object) becomes inverted: “whom you well know,” so that the relative pronoun, “whom,” might be placed at the front of the clause.
Adjective clauses, as their name suggests, are adjectival modifiers. The principle of proximity, in its strictest application, applies to adjective clauses, too.
♦ An adjective clause must be placed directly after the noun that it intends to modify.
For example:
The oil portrait that has just been freshly painted is hanging on the wall.
is a sentence that says something entirely different than …
The oil portrait is hanging on the wall that has just been freshly painted.
In both sentences, the adjective clause is “that has just been freshly painted.” However, in the former sentence, since the adjective clause directly follows “oil portrait,” it is the portrait that must be seen as having been freshly painted. In the latter sentence, the wall must be seen as having been freshly painted, since “wall” is immediately followed by the adjective clause.
We have, in these two examples, the exact same words. But those words are placed in varying order from one sentence to the next. In changing the word order, we have changed the meaning of the first sentence vis-à-vis the second sentence. A change in syntax has changed meaning from one construction to another.
― Watch out for Misplaced Adjective Clauses ―
A misplaced adjective clause also comes under the category of “misplaced modifier.” Adjective clauses – given the fact that they are adjectives – must adhere to a strict principle of proximity. Their placement is mandated. They must directly follow the noun that they intend to modify. As such, they have the potential to be misplaced.
For example:
The oil portrait is being held up by the curator that has just been freshly painted.
As with the sample sentences we have just examined, the adjective clause is “that has just been freshly painted.” Given its placement in the sentence – and according to the strict principle of proximity relative to all grammatical elements that are adjectival – the adjective clause in this sentence, of necessity, must be seen as modifying “the curator,” the noun that the adjective clause directly follows. This sentence is saying that the curator has just been painted! This is a ridiculous proposition.
You should be aware that the relative pronoun, “that” can be relative to a person (as who, whom, and whose always are). So the use of “that” does not obviate our reading the sentence in the ridiculous manner that we must.
The correct syntax:
The oil portrait that has been freshly painted is being held up by the curator.
Now the adjective clause modifies “oil portrait,” as it was meant to do.
NO!
The ancient oak tree fell against the garage which had been uprooted during the storm.
(The adjective clause has been misplaced, and so the sentence is saying that the garage – and not the oak tree – was uprooted during the storm. The adjective clause must be placed in proximity to “oak tree,” the noun that the clause intends to modify.)
Yes:
The ancient oak tree, which had been uprooted during the storm, fell against the garage.
NO!
We saw an Egyptian mummy at the museum which had been embalmed centuries ago.
(The adjective clause has been misplaced, and so the sentence is saying that the museum – and not the Egyptian mummy – was embalmed centuries ago. The adjective clause must be placed in proximity to “Egyptian mummy,” the noun that the clause intends to modify.)
Yes:
At the museum, we saw an Egyptian mummy which had been embalmed centuries ago.
• The Adverb Clause
The adverb clause functions as any one-word adverb would function: that is to say, it acts as a modifier to a verb, an adjective, or an adverb by addressing one of the four adverb questions: “Where?”, “When?”, “How?”, and “To what extent?” – and two additional questions that are pertinent only to certain adverb clauses: “Why?” and “Under what condition?”.
The adverb clause most typically modifies a verb. The modified verb in question is one that will be lodged within the independent clause of the complex sentence.
Sometimes an adverbial modifier qualifies another modifier – an adjective or adverb. This occasionally occurs with an adverb clause as well. Upon such an occurrence, the modifier that is being qualified by the adverb clause will also be lodged within the independent clause.
An adverb clause always begins with a certain type of word known as a subordinating conjunction. These subordinating conjunctions are “clause indicators.” They indicate that a clause – in this case, an adverb clause – is about to begin.
There are only five relative pronouns for adjective clauses. However, there are many subordinating conjunctions. Here is a list of most of them …
after as soon as in order that until
although as though since when
as because so that whenever
as far as before than where
as if even though though wherever
as long as if unless while
Example #1:
I left your present where you will never find it.
The adverb clause is “where you will never find it.” It is modifying the verb “left” in the independent clause, “I left your present.” Here the adverb clause is answering the adverb question “Where?” – i.e., “Where did the subject leave the present?” Answer: where you will never find it.
Example #2:
We will go whenever you’re ready.
The adverb clause is “whenever you’re ready.” It is modifying the verb “will go” in the independent clause, “We will go.” Here the adverb clause is answering the adverb question “When?” – i.e., “When will the subjects go?” Answer: whenever you’re ready.
Example #3:
We left early so that we wouldn’t be late.
The adverb clause is “so that we wouldn’t be late.” It is modifying the verb “left” in the independent clause, “We left early.” Here the adverb clause is answering the question “Why?” – i.e., “Why did the subjects leave early?” Answer: so that they wouldn’t be late.
As stated at the beginning of this section, sometimes an adverb clause will modify an adjective or an adverb, just as a one-word adverb will sometimes modify another modifier within its sentence.
Example #1:
Mike is taller than I am.
The adverb clause “than I am” is modifying the (predicate) adjective, “taller.” Here the adverb clause is answering the question, “To what extent?” – i.e., “To what extent is Mike tall? Answer: he is taller than I am.
Example #2:
Jan arrived sooner than I did.
The adverb clause “than I did” is modifying the adverb, “sooner.” Here the adverb clause is answering the question, “How?” – i.e., How (much) sooner did Jan arrive? Answer: sooner than I did.
You will recall, I hope, that adverbial elements in a sentence do not labor under an adjective’s constraints regarding the principle of proximity: Adverbial elements can often range throughout their sentence without changing the essential idea of the sentence. This phenomenon holds true for the one-word adverb, the adverbial phrase, and the adverb clause.
For example:
We will go whenever you’re ready.
can be rewritten as …
Whenever you’re ready, we will go.
The essential idea is unchanged from the first sentence to the second despite the change in syntax.
Note that when a one-word adverb – or an adverbial phrase – or an adverb clause – begins a sentence, it must be set off by a comma.
COMMON GRAMMATICAL ERRORS THAT ENTAIL A CONFUSION REGARDING FORM AND FUNCTION
It would be impossible to write a manual, or an entire book for that matter, which could anticipate every sort of grammatical error that a student might make. However, there are three instances where errors crop up again and again pertinent to three particular parts of speech. These parts of speech to which I allude change their form – without changing their meaning – in order to carry out varying functions in different sentences. Lack of awareness in this regard leads to grammatical errors. The problematical parts of speech are …
Verbs
Pronouns
Adjectives with an Adverbial Counterpart
VERBS
♦ Issue number one regarding verbs: Errors Involving the Past and The Past Participle
Verbs have two past tenses, in effect. Of a verb’s four principal parts, one is the past, and a second is the past participle. If all verbs were regular the fact that there are two past tenses would not create a problem, since the past and the past participle of all regular verbs are identical. For example, the four principal parts of “to talk” are … talk (present), talked (past), talking (present participle), and talked (past participle). But when a verb is irregular, its past and past participle forms are often (but not always) different. The following is a list of some irregular verbs with differing past and past participle forms. There is no listing for the present participle of these verbs because the present participle is always the same: it ends in “ing.”
PRESENT PAST PAST PARTICIPLE
become became become
begin began begun
break broke broken
choose chose chosen
come came come
do did done
drink drank drunk
drive drove driven
eat ate eaten
fall fell fallen
fly flew flown
freeze froze frozen
get got gotten
give gave given
go went gone
grow grew grown
know knew known
ride rode ridden
ring rang rung
rise rose risen
see saw seen
sing sang sung
speak spoke spoken
steal stole stolen
swim swam swum
take took taken
throw threw thrown
One uses the past principal part of a verb when the simple past is in force. In these cases, no helping verb is required.
For example:
I went to the store yesterday.
The verb, in bold-faced type, is in the simple past tense. Thus, of the four principal parts of this verb, the past, “went,” is used; and no helping verb is required.
One uses the past participle principal part of a verb when one of the perfect tenses is in force. This tense employs the verb “to have,” in any of its conjugations, as its helping verb. The past participle will then be employed as the main verb of the verb phrase, and will convey the idea of which action is occurring.
For example:
I have gone to that store for years now.
In this sentence, we have the verb phrase, “have gone.” (As you will recall, any phrase is two or more words functioning as a single part of speech. A verb phrase functions as THE verb of the sentence.) So the verb here is not “have,” nor is it “gone.” The verb, here, is the verb phrase, “have gone.” Be aware, however, that the main idea of this verb phrase is the “going,” not the “having.” The helping verb “have” is merely enabling the conjugation: “have” takes the conjugation of “to go” into its present perfect tense. This tense requires both a helping verb and a main verb, a main verb that must be conjugated in its past participle form.
The following is a review from pages 24 and 25
All of the perfect tenses employ the verb “to have” – in some one of its conjugations – as their helping verb. The perfect tenses always have the same type of main verb: the main verb will be conjugated in its past participle form. If a verb is irregular, as is the verb “to go” (go, going, went, and gone), then one must take care to choose the past participle (gone) and not the past (went) for the main verb when conjugating that verb in one of its perfect tenses. When a verb is regular, this is not an issue since the past and past participle forms of regular verbs are always identical. For example: “I walked down this block,” and, “I have walked down this block.”
