| Author |
Message |
Curious G.
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 7:16 am
Post subject: Complement or Adjunct? |
|
|
What do you think is the function of the _that_ clause in the following
sentence?
(a) The fact that he is absent annoys me.
Does "that he is absent" modify "the fact" (like a relative clause as
in (b) below), or complement "the fact" (similar to the _that_ clause
as in (c) below?
(b) This is the fact that I hate most.
(c) I think that he is absent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
R J Valentine
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 7:16 am
Post subject: Re: Complement or Adjunct? |
|
|
On 31 May 2005 21:07:53 -0700 Curious G. <jonplus@gmail.com> wrote:
} What do you think is the function of the _that_ clause in the following
} sentence?
}
} (a) The fact that he is absent annoys me.
}
} Does "that he is absent" modify "the fact" (like a relative clause as
} in (b) below), or complement "the fact" (similar to the _that_ clause
} as in (c) below?
}
} (b) This is the fact that I hate most.
} (c) I think that he is absent.
For real? Neither one. It's the subject of the sentence. The "The fact"
is a big nothing, a clearing of the throat, a tapping of the microphone.
Clue: Which one would you leave out if you had your druthers? Do you lose
anything by leaving it out?
--
R. J. Valentine <mailto:rj@theWorld.com> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CyberCypher
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 7:17 am
Post subject: Re: Complement or Adjunct? |
|
|
"Curious G." <jonplus@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | What do you think is the function of the _that_ clause in the
following sentence?
(a) The fact that he is absent annoys me.
Does "that he is absent" modify "the fact" (like a relative clause
as in (b) below), or complement "the fact" (similar to the _that_
clause as in (c) below?
(b) This is the fact that I hate most.
(c) I think that he is absent.
|
It's a relative clause. The difference between a and b is that "the
fact that X" is the subject in a and the predicate nominative in b.
--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
R J Valentine
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 7:17 am
Post subject: Re: Complement or Adjunct? |
|
|
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 05:27:40 +0000 (UTC) CyberCypher <cybercypher@19--16-25-13-01-03.com> wrote:
} "Curious G." <jonplus@gmail.com> wrote:
}
}> What do you think is the function of the _that_ clause in the
}> following sentence?
}>
}> (a) The fact that he is absent annoys me.
}>
}> Does "that he is absent" modify "the fact" (like a relative clause
}> as in (b) below), or complement "the fact" (similar to the _that_
}> clause as in (c) below?
}>
}> (b) This is the fact that I hate most.
}> (c) I think that he is absent.
}
} It's a relative clause. The difference between a and b is that "the
} fact that X" is the subject in a and the predicate nominative in b.
Oh, there's a little more difference than that.
--
R. J. Valentine <mailto:rj@theWorld.com> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anita
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 6:05 pm
Post subject: Re: Complement or Adjunct? |
|
|
"The fact" plus a "that"-clause is often used as a subject instead of of a
simple "that"- clause.( It's less formal)
(Collins Cobuild English Grammar)
"Curious G." <jonplus@gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
1117598873.914752.302930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | What do you think is the function of the _that_ clause in the following
sentence?
(a) The fact that he is absent annoys me.
Does "that he is absent" modify "the fact" (like a relative clause as
in (b) below), or complement "the fact" (similar to the _that_ clause
as in (c) below?
(b) This is the fact that I hate most.
(c) I think that he is absent.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CyberCypher
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:26 am
Post subject: Re: Complement or Adjunct? |
|
|
Robert Lieblich wrote:
| Quote: | CyberCypher wrote:
"Curious G." <jonplus@gmail.com> wrote:
What do you think is the function of the _that_ clause in the
following sentence?
(a) The fact that he is absent annoys me.
Does "that he is absent" modify "the fact" (like a relative
clause as in (b) below), or complement "the fact" (similar to
the _that_ clause as in (c) below?
(b) This is the fact that I hate most.
(c) I think that he is absent.
It's a relative clause. The difference between a and b is that
"the fact that X" is the subject in a and the predicate
nominative in b.
At the risk of actually answering the original question, might I
venture the suggestion that the "that" clause in sentence (a) is
in apposition to "the fact"? Compare "My wife Gladys ... " The
"that" clause in sentence (b) is an adjectival clause modifying
"fact."
|
In fact, in both a and b the "that" clause is in apposition to "the
fact", and as appositive clauses, they differ from relative clauses
because (Quirk et al., 17.26, p. 1260):
(1) "that" is a particle and not a member of the clause structure;
(2) the nonrestrictive appositive clause has the same introductory
item as the restrictive, ie "that" (cf. 17.33);
(3) the head of the NP must be a general abstract noun such as "that,
idea, reply", etc.
| Quote: | The "that" clause in sentence (c) is a substantive clause
functioning as direct object."
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I do ask that any
correction take the form of specifying the actual function of the
clause in the sentence.
|
I don't think I corrected anything. I merely avoided using
"complement" and "adjunct", useless words for non-linguists and
grammarians, AFAICT, especially when the first means:
[W3NID}
2 : a phrasal category (as a noun phrase or sentence) that is
combined with a lexical head (as a verb) or a function word to form a
larger constituent
and the second:
[W3NID]
3 : a word or word group that qualifies, amplifies, or completes the
meaning of another word or other words and is not itself one of the
principal structural elements in its sentence *in the sentence *most
children eat heartily*, most is an adjunct to the subject children,
and heartily is an adjunct to the predicate verb eat*
and "adjunct accusative" = "objective complement" [W3NID].
