Search results for 'tag:Adjuncts' matching tag 'Adjuncts'

Are noun adjunct modifiers accepted in current English usage?

Anonymous — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:47:58 GMT

Are noun adjunct modifiers accepted in current English usage?

Noun adjunct modifiers which means modifiers such as "rotten" in "rotten apple taste".

Thanks.

Re: nations' efforts or nations efforts

wholegrain — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 22:52:42 GMT

NO, THERE IS!

Muhahahahahahaha!

Proof:

Noun adjuncts were traditionally mostly singular (e.g. "trouser press") except when there were lexical restrictions (e.g. "arms race"), but there is a recent trend towards more use of plural ones, especially in UK English. Many of these can also be and/or were originally interpreted and spelled as plural possessives (for example "chemicals' agency", "writers' conference", "Rangers' hockey game")[2], but they are now often written without the apostrophe although this is criticised by some authorities.

Re: preposition after "lash out"

CalifJim — Thu, 08 May 2008 22:21:20 GMT

Well, yes. on can be used in those cases, but then on can also be used for a variety of other adjuncts.

She lashes out on Mondays.

And so can many other prepositions, including at with an adjunct.

She lashes out in anger.

She lashes out for many reasons.

She lashes out with glee.

She lashes out at noon.

That's not the same as the usage with the complement of lash out at (+ person). But I think you already knew that.

Re: conjunctive adverbs

miriam — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 05:13:39 GMT

Conjunctive adverbs, or simply "conjuncts", do exist, and are different from sentence adverbials.These conjuncts link sentences or paragraphs and usually appear at the beginning of a sentence.

The adverbials Anonymous mentioned in their first post, those that tell us something about the verb (why, when, where, how, what for, etc.) are adjuncts (as opposed to conjuncts. Unlike conjuncts, adjuncts are part of the structure of the sentence (from the point of view of syntax); they will appear in the predicate. You also have âsentence adverbialsâ, which modify an entire clause or sentence and are placed, usually, at the beginning of the sentence).

Adverb: a part of speech whose main function is that of modifying a verb, an adjective or another adverb.

Adverbial: a syntactic function that may be realised by a number of structures (and even single words): adverbs, prepositional phrases, clauses (both finite and non-finite), noun phrases.

Both conjuncts and adjuncts are adverbials, only they are of different types.

Most conjuncts are adverbs or prepositional phrases: however, consequently, yet (meaning âhoweverâ), firstly, lastly, anyway, nonetheless, nevertheless, meanwhile, by the way, on the one hand, on the other hand, to begin with, to sum up, in short, etc. Even some conjunctions can function as conjuncts, as long as they appear at the very beginning of the sentence (for example âandâ and âbutâ). again, these are not part of either the subject or the predicate, but remain outside the structure of the sentence and act as links to the previous sentence/s or paragraph.

Miriam

Re: Is it a subject relative?

miriam — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 05:02:36 GMT

Hello.

Relative clauses can only be (from a syntactic point of view) either post-modifiers of nouns/pronouns, or sentence modifiers. They are never objects; they don't modify verbs.

What can be subjects or objects, WITHIN the relative clauses themselves, are the relative pronouns used (who, that, which, etc.).

You provided the following examples: "The girl laughed at the boy who is bigger than her" and "The boy hit the girl who slept".

Both sentences could use some changes, but I will concentrate on what you're asking only.

In the first sentence, "who is bigger than her" is a restrictive relative clause acting as post-modifier of the noun "boy". The relative pronoun "who" is the subject of the relative clause.

Your second sentence is another example of the relative pronoun as subject of the relative clause. The clause is "who slept", with "who" as its subject.