The Perfect Tenses:
The perfect tenses denote action that is (or was, or will be) past, completed,
finished. When something is finished it is perfected. Hence the perfect tenses
refer to an action that has been perfected, in the sense that we use that word to mean “finished.”
The sense of this tense is subtle and more complicated than those tenses that don’t require a helping verb. With the perfect tenses, the action is protracted, or the action is relative to a second past action, or the action is habitual – or all three.
The past perfect conjugation of the verb phrase most recently considered would be, “I had gone to the store.”
This phrase’s future perfect conjugation would be, “I will have gone to the
store.”
So we see that the perfect tense is past perfect when the helping verb is past (“had”); it is present perfect when the helping verb is present (“have” or “has”); and, it is future perfect when the helping verb is future (“will have”).
There is a past, present, and future permutation of this tense in order to accommodate various perspectives on the action.
The writer might be remembering a completed event; and so would need the past perfect. With “I had gone to the store,” the action was completed from a past perspective.
The writer might be experiencing or alluding to an event that has just been completed, or that has extended into the present time but is now over and done with; and so would need the present perfect: “I have gone to the store.” The action was completed from a present perspective.
The writer might be imagining or anticipating a completed event; and so would need the future perfect. With “I will have gone to the store,” the action was (or, more correctly, will be) completed from a future perspective.
It is important to understand that the completed action of the perfect tenses stands in contrast to the completed action of the simple past tense. The simple past tense is discrete: the action is committed within a narrow time frame, and the subject will not return to that action (as a general rule). However, the perfect tenses denote an action that is more complex than this.
Here is a simple rule:
The presence of “have,” “has,” “had,” or “will have” as the helping verb in a verb phrase absolutely obligates the use of the past participle as the phrase’s main verb.
NO!
I have went there many times.
Yes:
I have gone there many times.
NO!
My wife has grew all sorts of vegetables in our backyard.
Yes:
My wife has grown all sorts of vegetables in our backyard.
NO!
The thief had took my money without my knowing it.
Yes:
The thief had taken my money without my knowing it.
NO!
I will have ate my meal by the time you sit down to the table.
Yes:
I will have eaten my meal by the time you sit down to the table.
― Watch out for Contractions ―
The helping verb “have” in its present tense – have and has – can be contracted into its subject if the subject immediately precedes it (which it almost always does).
For example:
I have We have
You have You have
He, she, or it has They have
or …
Bob, Sheila, New York, the car
(or virtually any noun in the language
which is singular – thus we are talking
about a billion possibilities) … has
becomes contracted into …
I’ve We’ve
You’ve You’ve
He’s, she’s, or it’s They’ve
or …
Bob’s, Sheila’s, New York’s, the car’s
(etc. …)
The fact that the helping verb “have” or “has” is contracted does not mean it isn’t there – it is. It is merely expressed in a different form. And once the helping verb “have” or “has” is in place as part of the present perfect tense, regardless of whether “have” or “has” is in its full form or in its contracted form, the writer is now absolutely obligated to use the past participle as the main verb.
NO!
I’ve began the project already.
Yes:
I’ve begun the project already.
NO!
You’ve broke my favorite lamp.
Yes:
You’ve broken my favorite lamp.
NO!
He’s chose the wrong alternative.
Yes:
He’s chosen the wrong alternative.
NO!
Bob’s drove this route before.
Yes:
Bob’s driven this route before.
NO!
We’ve fell into debt and can’t find our way out.
Yes:
We’ve fallen into debt and can’t find our way out.
NO!
They’ve knew the answer all along.
Yes:
They’ve known the answer all along.
♦ Issue number two regarding verbs: Errors Involving Subject-Verb Agreement.
Every present tense verb has two conjugations. One ends in an “s”; and one does not. In the present tense, the first and second person singular subjects agree with (i.e., correctly conjugate with) a verb that does not end in “s.” In addition, all the plural subjects agree with a verb that does not end in “s.” Only a third person, singular subject will agree with a verb that does end in “s.” The correct application of this peculiarity regarding the present tense’s conjugation – whereby the verb will end in “s” only when the subject is both third person and singular – is referred to as subject-verb agreement.
There are two things to take note of regarding subject-verb agreement:
• The final “s” on these present tense verbs indicates a conjugation shift. This “s” is not the “s” of plurality. Verbs do not have number as do nouns; they are
not considered to be either singular or plural; however they agree with either
singular or plural subjects.
• The final “s” of a present tense verb in agreement with a third person, singular subject is never rendered as an apostrophe “s.” For example: it is always, “plays,” but never “play’s.”
Here is a sample present tense conjugation:
I play We play
You play You play
but … They play
He plays, or She plays, or It plays
or …
Bob, or Sheila, or New York
(or virtually any noun in the language which is
singular – thus we are talking about a
billion possibilities) … plays
Sometimes a student writer simply makes a mistake with subject-verb agreement.
NO!
He go to school with me.
Yes:
He goes to school with me.
However, it is much more common to see a student use correct subject-verb agreement in most cases, only to lapse into a mistake when faced with certain predictable pitfalls; pitfalls that typically involve one of the following distracting influences: contractions; compound subjects; prepositional phrases following the subject; and, expletives.
― Watch out for Contractions ―
Certain words can contract into an immediately preceding word. We saw this with “have” (“I’ve”) and “has (“he’s”). This is also true of “not.” For example, both “don’t” (“do not”) and “doesn’t” (“does not”) are contracted forms. They derive from the verb “to do” in its two present tense conjugations, along with the compression of “not” into “n’t”.
The present tense conjugation of “to do” is as follows:
I do We do
You do You do
He does They do
(etc.)
(Henceforth, when any verb’s conjugation is given, “He” will be a “stand-in” not only for “she” and “it” but for the billion of singular nouns that can function as a third person, singular subject.)
Given the conjugation of this verb, one must use “don’t” (“do not”) with the first and second person, singular subjects; and all the plural subjects. One must use “doesn’t” (“does not”) with any third person, singular subject. It is not uncommon to see mistakes regarding this principle. The indiscriminate use of “don’t” leads to errors in subject-verb agreement.
NO!
He don’t know the answer to the question.
Yes:
He doesn’t know the answer to the question.
NO!
Maria don’t know the first thing about baseball.
Yes:
Maria doesn’t know the first thing about baseball.
― Watch out for Compound Constructions ―
As has been stipulated: In the present tense, when the subject of a sentence is third person, singular, the agreeing verb ends in “s.” When the subject is first person singular, or second person singular, or when the subject is plural, the agreeing verb does not end in “s.”
But what exactly is a plural subject? Especially in the third person?
• The pronoun “they” is a plural, third person subject: “They are going to the beach.”
• Nouns that end in “s” will function as plural, third person subjects: “My shoes need to be shined.”
• Certain oddball nouns that don’t end in “s” are still considered to be plural, and thus will function as plural, third person subjects: “My feet are killing me.” “Those geese are vicious.” “The cattle are grazing.”
• Compounded nouns or pronouns can act as third person, plural subjects.
Two nouns brought together by a conjunction (most typically “and”) are said to be a compound construction. When a compound construction is functioning as the subject of the sentence, the subject is referred to as a compound subject. As stated above, such a subject is a plural, third person subject.
It is quite common for a speaker or writer to automatically have the verb of his present tense sentence agree with whichever noun immediately precedes the verb.
This is wrong.
You must consider what word – or words – is functioning as the subject of the sentence. The subject of any sentence is specific. The subject is the name of the person, place, thing, or idea (i.e., it will be a noun or pronoun) – whether singular or plural – committing the action denoted by the verb
NO!
My friend, Bob, and my cousin, Marty is coming with us on our camping trip.
Yes:
My friend, Bob, and my cousin, Marty are coming with us on our camping trip.
The subject of this sentence above is not “Bob.” Nor is it “Marty.” The subject of this sentence is “Bob and Marty.” This is a compound subject that is considered to be plural. Since this sentence is in the present tense (the present progressive tense to be exact: “is coming”), the agreeing verb for this plural subject must be “are” and not “is.”
Note that with a verb phrase, only the helping verb will conjugate to agree with the subject of the sentence. The main verb always remains the same.
― Watch out for Prepositional Phrases ―
In the section on prepositional phrases it was pointed out that adjectival phrases (prepositional phrases functioning as adjectives) are always placed directly after the noun that they are modifying. When this takes place relative to the subject of a sentence, the noun that is the object of the preposition will find itself much closer to the verb of the sentence than will the subject of the sentence. And, as was stipulated in the section immediately preceding this one, it is quite common for the speaker or writer to automatically have the verb of his present tense sentence agree with whichever noun immediately precedes the verb.
This is wrong.
You must consider what word is functioning as the subject of the sentence. This will determine the conjugation of the verb.
For example:
There might be a question as to the correct conjugation of the verb in the following sentence …
My girlfriend, with all her problems, (is or are?) miserable.
To find the subject of this sentence, or any sentence, one must find the complete predicate of the sentence under examination – which in this case is “(is or are?) miserable”– and precede the now-isolated predicate with either one of two interrogative pronouns – “who?” or “what?” The consequence of this procedure is that an interrogative sentence (i.e., a question) will be formed. In this instance, the question is “Who – or What – (is or are?) miserable?” The word (from the sentence under consideration) that logically answers one version of that question will be the subject of the sentence.
Logically, the answer to one version of the question – “What (is or are?) miserable?” – cannot be “problems.” “Problems,” themselves, are not capable of emotions such as misery.