I think I did mention the function: relative clause, and the
function: subject and predicate nominative. I may have been wrong all
three times, but I notice that you didn't correct me, so I must have
been right. That you call the relative clause "an adjectival clause
modifying 'fact'" adds only another layer of abstruseness.
Why is it necessary to label this clause "adjectival"? (I'll answer
my own question here because my first answer --- now deleted --- was
an admission of ignorance, so I took the trouble to inform myself by
checking out Quirk et al.) Because some relative clauses are actually
adverbial, e.g. "This is the table that the boy hid under", in which
sentence the relative pronoun (Quirk et al., 17.17, p. 1252) is a
complement of the preposition "under".
| Quote: | Thank you all so very much.
|
I don't disagree with you at all, Bob, but I figure that if someone
has the nerve to ask whether a phrase or clause is "a complement or
an adjunct", then he damned well can figure out the function for
himself when told that it's a relative clause, which is always in
apposition to the NP to which it is related by the "that" (in this
case).
We can also get into a terminological discussion about the
differences and similiarities between "complementation",
"adjunction", and "modification", but I don't want to, except to say
that both complements and adjuncts seem to me to "modify" anything to
which they are attached, so it is not at all informative to attempt
to distinguish between "to complement" and "to modify".
As much as I love grammar, I don't love the abstruse terminology of
grammarians and linguists. Telling someone that a "that" clause is a
complement or an adjunct[1] doesn't tell me a whole hell of a lot.
And I gather that you are of the same opinion: you didn't use either
one of those words.
NOTE:
[1]
Here is what the Lexicon of Linguistics says about "complement":
[quote: http://www2.let.uu.nl/UiL-OTS/Lexicon/]
Complement
SYNTAX: YP in [H' H YP], where H is a head and H' the projection of
H. According to X-bar theory, the complement of a head X0 is defined
either as a position attached or adjoined to X', or as a sister of
X0. Thus, in configuration (i), either A and B are complements of X0,
or just B (the sister of X0).
(i) X'
/|
/ |
A X'
/|
/ |
B X0
Sometimes, the complement of a head X0 is equated with its internal
argument(s).
LIT. Chomsky, N. (1986a)
Chomsky, N. (1981)
Williams, E. (1980)
And here is what it says about "adjunct":
| Quote: |
Adjunct
SYNTAX: a constituent in an adjoined position.
EXAMPLE: in [X Y [X ...]] Y is "Chomsky -adjoined" to X. Usually the
term 'adjunct' refers to base-generated adjuncts only.
|
It doesn't have an entry for "adjective" much less "adjectival
clause".
I don't know about you, but I don't have the time to try to figure
out what all this means in plain English.
--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Lieblich
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 6:10 am
Post subject: Re: Complement or Adjunct? |
|
|
CyberCypher wrote:
| Quote: |
"Curious G." <jonplus@gmail.com> wrote:
What do you think is the function of the _that_ clause in the
following sentence?
(a) The fact that he is absent annoys me.
Does "that he is absent" modify "the fact" (like a relative clause
as in (b) below), or complement "the fact" (similar to the _that_
clause as in (c) below?
(b) This is the fact that I hate most.
(c) I think that he is absent.
It's a relative clause. The difference between a and b is that "the
fact that X" is the subject in a and the predicate nominative in b.
|
At the risk of actually answering the original question, might I
venture the suggestion that the "that" clause in sentence (a) is in
apposition to "the fact"? Compare "My wife Gladys ... " The "that"
clause in sentence (b) is an adjectival clause modifying "fact." The
"that" clause in sentence (c) is a substantive clause functioning as
direct object."
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I do ask that any correction
take the form of specifying the actual function of the clause in the
sentence.
Thank you all so very much.
--
Bob Lieblich
The Gutsy Grammarian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:56 pm
Post subject: Re: Complement or Adjunct? |
|
|
Robert Lieblich wrote:
| Quote: | CyberCypher wrote:
"Curious G." <jonplus@gmail.com> wrote:
What do you think is the function of the _that_ clause in the
following sentence?
(a) The fact that he is absent annoys me.
Does "that he is absent" modify "the fact" (like a relative
clause
as in (b) below), or complement "the fact" (similar to the _that_
clause as in (c) below?
(b) This is the fact that I hate most.
(c) I think that he is absent.
It's a relative clause. The difference between a and b is that
"the
fact that X" is the subject in a and the predicate nominative in
b.
At the risk of actually answering the original question, might I
venture the suggestion that the "that" clause in sentence (a) is in
apposition to "the fact"? Compare "My wife Gladys ... " The
"that"
clause in sentence (b) is an adjectival clause modifying "fact."
The
"that" clause in sentence (c) is a substantive clause functioning
as
direct object."
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I do ask that any
correction
take the form of specifying the actual function of the clause in
the
sentence.
Thank you all so very much.
|
You're right, as usual. I'd add that (c) is indirect speech --
"speech" here includes thought. I'd also add that if one finds
oneself writing "the fact that", it may be time to stop and rethink:
if "That he is absent annoys me" seems to falute too highly, "His
absence annoys me" is available, as is "He's never here, and that
pisses me off". It has been said of my brother that he is never in
the same place once.
--
Mike,
Gusty grammarian. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in