Here are a couple of examples of relative clauses in which the relative pronoun acts as object:

1. "Where is the flower-pot (that I gave you last month)?" [that = direct object] (the subject of the clause is "I")

2. "The books (that are on the table) are Paul's." [that = subject (the books)]

3. "You don't know the man (to whom my sister sold her car)." [to whom = indirect object] (the subject of the clause is "my sister")

There are also cases in which the relative pronoun is preceded by a preposition but you're not in the presence of an indirect object. In such cases, what you'll have is an adjunct (or adverbial), as in the following sentence:

4. "Chemistry is a subject which I've always had problems with." [here, "with which" is neither subject nor object, but an adjunct/adverbial]

You can remove "which" (though not the preposition) from sentence #4, and the sentence will still make sense: "Chemistry is a subject I've always had problems with".

One good way of telling whether the relative pronoun is acting as object (direct or indirect) or subject in the relative clause is trying to remove the pronoun in question from the clause. If you do, and the sentence still makes sense, that will most probably mean that the relative pronoun is the object of the clause (watch out for adjuncts, though). If you can't remove the pronoun, that will mean it's the subject (of the relative clause). Have a look at my examples and give this a try. You won't have a correct sentence in #2 if you remove the relative proboun, but you can certainly remove it in the other three examples. You'll have to make a minor change in sentence #3, though.

See if you can do it and what you come up with.

I hope this helps.

Miriam.

Re: Does "John paid a dollar" sound good?

Anonymous — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 03:49:25 GMT

In the sentence "John paid a dollar for a head of lettuce", is "for a head of lettuce" a complement or adjunct? Actually I am drawing a tree diagram for the sentence "It strikes me as a good idea." I didn't learn how to draw the tree for a sentence having a ditransitive verb. But I have the tree drawn for "John paid a dollar for a head of lettuce" in the textbook for the sentence. They treat "for a head of lettuce" as a PP to the V'. So if "for a head of lettuce" is a complement, I wonder if I can do the same thing to "as a good idea" in "It strikes me as a good idea." Thank you so much:)

Re: Does "John paid a dollar" sound good?

CalifJim — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 00:28:45 GMT

Anonymous
I am a linguistics student.

Anonymous
I have a question about if "for a head of a lettuce" is a complement or adjunct. According to what we learned, if it is obligatory, it is a complement.

1. An isolated phrase, like "for a head of lettuce", is neither a complement nor an adjunct. You must show it in a sentence. In one sentence it may be an adjunct; whereas in another sentence it may be a complement.

2. I don't know what method your teacher is using, but whether a constituent is obligatory or optional is not a criterion for deciding whether it's a complement or an adjunct. Adjuncts are certainly optional, but complements may be either obligatory or optional -- though most are obligatory.

Example: I paid -- no complements, no adjuncts. I paid a dollar -- a dollar is a complement (optional). I paid for a head of lettuce. -- paid for can be treated as a phrasal verb and a head of lettuce as a complement. I paid last month -- last month is an adjunct.

Example: I read (that novel) for three hours -- that novel is a complement (optional), for three hours is an adjunct.

Does "John paid a dollar" sound good?

Anonymous — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 17:52:25 GMT

Hi, all. I am a linguistic student. I have a question about if "for a head of a lettuce" is a complement or adjunct. According to what we learned, if it is obligatory, it is a complement. so does "John paid a dollar" sound good to native speakers. Thank you.

Re: Clauses

CalifJim — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 01:39:28 GMT

I don't see how "began to slip" can be an adjunct of any kind since it's the main verb phrase.

The ladder began to slip.
I was standing on it.

So which I was standing on is a relative clause.

CJ

Re: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CORE ARGUMENTS AND INTERNAL ARGUMENTS

CalifJim — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 08:00:58 GMT

core arguments = required arguments

    external argument = subject
    internal argument can be: direct object, indirect object, prep phrase
      (internal arguments = complements)

oblique arguments = optional arguments
(oblique arguments = adjuncts)
___________

Examples:

Mary gave John the letter yesterday.

core arguments:
external: Mary
internal: indirect object: John
                direct object:    the letter

oblique argument: yesterday.
_________

Susan put the soup in the bowl with a spoon.

core arguments:
   external: Susan
   internal: direct object: the soup
                 prep phrase: locative: in the bowl

oblique argument: with a spoon.

CJ