Moreover, one word can only perform one function in one sentence at one time. In this sentence, “problems” is already functioning as the object of the preposition, “with.” (The prepositional phrase, “with all her problems” is modifying the noun, “girlfriend,” by answering the adjective-question, “Which one?” – i.e., “Which girlfriend?” Answer: the girlfriend with all her problems.) This preempts the possibility that “problems” might be the subject of this sentence.
“Girlfriend” is the subject of this sentence – not “her problems.” “My Girlfriend” answers the question, “Who is miserable?”; the question that the analyst would ask in order to identify the subject of this sentence.
Since “girlfriend” is singular, “is” is the correct conjugation of the verb in this sentence.
The sentence should read:
My girlfriend, with all her problems, is miserable.
The pitfall of having the verb of a given sentence incorrectly agree with an immediately preceding noun-object (i.e., the object of a preposition) rather than the noun-subject is particularly problematical when the subject is a collective noun.
What is a collective noun?
A collective noun is a noun that, logically, is plural, but grammatically is considered to be singular. Some examples are …
team, committee, class, jury, town, city, etc.
When a collective noun is the subject of the sentence, and it is modified by an adjectival phrase whose object is a plural noun, there is an overwhelmingly strong tendency to see the sentence as having a plural subject, and to conjugate the noun accordingly (and therefore incorrectly). Be aware of this pitfall.
NO!
The team of charged up players are raring to go.
Yes:
The team of charged up players is raring to go.
The subject of this sentence is “team,” not “players.” “Players” is the object of the preposition, “of.”
As a collective noun – and therefore a singular subject – “team” must take the agreeing verb “is” and not “are.”
In class, when I question a student as to why he or she made a particular choice in regard to grammar, an answer that I will frequently hear is, “Because it sounded right.” The above example is a classic case of how one cannot be led by what “sounds right” in making grammatical choices. The incorrect construction, in this case, actually sounds better than the correct construction. What sounds right is all too often a useless measure in making grammatical choices. We must know the principles of form and function.
― Watch out for Expletives ―
When they are placed at the very beginning of a sentence, “here” and “there,” are called expletives. They are never the subject of the sentence. They can’t be subjects because they are not nouns or pronouns – they are adverbs. They answer the adverb-question, “Where?”.
Expletives invert the sentences in which they appear. An inversion, as was mentioned before, is a situation where the natural S-V-C of a sentence is transposed – that is to say, switched around. An expletive will cause the verb of its sentence to come before the subject: Expletive – Verb – Subject – Complement (if any). Due to this phenomenon, the sense of the sentence’s subject can elude us since the subject is now positioned somewhere other than where we expect it to be. As a consequence of this, the possibility arises that the verb of the sentence will be incorrectly conjugated.
Example #1:
Here is the book that you ordered.
The verb of the first clause is “is.” The verb in question is correctly conjugated to agree with its third person, singular subject, “book,” which has found itself placed after the verb due to the inversion created by the expletive, “here.”
Example #2:
NO!
There is the books that you ordered.
Yes:
There are the books that you ordered.
The subject of this sentence is not “there.” “There” is not capable of functioning as a subject. “There” is an expletive. The sentence is inverted due to the expletive, “there.” The subject is “books,” which is a third person, plural subject. So the correct conjugation of the verb in this sentence would be “are” and not “is.”
PRONOUNS
♦ The one and only issue: Errors Involving a Confusion between the Cases.
As stated in the section dedicated to this part of speech, pronouns have three cases: nominative, objective, and possessive. Each case (a form) is specifically and exclusively tied to a particular function. The nominative case of the personal pronouns – I, You, He, She, It, We, You, and They – will function as the subject of a sentence. The objective case of the personal pronouns – Me, You, Him, Her, It, Us, You, and Them – will function either as the direct object to a transitive verb, or as the object of a preposition, to name two of several possible functions for this case.
Mistakes abound regarding the correct usage of the nominative case versus the correct usage of the objective case, and vice-versa. Mistakes regarding the correct usage of the possessive case vis-à-vis the other two cases are practically nonexistent; so the possessive case will not be dealt with here.
When a nominative case pronoun is mistakenly used in place of an objective case pronoun, or vice versa, the culprit is almost always the same: a compound construction. As you will recall, a compound construction is an instance where two grammatically identical elements of a sentence are joined by a conjunction, most typically “and.” So it is possible to have a compound subject, whereby one or both subjects might be a pronoun. In such cases, the pronoun – or pronouns – must be in the nominative case. It is also possible to have a compound direct object whereby one or both direct objects might be a pronoun. In such cases, the pronoun – or pronouns – must be in the objective case. It is possible, as well, to have a compound object of a preposition, whereby one or both objects of the (same) preposition might be a pronoun. In such cases, the pronoun – or pronouns – must be in the objective case. Form must follow function.
― Watch out for Compounded Objects of a Preposition ―
“Between” is a preposition. Given its nature, it obligates a compound object. I frequently encounter a nominative case pronoun incorrectly used as this preposition’s object. An objective case pronoun – or pronouns – must follow “between.”
NO!
Let’s keep this secret between you and I.
Yes:
Let’s keep this secret between you and me.
The irony of this error is that the speaker or writer is trying to be correct. When people who have not been fully tutored in this subject are searching for the grammatical choice that “sounds right” relative to either “I” or “me,” they almost always choose “I” over “me” because “I” sounds fancier – and therefore grammatically correct. But grammatical choices must be based on knowledge of form and function not what sounds right – or fancy.
An element that further confuses the issue in this specific example is “you.” “You” is not helping the speaker or writer to make the right choice, because “you” is an oddball pronoun that almost never changes its form: it can be almost anything, grammatically speaking. That is to say, without undergoing a change in spelling, it can be nominative case, and it can be objective case; it can be singular, and it can be plural.
Here is what I’m talking about:
“You are my best friend.”
The “you” is singular, here.
“You two have to get along.”
The “you” is plural, here.
“You need to see me after school.”
The “you” is in the nominative case, here.
“I love you.”
The “you” is in the objective case, here.
Since we cannot always immediately discern its nature, the presence of “you,” when it is part of a compound construction, does not help to lead the way to a correct grammatical choice. In fact, it very well might mislead us.
If an individual chooses to hear the “you” in “between you and I” as the nominative case “you,” he will be led to choose the nominative case “I.” But grammatically speaking, the “you” in the prepositional phrase, “between you and me” is the objective case “you” (which, of course, is identical to the nominative case “you”). I’m sure this situation contributes, in part, to errors.
― Watch out for Compounded Direct Objects ―
When a direct object is compounded one – or both – of its object-pronouns must be in the objective case.
NO!
Our grandmother loves you and I.
Yes:
Our grandmother loves you and me.
“Loves” is a transitive verb. It takes a direct object. In this case the direct object was compounded, and so both pronoun-objects had to be in the objective case. “Me,” not “I,” is in the objective case.
Had there been a noun and a pronoun functioning as the direct object, the lone pronoun would again have to be in the objective case – e.g., “My grandmother loves Annie and me.”
Notwithstanding the above examples, it is much more typical that an objective case pronoun will be incorrectly used when a nominative case pronoun is called for.
― Watch out for Compounded Subjects ―
When a subject is compounded one – or both – of its subject-pronouns must be in the nominative case.
NO!
My mother and me went to the mall.
Yes:
My mother and I went to the mall.
As one of the two subjects of this compounded subject, the pronoun under consideration had to be in the nominative case. The nominative “I” was called for, not the objective “me.”
One often sees this type of error when there is a compound subject of a clause within a complex sentence.
NO!
Here is the equipment that you and me will need for the trip.
Yes:
Here is the equipment that you and I will need for the trip.
As one of the two subjects of this compounded subject of the adjective clause (“that you and I will need for the trip”) the pronoun under consideration had to be in the nominative case. The nominative “I” was called for, not the objective “me.”
Given the examples above, I don’t want to mislead you into thinking that there is only some potential confusion surrounding “I” and “me,” alone.
Both “you” and “it” are identical in their nominative and objective cases. So these two pronouns will never present a problem relative to the issue that we are now addressing.
But there can be confusion between “he” and “him”; “she” and “her”; “we” and “us”; and, “they” and “them” – as well as “I” and “me.”
NO!
Michael and him are best friends.
Yes:
Michael and he are best friends.
NO!
This is the quilt that my mother and her made for us.
Yes:
This is the quilt that my mother and she made for us.
NO!
Both you and us have to get together again soon.
Yes:
Both you and we have to get together again soon.
NO!
It’s nice to see that my old friends and them have become friends as well.
Yes:
It’s nice to see that my old friends and they have become friends as well.
Here is a simple rule:
As a test, uncompound any compound construction that you’ve composed – i.e., take out the second element of the compounded construction, leaving one pronoun only – to see how the sentence reads. This will lead you to the right choice.
If there is a noun and a pronoun in the compound construction, always take out the noun.
If there are two pronouns in a compound construction, and one of them is either “you” or “it,” always take out the “you” or the “it.”
Example #1:
Take the following sentence that first appeared among the sample sentences above …
“This is the quilt that my mother and her made for us.”
Remove the first of the two subjects – “my mother” (as you must, according to the simple rule: always take out the noun) – and remove the (now unnecessary) conjunction, “and” from the construction. What we’re left with is a ridiculous sentence …
“This is the quilt that her made for us.”
