Search results for 'tag:Noun phrases tag:Clauses' matching tags 'Noun phrases' and 'Clauses'

Re: not / neither / nor

Anonymous — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 00:09:37 GMT

When looking up tricky constructions or words, one can often go to the dictionary to view its proper usage. For example, www.dictionary.com shows this definition and usage note for nor:

1. (used in negative phrases, esp. after neither, to introduce the second member in a series, or any subsequent member): Neither he nor I will be there. They won't wait for you, nor for me, nor for anybody.
2. (used to continue the force of a negative, as not, no, never, etc., occurring in a preceding clause): He left and I never saw him again, nor did I regret it.

So,

"Usage Note: When using neither in a balanced construction that negates two parts of a sentence, nor (not or) must be used in the second clause: She is neither able nor (not or) willing to go. Similarly, when negating the second of two negative independent clauses, nor (not or) must be used: He cannot find anyone now, nor does he expect to find anyone in the future; Jane will never compromise with Bill, nor will Bill compromise with Jane. Note that in these constructions, nor causes an inversion of the auxiliary verb and the subject (does he ... will Bill ...). However, when a verb is negated by not or never, and is followed by a verb phrase that is also to be negated (but not an entire clause), either or or nor can be used: He will not permit the change, or (or nor) even consider it. In noun phrases of the type no this or that, or is actually more common than nor: He has no experience or interest (less frequently nor interest) in chemistry. Or is also more common than nor when such a noun phrase, adjective phrase, or adverb phrase is introduced by not: He is not a philosopher or a statesman. They were not rich or happy. "

So, or is more common than nor, but nor is still acceptable (even if it sounds weird).
It further becomes clear that not...nor is acceptable when you look at the definition of neither, which is a conjunction for not either.

Re: Lack of emphasis on NPs in ESL

Anonymous — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 10:08:38 GMT

Moving away from writing and language fora for a moment, one study of noun phrases in ESL teaching and learning notes with this state of affairs:

"and have indicated that complex postmodifiers such as the relative clauses (RCs) in example (1) are rarely found in the spontaneous speech of ESL learners (e.g., Gass, 1979; 1994)."

<URL removed by mod.>

Speaking and listing to non-native ex-ESL/EFL students, have any of you reached the same or a similar conclusion?

Re: Noun phrases containing relative clauses...help!

Anonymous — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 23:30:30 GMT

actually "one thing I"d really miss" is the noun phrase acting as the subject of the sentence
the verb : is

Re: The verb complement in "John tends to get hungry."

ouyang — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 04:58:39 GMT

Actually, I do classify some infinitive phrases that follow the verbs "seem" and "appear" as subject complements. I'm not totally comfortable with that view, so I like to consider other options.

Also, I'm not fluent in Chinese, but I think that there is an important difference between its verb-verb complements and the verb-verbal phrase complements that begin with "tend" and "dare". Verb-verb complements are like phrasal verbs in that they combine as immediate constituents before they take objects. In phrases like, "tends to be late", "tends to say stupid things", and "dare to be different", I would say that the infinitves combine with their own complements before the infinitive phrase combines with the main verb. If this is true, then I think I need to correct my previous post because these infinitive phrases must be noun phrases functioning as objects.

I would say that the dependent clauses which follow "seem" and "appear" in sentences like, "It seems that he is confused" and "It appears that he fixed the computer" are noun clauses functioning as predicate nouns. The fact that a common noun can't be substituted for predicate nouns which follow these verbs is significant, but it doesn't matter. When verbal phrases follow these verbs, then the type of verb which forms the verbal shouldn't affect the function of the phrase. The verb phrases in the following sentences should have the same pattern, "He seems to be honest.", "He seems to be the owner.", and "He seems to eat a lot." Since these phrases could function as predicate nouns in sentences like, "The important thing is to be honest.", "The best job is to be the owner." and "My advice is to eat a lot.", I would say they are also predicate nouns when they follow "seem" and "appear". Different substitutions might imply that they are predicate adjectives. I wish there was a strong argument for classifying the infinitves which follow "seem" and "appear" as their immediate constituents, but I don't think there is.

'For example, although it is true to say that the noun group is the structure we choose for "the things" we want to talk about, it is not the only one.'

Peaceblinkfriend — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 09:35:18 GMT

For example, although it is true to say that the noun group is the structure we choose for the things we want to talk about, it is not the only one. Sometimes we want to talk about an event or an idea that is not easy to express in a noun group. Instead we can use a clause as the subject of another clause. e.g All I want is a holiday. (Quoted from the introduction of Collins COBUILD English Grammar )

I don't quite understand what it means by 'the things we want to talk about'. What is being referred to by 'the things'? For all it's worth, according to the glossary included in the grammar, a noun group is a group of words which acts as the subject, complement, or object of a clause, or as the object of a preposition. Also called nominal group or noun phrase.

Thank you

PBF

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: when to?

CalifJim — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:28:55 GMT

Taka
I think what the author is trying to say is 'when you change trains',

Yes, that's most likely the intent.

Taka
but is that 'when to' grammatically acceptable?

Not here. No. when to clauses are indirect questions, hence, they function as noun phrases:

I didn't know when to change trains.

Be sure to tell him when to change trains.

They don't function as adverbs:

*You have to walk when to change trains.

*Be sure to read the posted signs when to change trains.

Re: names and functions of non-finite clauses

Dawnstorm — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 09:10:32 GMT

Actually, "to find / that the house had been burgled," is a non-finite clause. The non-finite verb "to find" (infinitive) takes as its object a finite clause ("that the house has been burgled").

The object slot could have been filled with a noun phrase, or something:

She came home [to find / the dog on the bed].

The non-finite clause in question could also function as the subject of a sentence:

[To find that the house has been burgled] can't have been pleasant for her.

Re: gerund

Huevos — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 09:01:12 GMT

Cool Breeze
Having read is indeed a gerund in the sentence, a perfect gerund to be exact. There are lots of threads on the subject of the gerund.

Could you please explain how that is so? I saw "Mr. Doe having read the book many times" as a noun phrase of the second clause and "having read" as the verb phrase of the previous quote. How is it operating as a gerund?

Re: Is this sentence correct?

CalifJim — Mon, 12 May 2008 06:52:33 GMT

Again, you are just making a long noun phrase. The modifying clauses like which defines your lifestyle do not supply the necessary verb.

Here are some non-sentences like the ones you are making:

The boy who laughed. What about him? The boy who laughed did what?

You can change this to: The boy laughed. Or The boy who laughed was dressed in green.

The box that is in the corner. What about the box? The box that is in the corner is blue? is old?

You can change this to: The box is in the corner. Or The box that is in the corner is large.

You can make your phrase into a sentence:

Power, performance, luxury, and comfort define your lifestyle.