Search results for 'tag:Noun phrases tag:American English' matching tags 'Noun phrases' and 'American English'

Re: participle as a subject

CalifJim — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 01:48:17 GMT

Cool Breeze
I am walking. Walking is an adjective?

"allegedly" See below.

From Introduction to the Grammar of English (Huddleston, Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics)

... participles are said to be 'verbal adjectives'.

First example given:

He was telling the truth.

Later:

... a present participle ... allegedly has adjectival properties. I say 'allegedly' because it is difficult to see any significant functional resemblance to an adjective ... [in the first example on the list].

He goes on to say that the -ing words in such examples are clearly verbs, while in other contexts they are clearly adjectives.

_____

With respect to the original question then, I suppose the more accurate description is that participles are either parts of verb phrases or are adjectives. In either case, a participle -- being verb or adjective -- cannot be the subject of a sentence unless it is in the cleft sentence structure, as illustrated earlier in the thread by GG. I think that's the only structure that allows a participle or an adjective to be promoted to the status of a noun phrase so it can be a subject.

At least that's my claim. Maybe someone can provide a counterexample. That would be instructive.

Edit:

'Destroyed' is the best description of that town.

Here a participle (adjective) is promoted to a noun and is the subject of the sentence. So there are cases other than the cleft sentence structure that allow it. Nevertheless, note the quotes. It works in the same way that anything in quotes can be promoted to subject:

'Xygneoowytoeyy' is a nonsense word.

'got into the truck' is not a complete sentence.

_____

Your question opens up a good many sticky points in the terminology. Do we (Can we) talk about certain structures by naming them without regard to their function in context? Or not? Probably not. Is love a noun or a verb? Only context will tell.

Cool Breeze
To hear him sing is an unforgettable experience.

to hear him sing is a sentence with a non-finite verb used as a noun phrase in a higher level sentence. The idea is that the terminological identity of a word or group of words may change depending on which level in a hierarchy of clauses it is considered. At the lowest level of the "tree", to hear is indeed an infinitive (a non-finite verb), but in the context of the whole sentence (higher in the hierarchical tree), to hear him sing is the subject of the main clause, is nominal in nature, and is called a noun phrase. (Infinitives are often nominal in nature, so this is not surprising; for example, [I want + noun phrase] can take either of these forms: I want some pizza. I want to sing.)

Cool Breeze
Using an infinitive as a subject may not be common in American English

Actually, infinitives are used in AmE as subjects. The location geographically or historically has nothing to do with it. But infinitives (and their complement(s), if any), taken together, can make noun phrases.

To be absolutely precise, it is a noun phrase (NP) that must be the subject of a sentence. I oversimplified by saying 'noun or pronoun'.

Re: from/that

Maya2 — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 19:50:32 GMT

New2grammar wrote:

I was pleased to discover that the rest of that first week wasn't much different from/than the first day.

Which is correct, from or than? Please explain. Thanks in advance.

Usage Note: Different from and different than are both common in British and American English. The construction different to is chiefly British. Since the 18th century, language critics have singled out different than as incorrect, though it is well attested in the works of reputable writers. According to traditional guidelines, from is used when the comparison is between two persons or things: My book is different from (not than) yours. Different than is more acceptably used, particularly in American usage, where the object of comparison is expressed by a full clause: The campus is different than it was 20 years ago. Different from may be used with a clause if the clause starts with a conjunction and so functions as a noun: The campus is different from how it was 20 years ago. Â· Sometimes people interpret a simple noun phrase following different than as elliptical for a clause, which allows for a subtle distinction in meaning between the two constructions. How different this seems from Paris suggests that the object of comparison is the city of Paris itself, whereas How different this seems than Paris suggests that the object of comparison is something like "the way things were in Paris" or "what happened in Paris."

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=different&r=66

Re: different from, than or to?

Inchoateknowledge — Mon, 27 Nov 2006 11:28:07 GMT

Usage Note: Different from and different than are both common in British and American English. The construction different to is chiefly British. Since the 18th century, language critics have singled out different than as incorrect, though it is well attested in the works of reputable writers. According to traditional guidelines, from is used when the comparison is between two persons or things: My book is different from (not than) yours. Different than is more acceptably used, particularly in American usage, where the object of comparison is expressed by a full clause: The campus is different than it was 20 years ago. Different from may be used with a clause if the clause starts with a conjunction and so functions as a noun: The campus is different from how it was 20 years ago. Â·Sometimes people interpret a simple noun phrase following different than as elliptical for a clause, which allows for a subtle distinction in meaning between the two constructions. How different this seems from Paris suggests that the object of comparison is the city of Paris itself, whereas How different this seems than Paris suggests that the object of comparison is something like âthe way things were in Parisâ or âwhat happened in Paris.â

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=different&r=66

Re: Different than?

Extravaganza — Fri, 20 May 2005 11:00:41 GMT

The phrases different from and different than are both common in British and American English. The British also use the construction different to. Since the 18th century, language critics have singled out different than as incorrect, though it is well attested in the works of reputable writers. If you want to follow traditional guidelines, use from when the comparison is between two persons or things: My book is different from (not than) yours. Different than is more acceptably used, particularly in American usage, where the object of comparison is expressed by a full clause: The campus is different than it was twenty years ago. You can use different from with a clause if the clause starts with a conjunction and so functions as a noun: The campus is different from how it was twenty years ago.
Sometimes people interpret a simple noun phrase following different than as elliptical for a clause, which allows for a subtle distinction in meaning between the two constructions. How different this seems from Paris suggests that the object of comparison is the city of Paris itself, whereas How different this seems than Paris suggests that the object of comparison is something like âthe way things were in Parisâ or âwhat happened in Paris.â
bartleby got the answer.