An intransitive verb is a verb that has only one argument, that is, a verb with valency equal to one. In more familiar terms, an intransitive verb has a subject but does not have an object. For example, in English, the verbs sleep, die, condescend and swim, are intransitive.
A linking verb may or may not be considered a proper intransitive verb.
Showing posts with label grammar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label grammar. Show all posts
Saturday, July 21, 2007
Gerunds in English
In English the gerund is identical in form to the present participle (ending in -ing) and can behave as a verb within a clause (so that it may be modified by an adverb or have an object), but the clause as a whole (sometimes consisting only of one word, the gerund) acts as a noun within the larger sentence. For example:
Editing this article is very easy.
Within the clause "Editing this article", the word "Editing" behaves as a verb; the phrase "this article" is the object of that verb. But the whole clause "Editing this article" acts as a noun within the sentence as a whole; it is the subject of the verb "is".
Other examples of the gerund:
I like swimming. (direct object)
Swimming is fun. (subject)
Editing this article is very easy.
Within the clause "Editing this article", the word "Editing" behaves as a verb; the phrase "this article" is the object of that verb. But the whole clause "Editing this article" acts as a noun within the sentence as a whole; it is the subject of the verb "is".
Other examples of the gerund:
I like swimming. (direct object)
Swimming is fun. (subject)
Gerund
In linguistics, “gerund” is a term used to refer to various non-finite verb forms in various languages:
As applied to English, it refers to what might be called a verb's action noun, which is one of the uses of the -ing form. This is also the term's use as applied to Latin; see Latin conjugation.
As applied to Spanish, it refers to an adverbial participle (a verbal adverb), called in Spanish the gerundio. The term gerundive is also applied to this.
As applied to French, it refers either the adverbial participle — also called the gerundive — or to the present adjectival participle.
As applied to Hebrew, it refers either to the verb's action noun, or to the part of the infinitive that follows the infinitival prefix (also called the infinitival construct).
As applied to Frisian, it refers to one of two verb forms frequentely referred to as infinitives, this one ending in -n. It shows up in nominalizations and is selected by perception verbs.
As applied to other languages, it may refer to almost any non-finite verb form; however, it most often refers to an action noun, by analogy with its use as applied to English or Latin.
As applied to English, it refers to what might be called a verb's action noun, which is one of the uses of the -ing form. This is also the term's use as applied to Latin; see Latin conjugation.
As applied to Spanish, it refers to an adverbial participle (a verbal adverb), called in Spanish the gerundio. The term gerundive is also applied to this.
As applied to French, it refers either the adverbial participle — also called the gerundive — or to the present adjectival participle.
As applied to Hebrew, it refers either to the verb's action noun, or to the part of the infinitive that follows the infinitival prefix (also called the infinitival construct).
As applied to Frisian, it refers to one of two verb forms frequentely referred to as infinitives, this one ending in -n. It shows up in nominalizations and is selected by perception verbs.
As applied to other languages, it may refer to almost any non-finite verb form; however, it most often refers to an action noun, by analogy with its use as applied to English or Latin.
Government (linguistics)
In grammar and theoretical linguistics, government refers to the relationship between a word and its dependents. There is a traditional notion of government, and a highly specialized definition used in some generative models of syntax.
Interpretive" vs. "Generative" semantics
The controversy surrounding generative semantics stemmed in part from the competition between two fundamentally different approaches to semantics within transformational generative syntax. The first semantic theories designed to be compatible with transformational syntax were interpretive. Syntactic rules enumerated a set of well-formed sentences paired with syntactic structures, each of which was assigned an interpretation by the rules of a separate semantic theory. This left syntax relatively (though by no means entirely) "autonomous" with respect to semantics, and was the approach preferred by Chomsky. In contrast, generative semanticists argued that interpretations were generated directly by the grammar as deep structures, and were subsequently transformed into recognisable sentences by transformations. This approach necessitated more complex underlying structures than those proposed by Chomsky, and more complex transformations as a consequence. Despite this additional complexity, the approach was appealing in several respects. First, it offered a powerful mechanism for explaining synonymity. In his initial work in generative syntax, Chomsky motivated transformations using active/passive pairs such as "I hit John" and "John was hit by me", which despite their identical meanings have quite different surface forms [2]. Generative semanticists wanted to account for all cases of synonimity in a similar fashion — an impressively ambitious goal before the advent of more sophisticated interpretive theories in the 1970s. Second, the theory had a pleasingly intuitive structure: the form of a sentence was quite literally derived from its meaning via transformations. To some, interpretive semantics seemed rather "clunky" and ad-hoc in comparison. This was especially so before the development of trace theory.