When the sentence is rendered in this manner, it becomes immediately obvious that “she” is the correct choice …
“This is the quilt that she made for us.”
and …
“This is the quilt that my mother and she made for us.”
Example #2:
Let’s return to a second sentence that also first appeared among the sample sentences above …
“Both you and us have to get together again soon.”
Remove the first of the two subjects – “you” (as you must, according to the simple rule: always take out the “you” or the “it”) – and remove the (now unnecessary) correlative conjunctions, “both” and “and” from the construction. What we’re left with is a ridiculous sentence …
“Us have to get together again soon.”
When the sentence is rendered in this manner, it becomes immediately obvious that “we” is the correct choice …
“We have to get together again soon.”
and …
“Both you and we have to get together again soon.”
Uncompound compounded constructions involving pronouns to see if you’ve made the right choice. If you’re dealing with a compound subject, you might have to reconjugate the verb of the sentence or clause, but that’s of no consequence.
Oh, by the way … I’ve made up the words “uncompound” and “reconjugate.” But as an English teacher I can do that. It’s in my contract – so don’t get agimicated.
― Watch out for Ellipsed Clauses ―
An ellipse is an occasion when a word – or words – is left out of a sentence but is still understood to be in effect. This is not at all unusual in our language. For example, in the use of commands, the subject is ellipsed. The subject is unspoken (or unwritten) but is understood to be there. The subject is “you.” When I shout, “Stop!” I am, in effect, shouting, “You stop!” The “you” has been ellipsed, but it is understood to be there.
The words “than” and “as” can act as subordinating conjunctions. As such, their function would be to introduce a subordinate clause. It is frequently the case that “than” or “as” will appear as the second-to-last word in a sentence, followed by only one word – a pronoun; and then the sentence will end. What has happened is that “than” or “as” has introduced a very short clause, half of which is ellipsed.
Example #1:
He is as tall as I.
is actually saying …
He is as tall as I am tall.
The final thought, “am tall,” is understood to be there – but it is ellipsed. Thus the nominative case, “I” is required here – rather than the objective case “me” (which one so frequently sees in this type of construction) – because the pronoun under consideration is being called upon to function as the subject of the concluding clause which is very short, and mostly ellipsed.
Be aware of this fact:
Speakers and writers of English feel that they must end sentences with objective case pronouns. Usually this construction is correct – but not always.
In the case above, most people would end the sentence with “me”: “He is as tall as me.” But this construction is incorrect. We must know – and apply – the principles of form and function in choosing any pronoun.
Example #2:
NO!
My sister is prettier than her.
Yes:
My sister is prettier than she.
“She” is the subject of a clause; a clause that is mostly not there, but is understood to be there. If one returned to this sentence what had originally been ellipsed from it, the sentence would read …
“My sister is prettier than she is pretty.”
The question here was … should I use “she” or “her”? The pronoun under consideration had to be in the nominative case since it was functioning as the subject of the clause. “She,” not “her,” is in the nominative case; so, in this instance, “she” was the correct choice.
Be advised that the nominative case is often, but not always, called for when we’re faced with an ellipsed clause generated by either the subordinating conjunction, “than,” or “as.”
For example:
Mom likes you more than me.
… is correct.
Why?
Because if one returned to this sentence what had originally been ellipsed from it, the sentence would read …
“Mom likes you more than mom likes me.”
The question here was … should I use “I” or “me”? The pronoun under consideration had to be in the objective case since it was functioning as the direct object of the transitive verb, “likes.” “Me,” not “I” is in the objective case; so, in this instance, “me” was the correct choice.
Here is a simple rule:
When a pronoun follows “than” or “as” at the end of a sentence – and the case of that
pronoun thus comes into question – unellipse the sentence: i.e., finish the thought. If the
pronoun is acting as the subject of the mostly absent clause, choose the nominative case.
If the pronoun is acting as the direct object of the mostly absent clause, choose the objective case.
ADJECTIVES WITH AN ADVERBIAL COUNTERPART
♦ The one and only issue: Errors Involving the Type of Word Being Modified: Adjectives
Modify Nouns, and Adverbs Modify Verbs
An entire host of adjectives have an adverbial counterpart. In such cases, an “ly” is added to the adjective to transform it into an adverb.
For example:
quick/quickly
slow/slowly
happy/happily
gloomy/gloomily
careful/carefully
It would be counterproductive to try to provide a comprehensive list of the “non-ly/ly” pattern that exists among modifiers because there are so many such examples. Be advised that the few examples above comprise only a tiny fraction of the full range of adjectives that have an “ly” counterpart. The instances of this pattern are beyond counting.
Now in each case the meaning conveyed is the same. “Quick” means, essentially what “quickly” means.
So what’s the difference?
The theme of this manual has frequently been this: FORM follows FUNCTION (a brilliant statement made famous by the equally brilliant architect, Louis Sullivan).
Return to the section on the “Verb,” and consider that, though “play” means what “plays” means, the two words still can’t be used interchangeably. Return to the section on the “Pronoun,” and consider that, though “I” means what “me” means, neither can those two words be used interchangeably.
There are occasions when we need different forms of what is, in essence, the same word.
Why?
We need varying forms of a given idea to perform different grammatical functions.
The same is true in this instance. A modifier that is part of the “non-ly/ly” pattern uses the form without the “ly” to function as an adjective; and uses the form with the “ly” to function as an adverb.
For example:
The quick runner sprinted quickly.
(This sentence sounds redundant, I know, but it is being used to prove a point about grammar, not about writing style. The style is bad, the grammar is good.)
“Quick” was initially used because “quick” is an adjective, and an adjective was needed to modify the noun, “runner.” When the modifier comes up a second time, “quickly” was used because the modifier was now describing how the sprinting was proceeding (i.e., the modifier was functioning as an adverb to the verb, “sprinted”) – thus the adverbial form “quickly” was called for.
Here is a simple rule:
When a sentence ends in a modifier that is part of the “non-ly/ly” pattern, always choose
the “ly” form of the modifier, because that is the form that functions as an adverb – and a
modifier that concludes a sentence will almost always be an adverb.
There are two things to take note of regarding this simple rule:
• An adverb is not obligated to be the very last word in a sentence. A word – or words can follow an adverb at the end of a sentence. But when a modifier is the last word in a sentence, it almost always should take the form of an adverb.
• There is one major exception to this simple rule which is brought about by the use of the verb “to be.” This exception will be discussed in the section, to come, which is solely dedicated to the verb “to be.”
NO!
He laughed loud.
Yes:
He laughed loudly.
“Loudly” is correct because it is an adverb to the verb, “laughed.” It answers the adverb- question “How?” – i.e., How did he laugh?” Answer: loudly.
As anticipated by our most recent simple rule, the correct choice here was “loudly,” the “ly” counterpart to “loud,” since this modifier ends the sentence.
NO!
She sang beautiful all throughout the performance.
Yes:
She sang beautifully all throughout the performance.
“Beautifully” is necessitated here because the modifier that is needed is one that can function as an adverb to “sang.”; and “beautifully,” alone, is the adverb of the “beautiful/beautifully” pair. “Beautifully” answers the adverb-question “How?” – i.e., “How did she sing?”. Answer: “beautifully.”
As anticipated by one of the two addenda to our most recent simple rule, this adverb was not obligated to be the very last word in this sentence.
― Watch out for “Good” and “Well” ―
Like the “non-ly/ly” pattern of modifiers, “good” and “well” mean the same thing. However, they do not function in the same manner. “Good” is an adjective, while “well” is an adverb.
For example:
The good musician performed well at the concert.
“Good,” acting in its capacity as an adjective, is modifying the noun “musician.” “Well,” acting in its capacity as an adverb, is modifying the verb, “performed.”
Here is a coda to the most recent simple rule:
When a sentence might end in either “good” or “well,” choose “well,” because that is the form that functions as an adverb – and a modifier that concludes a sentence will almost always be an adverb.
Again, there are two things to take note of regarding this simple rule:
• “Well” is not obligated to be the very last word in a sentence. A word – or words – can follow “well” at the end of a sentence.
• There is one major exception to this simple rule which is brought about by the use of the verb “to be.” This exception will be discussed in the section, to come, which is solely dedicated to the verb “to be.”
NO!
You played good.
Yes:
You played well.
“Well” is correct because it is an adverb to the verb, “played.” It answers the adverb- question “How?” – i.e., How did you play?” Answer: well.
As anticipated by our most recent simple rule, the correct choice here was “well” since this modifier ends the sentence.
NO!
You played good last night.
Yes:
You played well last night.
“Well” is necessitated here because the modifier that is needed is one that can function as an adverb to “played.”; and “well,” alone, is the adverb of the “good/well” pair. Again, “well” answers the adverb-question “How?” relative to the verb, “played.”
As anticipated by one of the two addenda to the coda of our most recent simple rule, this adverb was not obligated to be the very last word in this sentence.
OTHER AREAS WHERE ONE OFTEN FINDS COMMON GRAMMATICAL ERRORS
The Verb “To Be”
The Use of Who, Whom, and Whose
The Confusion Between Homonyms
Gerunds in Prepositional Phrases
THE VERB “TO BE”
The verb “to be” appears with a frequency in our language that outpaces our use of any other verb. It often operates, however, in ways that are unlike any other verb. So it’s well worth our time to study the qualities and peculiarities of this atypical verb. Let’s begin with recognizing what it looks like. Here is its conjugation …
Present tense:
I am We are
You are You are
He is They are
Past tense:
I was We were
You were You were
He was They were
Future tense:
I will be We will be
You will be You will be
He will be They will be
Here are some features of the “to be” …
1. The verb “to be” is irregular.
There is no “ed” affixed to the end of its past tense conjugation.
