4. Up the Linguistic Pyramid: Syntax
4.6. From clauses to sentences
In the previous section, we were discussing clauses, though our example clauses could have been called simple sentences as well. However, not every clause can be called a sentence and, consequently, sentences are not always simple: they may consist of several clauses. The fol-lowing sentence is an example of a sentence with two clauses:
42) Bob wants to go out but Jane would rather stay at home.
This sentence comprises two clauses of equal rank: neither is subordinated to the other. The relationship between the two clauses is called COORDINATION. We may also say that the two clauses are coordinated, or that our sentence is a compound one. The conjunctions that link coordinated clauses (but, and, or) are coordinators.
4.6.2. Subordination
In other cases, the clauses of a sentence are not equal: one (or more) may be subordinated to the other. SUBORDINATIONmeans that the subordinate clause functions as one of the con-stituents (subject, object, complement or adverbial) of another clause. The clause which is not subordinated to any other clauses is the main clause. Since sentences can, in theory, be infi-nitely complex, it is not surprising that a sentence may contain several subordinate and/or several main clauses. Here are a few examples:
43) Sebastian has promised that he will help Anna.
44) Sebastian has promised that he will help Anna and Anna has promised that she will help Sebastian.
45) When Sebastian arrived, he said that he had brought something for Anna.
46) Anna says that she wanted to buy the CD as soon as she saw it in the shop window.
43) consists of a main clause and a subordinate clause functioning as an object. (Cf. the an-swer to the question: What did Sebastian promise?) In 44), we find two (coordinated) main clauses, each of which has a subordinate (object) clause. In 45) one main clause (he said) has two subordinate clauses: When Sebastian arrivedis an adverbial clause (indicating time), while that he had brought something for Annais an object clause. Finally, 46) is a sentence in which the clauses to buy the CD(object) and as soon as she saw it in the shop window (adverbial) are subordinated to a clause (that she wanted) which is itself subordinated to the main clause Anna says. The word that, which introduces subordinate clauses, is called a sub-ordinator.
4.6.3. Finite and non-finite clauses
In 46) you may have noticed certain structural differences between the last two (subordinate) clauses. Take a look at the following sentences:
47) Anna promises [that she will help Sebastian].
48) Anna promised [that she would help Sebastian].
49) Anna promises [to help Sebastian].
50) Anna promised [ to help Sebastian].
If we examine the sentences, we will find that the change from present to past in the main clauses in 47) and 48) resulted in a change in the verbs of the subordinate clauses as well; while no similar change happened to the subordinate clauses in 49) and 50). Furthermore, we may notice that the subordinate clauses in 47) and 48) are introduced by that; the other two sub-ordinate clauses are not. Still another difference is the presence of the subject shein 47) and 48) and its apparent absence in 49) and 50). Clauses of the type represented by the subordi-nate clauses in 47) and 48) are called finite clauses and the corresponding verb forms (such as will helpor promised) are finite verb forms; while clauses of the type found in 49) and 50), as well as the corresponding verb forms (such as to help), are called non-finite.
4.6.4. Finally…
If you have successfully reached the end of this chapter, you may now take the opportunity to test your general understanding of the concepts outlined here, or to try to generate some thoughts of your own in connection with syntax by reading the points below.
4.6.4. Finally…
Points to Ponder
1. The underlined phrases in the following sentences are ambiguous. Explain the differences in structure that can account for the ambiguity.
1) This is a toy shop.
2) Old English literature societies usually have their own websites.
3) Mr Smith is too old to visit.
2. Compare the following sentence pairs. In the second one you will always find that the place of a constituent is empty. Do you think empty categories may have functions in syntax?
If so, explain their functions in these examples.
1) A) Sue wanted him to leave.
B) Sue wanted Øto leave.
2) A) The lions are hungry.
B) ØLions are dangerous.
3) A) They have seen her.
B) They Øsaw her.
3. In English finite clauses the presence of a subject is obligatory. In some other languages, such as Hungarian, subjects are often dropped. Can this difference be explained by other structural characteristics in the two languages? What do you think?
Suggested Reading
Fromkin,V. - Rodman, R. (19986): An Introduction to Linguistics. Holt, Rinehart and Win-ston: New York
A reader-friendly and fascinating introduction to all aspects of linguistics.
Graver, B.D. (19863): Advanced English Practice. OUP: Oxford
This book is a collection of really advanced practical exercises for those who want to understand syntactic structures, as well as to use them.
Radford, A. (1997): Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English: a Minimalist Approach.
CUP: Cambridge
The book introduces the concepts of syntax on the basis of a branch of generative lin-guistics with easy-to-follow explanations, guiding the reader step by step from the basic terminology to the more complicated ideas.
ince we use language to communicate with each other, it is clear that we will want to understand how language can pass on ‘what we mean’. Where can we find meaning in language? How is it that we understand what others mean? Sometimes what the other person says is ambiguous, that is, it can be understood in two different ways. There are two types of ambiguity, lexical and structural. A simple example of the former is “I saw her run to the bank”. From this sentence, we don’t know if the bank is a financial institution or the edge of a river. Of course, in a real conversation we would probably know. Structural am-biguity is different. If, for example, I were to say, “I ate the biscuits on the bed”, you wonder whether I was on the bed while I was eating, or if the biscuits I was eating had been on the bed. A lot of humour works because we are good at interpreting words and sentences in several ways. Of course, taking a joke to pieces to try and find out how and why it works does rather spoil the fun. Studying semantics makes us aware of just how difficult it is to know what meaning is. This is something that every child who has read Lewis Carroll’s book Through the Looking Glass knows. Alice is having a frustrating conversation with Humpty Dumpty who is not being clear about what he means and won’t accept Alice’s objection:
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
And that indeed is an important question. After reading the next chapter you will be able to think about words and lexical semantics in a new way.
5.1. Linguistics — Semantics — Lexical semantics
SEMANTICSis the study of (the various kinds of) meaning in language. Because it has links to logic, mathematics, and philosophy, not all aspects of it are suitable for even a simple presen-tation in this book. There are highly mathematicized branches within semantics, such as formal semantics, the semantics of logic, etc. (these mainly deal with sentences). Semantics may also deal with DISCOURSE ANALYSISand PRAGMATICS. Pragmatics is often treated as part of semantics, but when it is looked on as a self-contained branch of linguistics, it is semantics’ “neighbour”.
Lexical Semantics
Eötvös Loránd University SEAS English Linguistics Department