Generative semantics
Generative semantics is (or perhaps was) a research program within linguistics, initiated by the work of various early students of Noam Chomsky: John R. Ross, Paul Postal and later James McCawley. George Lakoff was also instrumental in developing and advocating the theory.[1] The approach developed out of transformational generative grammar in the mid 1960s, but stood largely in opposition to work by Noam Chomsky and his later students. The nature and genesis of the program are a matter of some controversy and have been extensively debated. Generative semanticists took Chomsky's concept of Deep Structure and ran with it, assuming (contrary to later work by Chomsky and Ray Jackendoff) that deep structures were the sole input to semantic interpretation. This assumption, combined with a tendency to consider a wider range of empirical evidence than Chomskian linguists, lead generative semanticists to develop considerably more absract and complex theories of deep structure than those advocated by Chomsky and his students — and indeed to abandon altogether the notion of "deep structure" as a locus of lexical insertion. Throughout the late 1960s and 1970s, there were heated debates between generative semanticists and more orthodox Chomskians. The generative semanticists lost the debate, insofar as their research program ground to a halt by the 1980s. However, this was in part because the interests of key generative semanticists such as George Lakoff had gradually shifted away from the narrow study of syntax and semantics. A number of ideas from later work in generative semantics have been incorporated into cognitive linguistics (and indeed into mainstream Chomskian linguistics, often without citation[1]).
Grammatical modifier
In grammar, a modifier (aka qualifier) is a word or sentence element that limits or qualifies another word, a phrase, or a clause. In English, there are two kinds of modifiers: adjectives, which modify nouns and pronouns, and adverbs, which modify verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs. A modifier phrase is a phrase that acts as a modifier; English has adjective phrases and adverb phrases. Neither modifiers nor modifier phrases are usually required by a clause's syntax; they are optional, and help clarify or limit the extent of the meaning of the word or phrase they modify.
The adjective "green" in "a green tree" modifies and thus limits the meaning of the noun "tree" in that it cannot be "a deciduous tree in winter." In the same way, the adverb "kindly" modifies the past tense of the verb "let" in "she kindly let me borrow her scissors". An adverb may also modify an adjective, such as in "abjectly poor".
A premodifier is a modifier placed before the head (the modified component). A postmodifier is a modifier placed after the head. Example: "land (pre-modifier) mines in wartime (post-modifier)".
Adverbial clauses (or particle phrases) such as "of course", "as it were", etc., commenting on the rest of the sentence or what has gone before in a previous sentence, may also be classed as modifiers, as in "Of course, he was never one to be silent" or "Unfortunately, we arrived late." Understanding adverbial clauses and how they function in discourse is often very useful in interpreting subtle layers of meaning.
Another way of defining a modifier is that it, the adjective or adverb, is dependent on the part of the sentence it modifies, namely the noun or verb. Nouns and verbs are obligatory elements in that a complete sentence requires, minimally, a subject and a verb. Adjectives and adverbs, on the other hand, are optional elements. We can say, for example, "Dogs growl (noun + verb) or "Big dogs growl loudly" (adjective + noun + verb + adverb). Either is a grammatical sentence, because the adjective and adverb are not essential in forming a complete sentence, whereas the noun and verb are.
In compound nouns, the first of the two words so combined functions as a modifier, such as "elementary" in "elementary school", "mountain" in "mountain bike", etc.
The adjective "green" in "a green tree" modifies and thus limits the meaning of the noun "tree" in that it cannot be "a deciduous tree in winter." In the same way, the adverb "kindly" modifies the past tense of the verb "let" in "she kindly let me borrow her scissors". An adverb may also modify an adjective, such as in "abjectly poor".
A premodifier is a modifier placed before the head (the modified component). A postmodifier is a modifier placed after the head. Example: "land (pre-modifier) mines in wartime (post-modifier)".
Adverbial clauses (or particle phrases) such as "of course", "as it were", etc., commenting on the rest of the sentence or what has gone before in a previous sentence, may also be classed as modifiers, as in "Of course, he was never one to be silent" or "Unfortunately, we arrived late." Understanding adverbial clauses and how they function in discourse is often very useful in interpreting subtle layers of meaning.