2. The verb “to be” is intransitive.
It does not take a direct object.
3. The verb “to be” does not denote an action. It denotes a state of being.
Nearly every other verb in the English language conveys the idea of an observable activity: run, jump, fall, speak, laugh, play, et al. The verb “to be” conveys the idea that the subject exists; that the subject is.
4. The verb “to be” does not reiterate the spelling of its infinitive form when going into
its present tense conjugation.
With every other verb in the English language, we find that the spelling of the verb’s infinitive will be the spelling of its present tense conjugations (save for the “s” that is added to the end of the third person, singular conjugation). For example, in the present tense, “to play” is … I play, You play, etc.
This is not the case with the verb “to be.” Its present tense forms are … am, is, and are. “Be” appears nowhere in the present tense conjugation of this verb.
5. The verb “to be” is capable of contracting into its immediately preceding subject.
In English, a contraction brings two words together, ellipses (i.e., eliminates) a letter or letters from one of the words, and creates, in the process, a single construction. An apostrophe will indicate that the resulting structure is a contraction, and will be placed at the point where the ellipsed letter(s) once stood.
The verb “to be” is capable of contracting in this manner in both its present and future tenses – but not the past tense. Here is the conjugation of the verb “to be” in its contracted form in the present and future tenses.
Present tense:
I’m We’re
You’re You’re
He’s They’re
Future tense:
I’ll be We’ll be
You’ll be You’ll be
He’ll be They’ll be
As stipulated earlier, “He” has become a “placeholder” for all third person, singular subjects. Should the subject of a sentence be a noun – the name of a person, for example – the agreeing verb “to be” could also contract into that noun-subject in the present and future tenses.
For example:
Bob’s going with us. (Bob is going with us.)
Bob’ll be right back. (Bob will be right back.)
Although the very last construction is frowned upon by grammarians, you do see it written; and you certainly hear it in casual conversation
6. The verb “to be” does not conjugate as other verbs do.
With every other verb in our language, you will see one conjugation of the verb, only, in the past tense.
For example:
I played We played
You played You played
He played They played
However, the verb “to be” has two conjugations in its past tense, “was” and “were”:
I was We were
You were You were
He was They were
With every other verb in the language, you will see two conjugations of the verb in the present tense – one will end in “s” (the third person, singular conjugation), and one will not.
For example:
I play We play
You play You play
He plays They play
However, the verb “to be” has three conjugations in its present tense, “am,” “are,” and “is”:
I am We are
You are You are
He is They are
7. The verb “to be” is rarely modified by an adverb; and is never modified by an adverb
that ends in “ly.”
Modifiers most typically range around the verb “to be” – an occurrence for which the verb “to be” is responsible. But modifiers rarely pertain to the verb “to be.”
8. The verb “to be” is one of the two most common helping verbs (the other is the verb
“to have”).
The verb “to be,” in its capacity as a helping verb, will do all of the work (i.e. “to be” will conjugate, the main verb will not), but will receive none of the glory. What is meant by this latter statement is that the idea of the verb phrase, of which the verb “to be” is a part, will have nothing to do with “being” – which is the very essence of the verb “to be” – but, rather, will have everything to do with the idea conveyed by the main verb. But this is not to say that the verb “to be” is of no importance in the formation of verb phrases. In this area, the verb “to be” affects – and effects! – the very nature of the conjugation, itself.
The verb “to be” helps in the formation of the progressive tenses, for example. In keeping with what has just been noted regarding “to be” as a helping verb, one will see, upon close consideration, that the idea of any progressive tense verb will be conveyed by the main verb; and not by the verb “to be,” the main verb’s helper. Consider the verb “to play” in this regard. Throughout its progressive tense conjugations, the idea remains the same: the idea is about “playing,” not “being.”
And, as previously stipulated, the main verb, “to play,” in its progressive tenses, does not change in form (“playing”) – its helping verb, “to be,” does all the changing.
For example:
Present Progressive:
I am playing We are playing
You are playing You are playing
He is playing They are playing
Past Progressive:
I was playing We were playing
You were playing You were playing
He was playing They were playing
Future Progressive:
I will be playing We will be playing
You will be playing You will be playing
He will be playing They will be playing
The progressive tenses denote an action that is not discrete. The action is subtle, ongoing, and often repetitive in nature.
The helping verb of every progressive tense will always be some conjugation of the verb “to be.” The main verb of every progressive tense verb phrase will always take that verb’s present participle principal part – the one that always ends in “ing.”
9. The verb “to be,” when it is the only verb in its sentence, takes on a power that few
other verbs have.
When the verb “to be” is the lone verb in a sentence (this latter point is a key idea!), it is referred to as the linking verb. No action verb has this unusual capacity; and only a few other verbs beside the verb “to be” have the power to link.
Here is a fairly complete list of linking verbs – other than the verb, “to be” …
to look, to appear, to seem, to taste, to feel, to smell, to sound.
As you can see, this is a very limited list; and, as you might also see, the verbs in this list denote a function of one of the five senses – but do not convey a sense of observable action. When these verbs are used in the passive voice, they become linking verbs. (A further explanation of this, including the meaning of passive voice, will be forthcoming.)
As an intransitive verb, the verb “to be” cannot take a direct object. However, the verb “to be,” functioning as a linking verb, will be followed by an adjective, or a noun, or a pronoun. The verb “to be,” in its capacity as a linking verb, will then link the adjective, or the noun, or the pronoun that follows it to the subject of its sentence. When an adjective is so linked, it is called a predicate adjective. When a noun or pronoun is so linked, it is called a predicate nominative.
The Predicate Adjective
In a sentence in which the conventional S-V-C construction is observed, the predicate of that sentence is the second half of the sentence. It will extend from the verb
of the sentence to the sentence’s conclusion.
For example:
“My best friend from Boston arrives on the 9 a.m. red-eye flight from L.A. on Tuesday,”
The complete subject of the sentence is “My best friend from Boston,” and the predicate is “arrives on the 9 a.m. red-eye flight from L.A. on Tuesday.”
The predicate adjective is so designated because this particular adjective is found, not in front of the noun-subject that it describes (as is customary), but rather is found in the back of the sentence (i.e., in the predicate part of the sentence; hence – predicate adjective) and is linked to the front of the sentence so that it might describe the noun-subject. This linkage is effected by the verb “to be” in any of its conjugations.
For example:
Marty is quick.
“Quick” is the predicate adjective in this sentence, and is linked to the noun-subject, “Marty,” by the linking verb “is.” “Quick” modifies “Marty” by answering the adjective-question, “How?” – i.e., How is Marty?” Answer: “quick”.
“Is” performs this linkage because it is a conjugation of the verb “to be,” and because it is the lone verb in the sentence (and not a helping verb within a verb phrase).
In the section on “Modifiers” (pg. 58) you came across a simple rule:
When a sentence ends in a modifier that is part of the
“non-ly/ly” pattern, always choose the “ly” form of the
modifier, because that is the form that functions as an
adverb – and a modifier that concludes a sentence will
almost always be an adverb. There is one
major exception to this rule which will be discussed in
the section, to come, on the verb “to be.”
In addressing the topic of the linking verb, we come across the major exception
alluded to above. The major exception is the predicate adjective. When the lone verb in a sentence is a conjugation of the verb “to be,” and that verb is followed by a modifier, that modifier will be an adjective – not an adverb.
And this, I believe, leads to a very common error.
Example #1:
Because it is correct to say …
Marty is quick.
people often assume it is also correct to say …
Marty runs quick.
The latter construction is incorrect. One can only follow the linking verb with an adjective. Whereas, one must follow an action verb like “run” with an adverb.
So the only correct construction of the latter sentence is …
“Marty runs quickly.”
Example #2:
One must say …
This pasta was good.
This pasta looks good.
This pasta tastes good.
This pasta smells good.
because each of the respective verbs are linking verbs.
The verb “was,” as the lone verb in its sentence, always links – since it is a conjugation of the verb “to be.” And that is the situation we find in “This pasta was good.”
In the subsequent sentences we find various examples of those few verbs that link because they denote a function of one of the five senses (looks, tastes, smells); AND are being used in the passive voice within the sentence.
What is passive voice?
Passive voice occurs when the subject is not committing the action denoted by the verb. In essence the subject is not a doer, but a receiver – and so, in spirit, is much more akin to a direct object. In all of the sample sentences above, the pasta was not acting: the pasta was not looking, tasting, or smelling. Rather, the pasta was passively being acted upon: the pasta was being looked at, tasted, or smelled. When a subject of a sentence is seen to be passive, we have the passive voice.
For these oddball verbs (to look, to appear, to seem, to taste, to feel, to smell, to sound) to link, they must be used passively within their sentence.
In contradistinction to the examples above, one must not say …
This pasta cooks good.
“Cooks” is an action verb – not a linking verb. Modifiers that end a sentence containing an action verb must be adverbial (according to the simple rule on this issue). “Good” is an adjective. “Well” is an adverb.
So, the only correct construction of the latter sample sentence is …
“The pasta cooks well.”
