Search results for 'tag:Images tag:Clauses' matching tags 'Images' and 'Clauses'

Analyzing WH-questions the H&P CGEL way

Anonymous — Thu, 08 May 2008 22:18:39 GMT

Hi!

I am reading Huddleston & Pullum's CGEL, and I've run into a problem. I don't understand how to analyze WH-questions with both subject-auxiliary inversion and . Couldn't somebody help me out?

Let us take the sentence What did the Captain say? as an example. Here the Captain is obviously the subject. But what is the predicate? Is it say ___, with the gap as the object, or what is it?

This is the solution I've come to, but I'm at all sure it is not altogether wrong:

[Clause[Prenucleus:NP_i [Head:N What]] [Nucleus:Clause [Prenucleus:V_j did] [Nucleus:Clause [Subject:NP [Det:D the] [Head:N Captain]] [Predicate:VP [Predicator:GAP_j ___] [CatComp:Clause [Predicate:VP [Predicator:V say] [Object:GAP_i ___]]]]]]]

Looks totally weird to me. Any ideas?

//AC

Re: correct sentences 24/11

Teo — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 06:09:54 GMT

They won't smoke ever since they saw a film on lung cancer.

What does "won't" mean here?

Re: correct sentences 24/11

Teo — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 06:09:49 GMT

http://forums.eslcafe.com/student/viewtopic.php?t=22113&highlight=

comma before 'when'?

Futurehuman11 — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:50:17 GMT

This lifestyle eventually caught up with the young man with a bright future, and he was convicted of first-degree manslaughter when he killed his girlfriend in a car crash.

Should I use a comma before the bolded 'when'? 'When' isn't essential to the sentence, but I also heard that you should not use a comma when the subordinating conjuction of the dependent clause is not at the beginning of the sentence. HELP!

Re: Which one is correct? (conditional clause)

Goodman — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:56:34 GMT

Yoong Liat wrote:
Hi Goodman
I searched for 'run into troubles' but found 'run into trouble' instead. The following is just one of the extracts.

Oxford University Google Search

Oxford University > Search Oxford University > Search Results

powered by

Search the Web Search ox.ac.uk

Web Searched pages from ox.ac.uk for run into troubles. (0.06 seconds)

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
(If you run into trouble with this the simplest option is to abort the integral routine and try again!). You. may now have to adjust the slope of the ...
www.chem.ox.ac.uk/spectroscopy/nmr/PDFs/ac_user.PDF - Similar pages

Liat,

Fine, if you believe and insist that what you learned is true, I don't want you to change your opinion on my behalf.

I know you searched for "if you run into trouble...".Have you tried others? (when you..../ should you.../ in case you ...?

My point is, the book's answers don't always explain everything. In this case, "troubles" as in the plural context discussed, is just as valid as it's singular cousin.

One can have trouble with marriage, job and finance at the same time, so what is wrong with plurals, as in "having troubles"!

Re: Which one is correct? (conditional clause)

Yoong Liat — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:06:48 GMT

Hi Goodman

I searched for 'run into troubles' but found 'run into trouble' instead. The following is just one of the extracts.

Oxford University Google Search

Oxford University > Search Oxford University > Search Results


			powered by
Search the Web Search ox.ac.uk

Web

Searched pages from ox.ac.uk for run into troubles. (0.06 seconds)

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
(If you run into trouble with this the simplest option is to abort the integral routine and try again!). You. may now have to adjust the slope of the ...
www.chem.ox.ac.uk/spectroscopy/nmr/PDFs/ac_user.PDF - Similar pages

Re: That isn't saying much

Niuben5777 — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 01:14:07 GMT

Dear all,

Clive wrote:

Hi guys,

I have a trouble with understanding the clause "that isn't saying much." Does it have the same meaning with "So it is obviously."

This expression is often used when giving faint praise.

eg After 20 years, he was promoted to senior clerk, although that isn't saying much.

The idea here is that, after 20 years, he should have managed to get promoted to a higher level.

Best wishes, Clive

"I was probably the tallest person in the whole place â and that isn't saying much." Is use of "that isn't saying much" in this sentence to give faint praise?

Re: urgent

Cool Breeze — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 07:30:11 GMT

Belly wrote:
What's the best of three?

It's urgent that she phones the police

It's urgent that she phone the police

It's urgent that she should phone the police ?

Hi Belly

They are all equally good. By using the indicative (phones) you take a detached view of the matter. Both should and the subjunctive (phone) underline your personal opinion. To use should in a that-clause in this way is more British than American.

Cheers
CB

Re: "shall" and "will" for 18th century readers: interchangeable?

Intelligent Freak — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:43:23 GMT

Ok, I got it but I don't know how to put the link here so i'll just paste the context here. This was given by CalifJim as response to the subject "Conditional with Modal Verbs"...

Strictly speaking, the modals are not tensed. However, they developed historically from tensed verbs. Each group below shows a "historical present / past" pair.

can / could
shall / should
will / would
may / might
must - not paired

In modern English, any of these can be used in a single clause sentence, but when it occurs in just one of two or more clauses in the same sentence, it needs to be matched correctly with the tense in the other clause.

Typically, when the accompanying clause is an "if" clause, the historical present tense forms go with present tense verbs, and historical past tense forms go with past tense verbs. However, "could" and "might", meaning "may" ("it is possible"), can be used with present tense verbs (as well as with past tense verbs). "should" has lost most of its force as a past tense and is better thought of as a present tense form in modern English, meaning "it is advisable". ("shall" is the least used of the modals shown above.) The result of all these historical changes is that in modern English we have far more choices in sentences with a present point of view than in those with a past point of view.

With this in mind we have:

If she has [present] time, she [can, could, (shall), should, will, may, might, must] go to the party. [not "would']

If she had [past] time, she [could, would, might] go to the party. [not "should"]

For reported speech we have the pairs:

He says that he [can, could, (shall), should, will, would, may, might, must] go to the party.

He said that he [could, could, (shall), should, would, would, might, might, must] go to the party.

Note how "can", "will", and "may" are restricted to the present, and the corresponding forms "could", "would", and "might" are used to report "can" or "could", "will" or "would", or "may" or "might" in the past.

CJ

To Wuthering Heights , I hope I was able to help.

Re: which or in which

Philip — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 14:26:36 GMT

Angliholic wrote:

But then emerged bizarre stories about the manner which/in which the first astronaut had provided for cross-country driving without rest stops.

Should I use which or in which here and why? Thanks.

In which: one does something in a particular manner, and we keep whatever preposition for the relative clause.