Another way of defining a modifier is that it, the adjective or adverb, is dependent on the part of the sentence it modifies, namely the noun or verb. Nouns and verbs are obligatory elements in that a complete sentence requires, minimally, a subject and a verb. Adjectives and adverbs, on the other hand, are optional elements. We can say, for example, "Dogs growl (noun + verb) or "Big dogs growl loudly" (adjective + noun + verb + adverb). Either is a grammatical sentence, because the adjective and adverb are not essential in forming a complete sentence, whereas the noun and verb are.
In compound nouns, the first of the two words so combined functions as a modifier, such as "elementary" in "elementary school", "mountain" in "mountain bike", etc.
Empty complementizers
Some analyses allow for the possibility of invisible or "empty" complementizers. An empty complementizer is a hypothetical phonologically null category with a function parallel to that of visible complementizers such as that and for. Its existence in English has been proposed based on the following type of alternation:
He hopes you go ahead with the speech
He hopes that you go ahead with the speech
Because that can be inserted between the verb and the embedded clause, the original sentence without a visible complementizer would be reanalyzed as
He hopes øC you go ahead with the speech
This suggests another interpretation of the earlier "how" sentence:
I read in the paper øC [it's going to be cold today]
where "how" serves as a specifier to the empty complementizer. This allows for a consistent analysis of another troublesome alternation:
The man øC [I saw yesterday] ate my lunch!
The man øC [I saw yesterday] ate my lunch!
The man that [I saw yesterday] ate my lunch!
where "OP" represents an invisible interrogative known as an operator.
In a more general sense, the proposed empty complementizer parallels the suggestion of near-universal empty determiners.
He hopes you go ahead with the speech
He hopes that you go ahead with the speech
Because that can be inserted between the verb and the embedded clause, the original sentence without a visible complementizer would be reanalyzed as
He hopes øC you go ahead with the speech
This suggests another interpretation of the earlier "how" sentence:
I read in the paper
where "how" serves as a specifier to the empty complementizer. This allows for a consistent analysis of another troublesome alternation:
The man
The man
The man
where "OP" represents an invisible interrogative known as an operator.
In a more general sense, the proposed empty complementizer parallels the suggestion of near-universal empty determiners.
Complementizer
A complementizer, as used in linguistics (especially generative grammar), is a syntactic category (part of speech) roughly equivalent to the term subordinating conjunction in traditional grammar. For example, the word that is generally called a complementizer in English sentences like Mary believes that it is raining. The term "complementiser" was apparently first used by Rosenbaum (1967).
The standard abbreviation for complementizer is C. The complementizer is widely held to be the syntactic head of a full clause, which is therefore often represented by the abbreviation CP (for complementizer phrase). Evidence that the complementizer functions as the head of its clause includes the fact that it is commonly the last element in a clause in languages like Korean or Japanese, in which other heads follow their complements, and always first in "head-initial" languages such as English.
It is common for the complementizers of a language to develop historically from other syntactic categories (a process known as grammaticalization). Across the languages of the world, it is especially common for determiners to be used as complementizers (e.g. English that). Another frequent source of complementizers is the class of interrogative words. It is especially common for a form that otherwise means what to be borrowed as a complementizer, but other interrogative words are often used as well; e.g. colloquial English I read in the paper how it's going to be cold today, with unstressed how roughly equivalent to that). English for in sentences like I would prefer for there to be a table in the corner shows a preposition that has developed into a complementizer. (The sequence for there in this sentence is clearly not a prepositional phrase.) In many languages of West Africa and South Asia, the form of the complementizer can be related to the verb say. In these languages, the Complementizer is also called Quotative. The quotative performs many extended functions in these languages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementizer
The standard abbreviation for complementizer is C. The complementizer is widely held to be the syntactic head of a full clause, which is therefore often represented by the abbreviation CP (for complementizer phrase). Evidence that the complementizer functions as the head of its clause includes the fact that it is commonly the last element in a clause in languages like Korean or Japanese, in which other heads follow their complements, and always first in "head-initial" languages such as English.