I’m convinced that the presence of the predicate adjective in our language leads to the incorrect use of adjectives when adverbs are called for. Avoid the pitfall of ending a sentence with an adjective – or following a verb within a sentence with an adjective – UNLESS the verb of the sentence is a linking verb.
The Predicate Nominative
The predicate nominative, as its designation suggests, is found in the predicate part of the sentence. Like the predicate adjective, it will be placed after some conjugation of the verb “to be” – thus it will be placed at the end of the sentence – and it will be linked to the subject-noun at the front of the sentence.
The predicate nominative, however, is a noun or pronoun that, in being linked to the subject-noun, identifies or renames the subject.
For example:
Mr. Baldwin is my teacher.
In this construction, the lone verb is “is,” a conjugation of the verb “to be.” So it is a linking verb. “Is” links the predicate nominative, “(my) teacher” to the subject-noun, “Mr. Baldwin.” “Teacher” renames, or identifies the subject, “Mr. Baldwin.” This follows the principle that acknowledges the fact that we can all be identified by a wealth of nouns – none of us goes by one name alone. So, it would also be correct to say …
Mr. Baldwin is a son.
Mr. Baldwin is a father.
Mr. Baldwin is a brother.
Mr. Baldwin is a neighbor.
Mr. Baldwin is my friend.
In these sentences above – son, father, brother, neighbor, and friend – are all predicate nominatives.
― Watch out for Pronouns Functioning as Predicate Nominatives ―
A pronoun replaces a noun. Any function that a noun performs, a pronoun must be able to perform, as well. Nouns do not have cases to indicate that they are carrying out the various functions that they are called on to perform. “John,” for example, would not change its form should it move from being the subject of one sentence to the direct object of a second sentence.
For example:
John loves Mary. (“John” is the subject of this sentence.)
Mary loves John. (“John,” unchanged in form, is now the direct object of this sentence.)
From the first sentence to the second, the function of “John” has changed, but its form has not.
Pronouns do change their form when they change their function. The pronouns that would replace “John,” for example, are threefold in form: he, him, or his. Let’s return to the sample sentences just given above …
He loves Mary. (“He” takes the place of “John.” “He” is necessitated here because it is
in the nominative case – as it must be since it is the subject of the
sentence.)
Mary loves him. (Now “him” takes the place of “John.” “Him” is necessitated here
because it is in the objective case – as it must be since it is the direct
object of the sentence.)
“He” and “him” both signify “John,” but the pronoun was obligated to change its form once it changed its function.
Take note of this fact: When the predicate nominative of a sentence is a pronoun, that pronoun must be in the nominative case. The very language of the term “predicate nominative” suggests this, doesn’t it?
For example:
Should I get a phone call, and hear the speaker on the other end of the line ask,
“Is Mr. Baldwin there?” …
I would answer …
“This is he.” (Not, “This is him.”)
Just as I would respond …
“It is I.” (Not, “It is me.”) …
to the question, “Who is it?”
“This is he,” “It is I.” These sentences sound weird, don’t they? To repeat something that was very recently mentioned in this manual: Speakers and writers of English feel that they must end sentences with objective case pronouns. This is the only construction with which we are truly comfortable. We don’t want to say the sample sentences, above, in the way that they’re supposed to be said. But grammatically, these constructions are correct.
This would be a good time to return to a point that was broached in the introduction of this manual. As often as not, what sounds right is a useless yardstick by which to measure correct grammatical choices: You must know the rules which mandate the form of a specific word, in a particular sentence, given the function that the word is asked to perform.
At this point, I would like to interject my thoughts about a subject that I call “situational grammar.” We frequently find ourselves in situations where we might not need to – or want to! – employ the correct grammatical form. So don’t.
Like most of you, I live in Brooklyn. I like to play pool. Should I find myself at Gotham City Billiards on Avenue U, and should I get a phone call, and should the speaker on the other end of the line ask, “Is this Dan?” you can bet the rent money that I’m going to answer, “This is him.” Why? Because if I said, “This is he,” or “It is I” in a pool hall, everyone I know there would bust my chops for about two years. Should you find yourself in a similar situation, make the prudent choice, and use the incorrect form. But when writing an academic essay, or when in the presence of college-educated professionals, use the grammatically correct form. This, my friends, is situational grammar.
THE USE OF WHO, WHOM, and WHOSE
All personal pronouns have a threefold nature: they have three cases. The three cases are these: the nominative case, the objective case, and the possessive case. For example: I, me, and my; he, him, and his; we, us, and our, etc. As I hope you will recall, the nominative case is the form that a pronoun takes when it functions as a subject. The objective case is the form that a pronoun takes when it functions as a direct object, or as the object of a preposition. The possessive case is the form a pronoun takes when it wishes to show possession, attachment, or association; that is to say, when it functions as an adjective.
The pronoun “who” also has three cases: who, whom, and whose. These three permutations of “who” are its nominative, objective, and possessive cases, respectively.
♦ Who, Whom, and Whose as the introductory word in an interrogative sentence
An interrogative sentence asks a question. When who, whom, or whose introduce an interrogative sentence, they are called interrogative pronouns. One of the three cases of this interrogative pronoun will be chosen in a particular interrogative sentence upon consideration of which function the pronoun is being called upon to perform in that specific sentence.
Example #1:
Who knows the answer?
“Who” is used at the beginning of the sentence because it is functioning as the subject of the sentence. As such, the interrogative pronoun one must choose has to be in the nominative case. “Who,” alone, is in the nominative case.
Example #2:
Whom do you trust?
“Whom” is used at the beginning of the sentence because it is functioning as the direct object of the sentence. As such, the interrogative pronoun one must choose has to be in the objective case. “Whom,” alone, is in the objective case.
It might be difficult to immediately see “whom” as the direct object in reading this sentence as it stands. But one must keep in mind that the order of many interrogative sentences is inverted. In such cases, the S-V-C construction is transposed, and the subject will not appear at the beginning of the sentence. This is the case here. If one uninverts the sentence, it will read this way: “You do trust whom.” Considered in this light, we can see that “you” is the subject, “do trust” is the transitive verb (phrase), and “whom” is the direct object – necessitating the objective case of this interrogative pronoun.
This particular sentence has a bit of a history. It was the name of a famous TV game show from the 1950’s. However, the title of the show was grammatically incorrect. The show was called Who do you trust? The producers used to get scores of letters every week, pointing out their error. They used to cry about the mistake they had made – from their penthouse apartments on Park Avenue.
Example #3:
“Whose backpack is this?”
“Whose” is used at the beginning of the sentence because it is possessive to “backpack.” With the possessive case, the pronoun remains a pronoun in form, but is actually an adjective in function. “Whose” is adjectival to the noun, “backpack,” answering the adjective question “Which one?” – i.e. “Which backpack?” Answer: “whose.”
Since we’ve just answered a question with a question, the point currently at issue is a particularly confusing one to make. It only becomes clear when one considers that this question will eventually be answered; and that “whose” is, for now, merely a place-holder for the name of the student who owns the backpack. When his or her identity is discovered, the name of the student in question will eventually specifically modify “backpack.”
In truth, “whose” will never be confused with either “who” or “whom.” Just as “my” will never be confused with either “I” or “me.” But, as we saw in the section on the “Pronoun,” the nominative and objective cases of personal pronouns often present a challenge, and are frequently used interchangeably – and ungrammatically – by some. “I” and “me”; “he” and “him”; “she” and “her”; “we” and “us”; and, “they” and “them” can be – and often are – confused.
The use of “who” and “whom” are similarly confused.
Thus the nominative and objective cases of this pronoun will be the focus of the remainder of this section.
♦ Who and Whom as the introductory words in an adjective clause
You will remember, I hope, from the section on the “Clause” that a clause is a sentence, or sentence-like structure, within a compound or complex sentence. Any clause is like a sentence in that it will have a subject, a verb, and (often, but not always) a complement. However, it must be stipulated that a complex sentence’s dependent clause is unlike a sentence in that it will not be able to stand on its own as a complete thought. A dependent clause will usually modify some particular word in its companion clause – the independent clause. Hence, dependent clauses will most typically function either as an adverb, or as an adjective.
“Who” or “whom” will often introduce a dependent clause that functions as an adjective.
When a pronoun introduces an adjective clause, that pronoun is referred to as a relative pronoun, thus “who” and “whom” can be relative pronouns.
A relative pronoun has a dual purpose. It will always be the first word of an adjective clause – announcing, in effect, that what follows is an adjective clause; and in addition, a relative pronoun will perform one of several possible functions within the adjective clause itself: A relative pronoun will be the subject; or, the direct object; or, an object of a preposition within its clause.
Example #1:
My cousin, who lives in New Jersey, is a big Nets fan.
The adjective clause is “who lives in New Jersey.” The clause is adjectival to the noun, “cousin.” (Remember that adjectival phrases and clauses immediately follow the noun that is being modified.) The clause answers the adjective-question, “Which one?” – i.e., “Which cousin?”. Answer: “the cousin living in New Jersey”.
“Who” is the relative pronoun of the adjective clause. “Who” announces to the reader that an adjective clause has begun. Furthermore, “who,” and not “whom,” is used at the beginning of this adjective clause, because “who” is functioning as the subject of this adjective clause itself. As such, the relative pronoun one chooses has to be in the nominative case. “Who,” alone, is in the nominative case.