It is common for the complementizers of a language to develop historically from other syntactic categories (a process known as grammaticalization). Across the languages of the world, it is especially common for determiners to be used as complementizers (e.g. English that). Another frequent source of complementizers is the class of interrogative words. It is especially common for a form that otherwise means what to be borrowed as a complementizer, but other interrogative words are often used as well; e.g. colloquial English I read in the paper how it's going to be cold today, with unstressed how roughly equivalent to that). English for in sentences like I would prefer for there to be a table in the corner shows a preposition that has developed into a complementizer. (The sequence for there in this sentence is clearly not a prepositional phrase.) In many languages of West Africa and South Asia, the form of the complementizer can be related to the verb say. In these languages, the Complementizer is also called Quotative. The quotative performs many extended functions in these languages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementizer
Adverbial phrase
An adverbial phrase is a linguistic term for a phrase with an adverb as head. The term is used in syntax.
Adverbial phrases can consist of a single adverb or more than one. Extra adverbs are called intensifiers. An adverbial phrase can modify a verb phrase, an adjectival phrase or an entire clause.
Examples of adverbial phrases in English:
* oddly enough
* very nicely
* quickly
Adverbial phrases can consist of a single adverb or more than one. Extra adverbs are called intensifiers. An adverbial phrase can modify a verb phrase, an adjectival phrase or an entire clause.
Examples of adverbial phrases in English:
* oddly enough
* very nicely
* quickly
Adverbial function
Other syntactic phrase types can also function adverbially, like the prepositional and verb participle phrases below:
* in a happy way
* happily working
* in a happy way
* happily working
Adverbial clause
An adverbial clause is a clause that functions as an adverb. In other words, it contains subject (explicit or implied) and predicate, and it modifies a verb.
* I saw Joe when I went to the store. (explicit subject I)
* He sat quietly in order to appear polite. (implied subject he)
According to Sidney Greenbaum and Randolph Quirk, adverbial clauses function mainly as adjuncts or disjuncts. In those functions they are like adverbial phrases, but in their potentiality for greater explicitness, they are more often like prepositional phrases (Greenbaum and Quirk,1990):
* We left after the speeches ended.
* We left after the end of the speeches.
Contrast adverbial clauses with adverbial phrases, which do not contain a clause.
* I like to fly kites for fun.
* I saw Joe when I went to the store. (explicit subject I)
* He sat quietly in order to appear polite. (implied subject he)
According to Sidney Greenbaum and Randolph Quirk, adverbial clauses function mainly as adjuncts or disjuncts. In those functions they are like adverbial phrases, but in their potentiality for greater explicitness, they are more often like prepositional phrases (Greenbaum and Quirk,1990):
* We left after the speeches ended.
* We left after the end of the speeches.
Contrast adverbial clauses with adverbial phrases, which do not contain a clause.
* I like to fly kites for fun.
Kinds of adverbial clauses
kind of clause usual conjunction function example
time clauses when, before, after, since, while, as, until These clauses are used to say when something happens by referring to a period of time or to another event. Her father died when she was young.
conditional clauses if, unless These clauses are used to talk about a possible situation and its consequences. If they lose weight during an illness, they soon regain it afterwards.
purpose clauses in order to, so that, in order that These clauses are used to indicate the purpose of an action. They had to take some of his land so that they could extend the churchyard.
reason clauses because, since, as These clauses are used to indicate the reason for something. I couldn't feel anger against him because I liked him too much.
result clauses so that These clauses are used to indicate the result of something. My suitcase had become damaged on the journey home, so that the lid would not stay closed.
concessive clauses although, though, while These clauses are used to make two statements, one of which contrasts with the other or makes it seem surprising. I used to read a lot although I don't get much time for books now.
place clauses where, wherever These clauses are used to talk about the location or position of something. He said he was happy where he was.
clauses of manner as, like, the way These clauses are used to talk about someone's behaviour or the way something is done. I was never allowed to do things the way I wanted to do them.
(Sinclair, 1990)
time clauses when, before, after, since, while, as, until These clauses are used to say when something happens by referring to a period of time or to another event. Her father died when she was young.
conditional clauses if, unless These clauses are used to talk about a possible situation and its consequences. If they lose weight during an illness, they soon regain it afterwards.
purpose clauses in order to, so that, in order that These clauses are used to indicate the purpose of an action. They had to take some of his land so that they could extend the churchyard.
reason clauses because, since, as These clauses are used to indicate the reason for something. I couldn't feel anger against him because I liked him too much.
result clauses so that These clauses are used to indicate the result of something. My suitcase had become damaged on the journey home, so that the lid would not stay closed.
concessive clauses although, though, while These clauses are used to make two statements, one of which contrasts with the other or makes it seem surprising. I used to read a lot although I don't get much time for books now.
place clauses where, wherever These clauses are used to talk about the location or position of something. He said he was happy where he was.
clauses of manner as, like, the way These clauses are used to talk about someone's behaviour or the way something is done. I was never allowed to do things the way I wanted to do them.
(Sinclair, 1990)
Postpositional phrases
are usually found in head-final languages such as Basque, Estonian, Finnish, Japanese, and Tamil. The word or other morpheme that corresponds to an English preposition occurs after its complement, hence the name postposition. The following examples are from Japanese:
* mise ni ("to the store")
* ie kara ("from the house")
* hashi de ("with chopsticks" or "on the bridge")
And from Finnish, where postpositions have further developed into case endings:
* kauppaan ("to the store")
* talosta ("from the house")
* puikoilla ("with chopsticks")
Postpositional phrases generally act as complements and adjuncts of noun phrases and verb phrases.
* mise ni ("to the store")
* ie kara ("from the house")
* hashi de ("with chopsticks" or "on the bridge")
And from Finnish, where postpositions have further developed into case endings:
* kauppaan ("to the store")
* talosta ("from the house")
* puikoilla ("with chopsticks")
Postpositional phrases generally act as complements and adjuncts of noun phrases and verb phrases.
Adpositional phrase
n linguistics, an adpositional phrase is a general term that includes prepositional phrases (which are usually found in head-first languages like English) and postpositional phrases (usually found in head-final languages like Japanese). The difference between the two is simply one of word order.
Both types of adpositional phrases are a syntactic category: a phrase which is treated in certain ways as a unit by a language's rules of syntax. An adpositional phrase is composed of an adposition (in the head position, which is why it lends its name to the phrase) and usually a complement such as a noun phrase. ("Adposition" is similarly a generic term for either a preposition or a postposition.) These phrases generally act as complements and adjuncts of noun phrases and verb phrases.
Both types of adpositional phrases are a syntactic category: a phrase which is treated in certain ways as a unit by a language's rules of syntax. An adpositional phrase is composed of an adposition (in the head position, which is why it lends its name to the phrase) and usually a complement such as a noun phrase. ("Adposition" is similarly a generic term for either a preposition or a postposition.) These phrases generally act as complements and adjuncts of noun phrases and verb phrases.
Adjectival phrase
An adjectival phrase (AP) is a phrase with an adjective (e.g., full of toys). Adjectival phrases may occur as postmodifiers to a noun (a bin full of toys), or as predicatives to a verb (the bin is full of toys).
Adjectival phrases give more detail to a noun. They can become arbitrarily long, and in some languages they tend to become quite complex
Examples
# ed (rose)
# red, big (rose)
# red, big, reminding me of my former love (rose)
# red, big, filling my senses with sorrow, reminding me of my former love (rose)
Adjectival phrases give more detail to a noun. They can become arbitrarily long, and in some languages they tend to become quite complex
Examples
# ed (rose)
# red, big (rose)
# red, big, reminding me of my former love (rose)
# red, big, filling my senses with sorrow, reminding me of my former love (rose)
Determiner phrase
n linguistics, a determiner phrase (DP) is a syntactic category, a phrase headed by a determiner. In English and many other languages, determiner phrases have a noun phrase as a complement.[1][2] This is opposed to the alternative view that determiners are specifiers of the noun phrase. The overwhelming majority of grammarians today adopt the DP hypothesis in some form or other.
Determiners govern the referential or quantificational properties of the noun phrases they embed. The idea that noun phrases preceded by determiners are determiner phrases is known as the DP hypothesis. The DP hypothesis goes very well with the theory of generalized quantifiers, which is the prevailing theory of the semantics of determiners.[3][4]
Determiners govern the referential or quantificational properties of the noun phrases they embed. The idea that noun phrases preceded by determiners are determiner phrases is known as the DP hypothesis. The DP hypothesis goes very well with the theory of generalized quantifiers, which is the prevailing theory of the semantics of determiners.[3][4]
Determiner (function)
For the word class, see Determiner (class).
A determiner is a noun modifier that expresses the reference of a noun or noun phrase in the context, including quantity, rather than attributes expressed by adjectives. This function is usually performed by articles, demonstratives, possessive determiners, quantifiers, cardinal numbers, or ordinal numbers.