Example #2:
The celebrated author, whom you know, is coming to speak to our class next week.
The adjective clause is “whom you know.” The clause is adjectival to the noun, “author.” The clause answers the adjective-question, “Which one?” – i.e., “Which author?”. Answer: “the celebrated author you know”.
“Whom” is the relative pronoun of the adjective clause. “Whom” announces to the reader that an adjective clause has begun. Furthermore, “whom,” and not “who,” is used at the beginning of the clause because “whom” is functioning as the direct object of the clause. As such, the relative pronoun one chooses has to be in the objective case. “Whom,” alone, is in the objective case.
Keep in mind that “who” or “whom” (and “whose” which is not at issue here) must begin the adjective clause in which they appear. Consequently, many adjective clauses must invert their natural order (i.e., transpose it, flip it around) in order to place their relative pronoun at their forefront. With this inversion, the S-V-C construction is turned around. The subject will not appear at the beginning of the clause. This is the case here. If one were to uninvert the clause, it would read this way: “You know whom.” Considered in this light, we can see that “you” is the subject, “know” is the transitive verb, and “whom” is the direct object – necessitating the objective case of this relative pronoun.
Here is a simple rule:
If you’ve composed a sentence with an adjective clause, and you intend to employ either
“who” or “whom” as the relative pronoun of the clause, but you’re not sure which alternative to select, here’s a little trick. Look at the word that will immediately follow your who-or-whom choice. If that word is a verb – then choose “who.” If that word is a noun or a pronoun – then choose “whom.”
There is one exception to this rule; and that exception will be addressed shortly.
Example #1:
A man who gives to charity will be blessed many times over.
The adjective clause is “who gives to charity.” It is modifying the noun, “man.” The relative pronoun of the adjective clause is “who.” In accord with our most recent simple rule, “who,” and not “whom,” is the correct choice here because the relative pronoun is immediately followed by a verb: “gives.” You should note that “who” is the subject of the adjective clause.
Example #2:
My brother whom you know from elementary school has grown into a formidable young man.
The adjective clause is “whom you know from elementary school.” It is modifying the noun, “brother.” The relative pronoun of the adjective clause is “whom.” In accord with our most recent simple rule, “whom,” and not “who,” is the correct choice here because the relative pronoun is immediately followed by a pronoun: “you.” You should note that the clause is inverted, and that “you” is the subject of the adjective clause, whereas “whom” is its direct object.
Example #3:
The plumber whom Ralph always hires will be calling you within the hour about that leak in your basement.
The adjective clause is “whom Ralph always hires.” It is modifying the noun, “plumber.” The relative pronoun of the adjective clause is “whom.” In accord with our most recent simple rule, “whom,” and not “who,” is the correct choice here because the relative pronoun is immediately followed by a noun: “Ralph.” You should note that the clause is inverted, and that “Ralph” is the subject of the adjective clause, whereas “whom” is its direct object.
♦ Who and whom as the introductory word of a noun clause
In addition to functioning as adjectives, dependent clauses can function as nouns. As such, they will in turn function in one of three possible ways within the larger complex sentence: as its subject; or, as its direct object; or, as the object of a preposition. The introductory word of a noun clause will often be either “who” or “whom.” Here, these pronouns will not be designated by a particular term (i.e., they won’t have a label such as “interrogative pronoun,” or “relative pronoun”), but they will function in much the same way as does a relative pronoun.
Each of the three upcoming sample sentences has a noun clause – which is in bold-faced type. Each clause begins with either “who” or “whom.” In each instance, the entire noun clause is functioning as the direct object of the independent clause’s transitive verb: “know.” As is always the case, the choice of “who” (or “whom”) is predicated on the grammatical function that that pronoun is being called upon to make within the clause in which it appears.
Example #1:
I know who lives here.
“Who,” and not “whom,” is used at the beginning of the noun clause, “who lives here,” because “who” is functioning as the subject of the clause. As such, the nominative case is required. “Who,” alone, is in the nominative case.
Example #2:
I know whom you need for this job.
In the case of noun clauses, as is the case with adjective clauses, once “who” or “whom” is decided upon, “who” or “whom” must begin the clause. And, as is the case with adjective clauses, this necessity will frequently lead to an inversion. This complex sentence’s noun clause – “whom you need for this job” – is inverted If you uninvert the clause (“you need whom for this job”), you will see that “you” is the subject of the clause; “need” is its transitive verb; and, “whom” is its direct object. The objective case is called for when a pronoun functions as a direct object. So, “whom,” and not “who,” is required here since “whom” is functioning as the clause’s direct object, and since “whom,” alone, is in the objective case.
Considering these two most recent examples, we see the same simple rule applies here as applied to the case of “who” and “whom” in its capacity as a relative pronoun within an adjective clause.
Here is a coda to the most recent simple rule:
As with an adjective clause, when a noun clause might begin with either “who” or “whom,” look at the word that will immediately follow your who-or-whom choice. If that word is a verb – then choose “who.” If that word is a noun or a pronoun – then choose “whom.”
There is one exception to this rule; and that exception will be addressed shortly.
In the sentence, “I know who lives here,” the verb “lives” was following the opening who-or-whom choice for the noun clause – so “who” was the correct choice.
In the sentence, “I know whom you need for this job,” the pronoun “you” was following the opening who-or-whom choice for the noun clause – so “whom” was the correct choice.
― Watch out for the Exception to the Simple Rules Regarding “Who” and “Whom” ―
Both of our two most recent simple rules regarding the use of “who” and “whom” offered two guidelines. In both instances, one of the two guidelines for both rules suggested the following: should “who” or “whom” be under consideration, check to see if your who-or-whom choice will be followed by a noun or a pronoun – if so, the correct choice then becomes “whom.”
However, there is an exception to this rule.
The exception to the rule regarding the who-or-whom choice:
If the verb “to be,” alone, in any of its conjugations, follows your who-or-whom
choice, then “who” – and only “who” – becomes the correct choice.
For example:
I know who you are.
The entire noun clause, “who you are,” is the direct object of the independent clause’s transitive verb: “know.”
The lone verb (and thus the linking verb) of the noun clause is a conjugation of the verb “to be,” – “are” – so, the exception to the who-or-whom simple rule is now in force; and, “who” becomes the correct choice, here, even though the who-or-whom choice is followed by the pronoun, “you.”
Why?
You will recall from the section on the verb “to be” that this verb, when functioning as a linking verb (i.e., when it is the lone verb in its sentence or clause), does not take a direct object, but does take either a predicate adjective (“This pasta was good”), or a predicate nominative (“It is I”). When the predicate nominative is a pronoun, that pronoun must be in the nominative case.
The clause within our current sample sentence is inverted. Uninverted, it would read: “you are who.” Within the noun clause, proper, of our current sample sentence, the who-or-whom choice under consideration is functioning as the predicate nominative, and thus must be in the nominative case. “Who,” alone, is in the nominative case.
Take note of this fact:
In instances where the linking verb is the lone verb of a noun clause or of an adjective clause, the nominative case, “who,” is the only correct choice as the clause’s introduction, since that is the pronoun case that will be required regardless of whether the clause is uninverted (“who” will function as the subject); or inverted (“who” will function as the predicate nominative).
Finally …
Did you ever wonder why the salutation to certain open-ended business letters reads, “To whom it may concern,” and not “To who it may concern”? “Whom” is correct in this instance because it is functioning as the object of the preposition, “to.” As such, the objective case is called for; and, “whom,” alone, is in the objective case.
THE CONFUSION BETWEEN HOMONYMS
Homonyms are a pair of words that have an identical pronunciation, but different spellings, and different meanings (e.g., two and too).
There are three sets of personal pronouns that are homonyms. In each instance, one half of the homonym-pair is a possessive case pronoun; its second half, its homonym counterpart, is the pronoun’s nominative case, along with a contraction of a either “are” or “is” – depending upon which conjugation agrees.
Possessive Pronoun Homonym Counterpart
Your You’re (“You” + “are” = “You’re”)
Its It’s (“It” + “is” = “It’s”)
Their They’re (“They” + “are” = “They’re”)
To make the correct choice … remember: A possessive case pronoun always functions as an adjective to a noun; a nominative case pronoun always functions as a subject.
The contractions that create the set of homonyms to the three aforementioned possessive pronouns are nominative in nature and will act as both the subject-pronoun and the verb (or helping verb) of their sentences.
Example #1:
Your brother is a lot fun.
The possessive, “your,” is correct because it is acting as an adjective to the noun, “brother.” “Your,” is modifying “brother” by answering the adjective question, “Which one?” – i.e., “Which brother?”. Answer: Your brother.
Compare this sentence to …
You’re here at last!
“You’re” is correct because it supplies the sentence with both its subject – “You” – and its verb – “are” – in a contracted form. “You’re” is saying “You are.” (You are here at last!)
Example #2:
New York is famous for its restaurants.
The possessive, “its,” is correct because it is acting as an adjective to the noun, “restaurants.” “Its,” is modifying “restaurants” by answering the adjective question, “Which one?” – i.e., “Which restaurants?”. Answer: its (i.e., New York’s) restaurants.
Compare this sentence to …
It’s getting dark earlier these days.
“It’s” is correct because it supplies the sentence with both its subject – “It” – and its helping verb – “is” – in a contracted form. (The main verb is “getting.” The verb phrase is “is getting.”) “It’s” is saying “It is.” (It is getting dark earlier these days.)
Example #3:
Their house is the most beautiful one on the block.
The possessive, “their,” is correct because it is acting as an adjective to the noun, “house.” “Their,” is modifying “house” by answering the adjective question, “Which one?” – i.e., “Which house?”. Answer: Their house.
Compare this sentence to …
They’re two of the nicest people that I have ever met.
“They’re” is correct because it supplies the sentence with both its subject – “They” – and its verb – “are” – in a contracted form. “They’re” is saying “They are.” (They are two of the nicest people that I have ever met.)
Here is a simple rule:
If you’re reviewing a sentence that has employed one of the aforementioned constructions that has a homonym counterpart – and you’re not sure that you’ve used the correct alternative – test the contracted version in the sentence … in its uncontracted form. If the resulting sentence makes sense, the contraction was correct all along; if the resulting sentence is ridiculous, then the contraction’s homonym – i.e., the possessive case pronoun – is the correct choice.
Example #1:
Let’s assume that I have written the following sentence, and I’m not sure whether to use “its” or “it’s.”
A lioness will fiercely protect (its? it’s?) cubs.
I would test my possible choices by observing what the sentence would sound like if I used the contraction, “it’s,” in its uncontracted form within the sentence …
A lioness will fiercely protect it is cubs.
This resulting sentence is ridiculous.
Since “it is” cannot be the correct choice here neither can “it’s.” By the process of elimination, I now know that the correct choice for this sentence is the homonym counterpart of “it’s” – “its.”
The correct construction is …
A lioness will fiercely protect its cubs.
Example #2:
Let’s assume that I have written the following sentence, and I’m not sure whether to use “its” or “it’s.”
(Its? It’s?) cold outside.
I would test my two possible choices by observing what the sentence would sound like if I used the contraction, “it’s,” in its uncontracted form within the sentence …
It is cold outside.
The resulting sentence is perfectly fine. So “it’s” is the correct construction to use in this sentence.
It’s cold outside.
Of course this simple rule also works when you’re confused over the use of “your” versus “you’re”; or, “their” versus “they’re.” Just test the uncontracted version of the contraction in your sentence (i.e.,” you are,” and “they are”) and see how the sentence sounds to come to a decision as to which is the correct alternative to choose.
GERUNDS IN PREPOSITONAL PHRASES
To review:
Verbs have four principal parts: present, past, present participle, and past participle. These four principal parts of a verb are the building blocks for all the conjugations a verb will go through; and will further serve as the source for a verb’s form when it is not acting as the verb of the sentence; but, rather, as a verbal within the sentence.
What is a verbal?
A verbal is a word that is derived from a verb; it is conjugated as a verb; it retains the features of a verb (e.g., it can be modified or complemented as a verb is modified or complemented); but it is not THE verb of the sentence.
A verbal can act as an adjective. In this capacity it will be called a participle.
A verbal can also act as a noun. In this capacity it will be called a gerund.
A gerund will always, and only, function as a noun within its sentence.
The present participle of any given verb (the principal part that always ends in
“ing”) will supply us with gerunds.
Thus, a gerund will always, and only, end in “ing.”
For example:
Choosing is sometimes difficult to do.
In this example, “choosing” is a verbal; it is a gerund; it is drawn from the present participle of the verb, “to choose”; it is functioning as a noun within the sentence. In its capacity as a noun, it is further functioning as the subject of the sentence.
As stipulated above, all verbals retain their verb-like qualities even though they are not functioning as the verb of the sentence in which they appear.
Thus, as a verbal, a gerund can be modified by a one-word adverb.
For example:
Choosing carefully is sometimes difficult to do.
“Choosing” is now modified by the adverb, “carefully.” The result is a gerund phrase. The gerund phrase is “choosing carefully.” This gerund phrase, in its entirety, is now the subject of the latest sentence.
As a verbal, a gerund can be modified by an adverbial phrase, which is a prepositional phrase functioning as an adverb.
For example:
Choosing with great care is sometimes difficult to do.
The subject of the sentence has now become the gerund phrase, “choosing with great care.” The adverbial phrase “with great care” is modifying the verbal, “choosing.”
As a verbal, a gerund can take a complement (a direct object, of sorts), if the verb from which it derives is transitive in nature, as is the verb “to choose.”
For example:
Choosing my sister for the lead in the class play would make her incredibly happy.
The subject of the sentence has now become the gerund phrase, “choosing my sister for the lead in the class play.” “Choosing,” a transitive verb, has taken a complement: “(my) sister,” which is analogous to a direct object. In addition, the verbal is being modified by an adverbial phrase, “for the lead”; and, “lead,” a noun and the object of the preposition, “for,” is in turn being modified by the adjectival phrase, “in the class play.”
As a noun, a gerund can be directly preceded by a one-word adjectival modifier: an article, a possessive pronoun, or a demonstrative pronoun.
For example:
The choosing (article)
Your choosing (possessive pronoun)
That choosing (demonstrative pronoun)
Below, we see the following: a gerund-as-subject that, in its capacity as a noun, is taking a possessive pronoun as a modifier; while, additionally, in its capacity as a verbal, is taking an adverbial phrase as a modifier; and, finally, given its pedigree as a transitive verb, is taking a complement.
The example:
Your choosing my sister for the lead has made her incredibly happy.
The subject of this sentence is the gerund phrase, “your choosing my sister for the lead.” “Your,” a pronoun in form, but an adjective in function, is modifying the gerund, “choosing.” This is made possible by the fact that all gerunds function as nouns, and so can be modified as nouns are modified. “My sister” is the complement of “choosing.” The adverbial phrase “for the lead” is modifying “choosing.”
All nouns function as either subjects or as objects. Since a gerund functions as a noun, it too will serve as either a subject or as an object within its sentence. The fact that gerunds function as nouns can cause grammatical problems. Those who have not been tutored in this subject often don’t see that a gerund is a gerund – and therefore a noun.
Perhaps failing to recognize a gerund for what it is will occur with even greater frequency when the gerund is functioning as the object of a preposition.
Moreover, a gerund-as-object that has taken a possessive pronoun as its modifier can lead to a very common grammatical error.
NO!
Were you happy with me choosing the actors that I did for the class play?
The writer has failed to recognize that the object of the preposition, “with” is not “me.” Were this the case, the objective case “me” would be correct (e.g., “Were you happy with me?”).
No. The gerund “choosing” is the object of the preposition. Think of it this way: “me” precedes “choosing”; it does not follow “with.” The contested pronoun is (or should be!) functioning as a modifier to “choosing,” thus “me” is in the wrong case for the job at hand. Of the three cases for this pronoun – I, me, and my – only the possessive case can function as a modifier, and, of the three, “my,” alone is in the possessive case.
Yes:
Were you happy with my choosing the actors that I did for the class play?
When it comes to verbals – especially when a gerund functions as the object of a preposition – our ear fail us: we often don’t hear the sort of error that has just been illustrated. It is entirely likely that we see and hear the gerund as a second verb in the sentence. Alternately, it is also probable that many people are simply unaware that a gerund functions just as a conventional noun would function.
As an illustration of the correctness of the latter sentence (Were you happy with my choosing the actors that I did for the class play?), let’s replace “choosing,” the gerund, with a similar word, but one that is a conventional noun: “choice.”
Would you say …
Were you happy with me choice for the actors for the class play? …?
Of course not!
This sentence sounds ridiculous.
But it is not wrong because it sounds wrong; it is wrong because it is wrong; it is wrong according to the precepts of grammar. “Me” can neither function as the object of the preposition, “with,” nor as a modifier to the noun, “choice.” “Me” is all wrong, and doesn’t belong in the sentence. The object of the preposition, “with,” is “choice,” not “me.”
Furthermore, “choice,” a noun, is meant to be modified by the pronoun that immediately precedes it. Only a possessive case pronoun can perform such modification. Of the three choices available to us, “my,” alone, is possessive. Therefore “my” must precede “choice.”
The correct construction would read …
Were you happy with my choice for the actors for the class play?
Hoping to hear your way to correct grammatical choices is a path filled with pitfalls. Probably every one of us would hear that “Were you happy with me choice …” is wrong. However, many people would probably not hear that “Were you happy with me choosing …” is wrong. To many, it undoubtedly sounds perfectly fine. But how the latter sentence sounds is an irrelevancy in this case. The second sentence is wrong because the grammar is flawed. The principles that lead us to “my choice” must also lead us to “my choosing.”
When constructing a sentence, one must make choices based on an understanding of the rules and patterns of grammar, alone. Here are some more examples of this very common error involving a gerund, modified by a pronoun, while the gerund functions as the object of a preposition.
NO!
Was the librarian annoyed with us talking so loudly?
Yes:
Was the librarian annoyed with our talking so loudly?
NO!
There are many details pursuant to me going with you.
Yes:
There are many details pursuant to my going with you.
NO!
There were unanticipated problems created by them drilling that excavation in the street.
Yes:
There were unanticipated problems created by their drilling that excavation in the street.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- year 4 grammar test
- myself or me grammar rule
- 1st grade grammar worksheets
- improving grammar for adults
- free printable grammar worksheets
- free 6th grade grammar worksheets
- free grammar worksheets with answers
- grammar lessons 8th grade english
- 6th grade grammar worksheets free printable
- 8th grade grammar test printable
- middle school grammar practice worksheets
- grammar for 8th graders