In most Indo-European languages, determiners are either independent words or clitics that precede the rest of the noun phrase. In other languages, determiners are prefixed or suffixed to the noun, or even change the noun's form. For example, in Swedish bok "book", when definite, becomes boken "the book" (suffixed definite articles are common in Scandinavian languages).
In some constructions, such as those which use the names of school subjects ("Physics uses mathematics"), a determiner is not used. This condition is called the "zero determiner" instance.
X-bar theory contends that every noun has a corresponding determiner. In a case where a noun does not have a pronounced determiner, X-bar theory hypothesizes the presence of a zero article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determiner_%28function%29
A determiner is a noun modifier that expresses the reference of a noun or noun phrase in the context, including quantity, rather than attributes expressed by adjectives. This function is usually performed by articles, demonstratives, possessive determiners, quantifiers, cardinal numbers, or ordinal numbers.
In most Indo-European languages, determiners are either independent words or clitics that precede the rest of the noun phrase. In other languages, determiners are prefixed or suffixed to the noun, or even change the noun's form. For example, in Swedish bok "book", when definite, becomes boken "the book" (suffixed definite articles are common in Scandinavian languages).
In some constructions, such as those which use the names of school subjects ("Physics uses mathematics"), a determiner is not used. This condition is called the "zero determiner" instance.
X-bar theory contends that every noun has a corresponding determiner. In a case where a noun does not have a pronounced determiner, X-bar theory hypothesizes the presence of a zero article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determiner_%28function%29
English determiners
The determiner function is usually performed by the determiner class of words, but can also be filled by words from other entities:
1. Basic determiners are words from the determiner class (e.g., the girl, those pencils) or determiner phrases (e.g., almost all people, more than two problems).
2. Subject determiners are possessive noun phrases (e.g., his daughter, the boy's friend).
3. Minor determiners are plain NPs (what colour carpet, this size shoes) and prepositional phrases (under twenty meters, up to twelve people)
1. Basic determiners are words from the determiner class (e.g., the girl, those pencils) or determiner phrases (e.g., almost all people, more than two problems).
2. Subject determiners are possessive noun phrases (e.g., his daughter, the boy's friend).
3. Minor determiners are plain NPs (what colour carpet, this size shoes) and prepositional phrases (under twenty meters, up to twelve people)
Types of conjunctions
Coordinating conjunctions, also called coordinators, are conjunctions that join two items of equal syntactic importance. As an example, the traditional view holds that the English coordinating conjunctions are for, and, nor, but, or, yet, and so (which form the mnemonic FANBOYS). Note that there are good reasons to argue that only and, but, and or are prototypical coordinators, while nor is very close. So and yet share more properties with conjunctive adverbs (e.g., however), and "for...lack(s) most of the properties distinguishing prototypical coordinators from prepositions with clausal complements" [1]. Furthermore, there are other ways to coordinate independent clauses in English.
Correlative conjunctions are pairs of conjunctions which work together to coordinate two items. English examples include both … and, either … or, neither … nor, and not (only) … but (… also).
Subordinating conjunctions, also called subordinators, are conjunctions that introduce a dependent clause. English examples include after, although, if, unless, and because. Another way for remembering is the mnemonic "BISAWAWE": "because", "if", "so that", "after", "when", "although", "while", and "even though". Complementizers can be considered to be special subordinating conjunctions that introduce complement clauses (e.g., "I wonder whether he'll be late. I hope that he'll be on time").
In many verb-final languages, subordinate clauses must precede the main clause on which they depend. The equivalents to the subordinating conjunctions of non-verb-final languages like English are either
* clause-final conjuctions (e.g. in Japanese) or;
* suffixes attached to the verb and not separate words[2]
Correlative conjunctions are pairs of conjunctions which work together to coordinate two items. English examples include both … and, either … or, neither … nor, and not (only) … but (… also).
Subordinating conjunctions, also called subordinators, are conjunctions that introduce a dependent clause. English examples include after, although, if, unless, and because. Another way for remembering is the mnemonic "BISAWAWE": "because", "if", "so that", "after", "when", "although", "while", and "even though". Complementizers can be considered to be special subordinating conjunctions that introduce complement clauses (e.g., "I wonder whether he'll be late. I hope that he'll be on time").
In many verb-final languages, subordinate clauses must precede the main clause on which they depend. The equivalents to the subordinating conjunctions of non-verb-final languages like English are either
* clause-final conjuctions (e.g. in Japanese) or;
* suffixes attached to the verb and not separate words[2]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)