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

Re: Relative clause versus predicate nominative

CalifJim — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 03:06:55 GMT

The dealership that sold more cars eded up losing more money. =adjective clause

My trouble was that they had never been there before=predicate nominative (noun phrase)

Question: What type of pronoun is that in the second sentence? It's not a pronoun because it doesn't take the place of a noun. It's called a complementizer.
Question: Will a relative pronoun in an adjective clause always immediately follow the noun and modify that noun?No, but it usually does. Here are some exceptions.

The book the cover of which is green can be found next to the table under which the cat is lying.

The first which refers back to the book. The second which refers back to the table.

Question: Will the that in the predicate nominative (second sentence) always immediately follow a verb and modify the subject? If it's a predicate nominative, yes, it has to follow a form of some linking verb, usually the verb to be. Not always immediately, however:

My trouble was [most likely / almost certainly / undoubtedly] that they had never been there before.

Relative clause versus predicate nominative

Eddie88 — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 00:46:01 GMT

Hi,

1)

Question: A relative clause and adjective clause are the same thing, correct?

2)

The dealership that sold more cars eded up losing more money. =adjective clause

My trouble was that they had never been there before=predicate nominative (noun phrase)

Question: What type of pronoun is that in the second sentence?

Question: Will a relative pronoun in an adjective clause always immediately follow the noun and modify that noun?

Question: Will the that in the predicate nominative (second sentence) always immediately follow a verb and modify the subject?

Thanks.

Re: Help please! Subordinate or main clause

Eddie88 — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 12:45:48 GMT

Hi, I have just two sall questions from your detailed analysis. The questions are based on your analysis, which I have copied below.

Anaylsis of Ind. Clause #2:

Subject: what I can tell you

Verb: (Linking verb) is

Subject complement: (predicate nominative) that it was one day before my birthday

The subject in this case has a subject and a verb, why is it not a clause? The word What, what is it as this is preventing the group of words being a subject. It cannot be a noun phrase as there is a verb present. What is this group of words called, other than being the subject?

Secondly, can the subject complement also be a noun clause or can't one have a linking verb joining a a noun (which seems to be the whole of the subject???) to a noun clause?
Can one only have a linking verb joining two nouns...

Thanks.

Re: Help please! Subordinate or main clause

Eddie88 — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 12:44:35 GMT

Hi, I have just two sall questions from your detailed analysis. The questions are based on your analysis, which I have copied below.

Anaylsis of Ind. Clause #2:

Subject: what I can tell you

Verb: (Linking verb) is

Re: Help please! Subordinate or main clause

CalifJim — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:50:10 GMT

Anaylsis of the large structure:

Independent clause #1 : I can not tell you that, mate,

Conjunction joining two independent clauses: but

Independent clause #2: what I can tell you is that it was one day before my birthday

____________________

Anaylsis of Ind. Clause #2:

Subject: what I can tell you

Verb: (Linking verb) is

Subject complement: (predicate nominative) that it was one day before my birthday

_________

Analysis of the subject of Clause #2

The subject of Clause #2 is a noun phrase formed by the fused relative pronoun what and a relative clause, call it Clause #2A.

[Note: The fused relative what is the understood fusion of that and which, where that is a demonstrative pronoun and which is a relative pronoun. that is thus the understood subject of Clause #2 and which is the understood direct object of the understood relative Clause #2A which I can tell you. what thus simultaneously serves both as the subject of Clause #2 and the direct object of Clause #2A.]

Understood demonstrative component of what: : (Subject of #2): that

Subject of Clause #2A: I

Verb of Clause #2A: can tell

Indirect Object of Clause #2A: you

Direct Object of Clause #2A: understood relative pronoun component of fused relative what : which

_________

Analysis of the subject complement of Clause #2.

The subject complement of Clause #2 is a noun phrase formed by a complementizer and a clause, call it Clause #2B.

Complementizer: that

Subject of Clause #2B: it

Verb of Clause #2B: (linking verb) was

Subject complement of Clause #2B: one day before my birthday

____

Analysis of the subject complement of Clause #2B.

The subject complement of #2B is a noun phrase.

Determiner: a numeral: one

Head noun: day

Modifier: a prepositional phrase: before my birthday

___

Analysis of the preceding prepositional phrase:

Preposition: before

Object of the preposition: a noun phrase: my birthday

Analysis of the preceding noun phrase:

Head noun: birthday

Determiner: possessive adjective my

Re: passive voice

Huevos — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 23:22:52 GMT

Goodman
How would you classify this sentence then?

Goodman, your sentences are active voice. Their construction is: subject + linking verb (to be), + a noun phrase (predicate nominative). The passive voice, on the other hand, is formed thus: subject + verb to be + past participle of the lexical verb.

Re: EH.. I dont get these => inside post...

Mister Micawber — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:13:07 GMT

Short Course:

1-- A Predicate Nominative is a noun phrase on the predicate (right) side of a linking verb: I am a handsome fellow.
2-- A Direct Object receives the action of a verb: I bought a sandwich. An Indirect Object receives the benefit of the action of the verb: I bought my girlfriend a sandwich.
3-- Objects of prepostions are the nouns that are usually to the right of the preposition and indicate the origin of the prepositional action or position: The sandwich is on the table.

Googling any of your terms will get you many pages of detailed examples and explanation, so I shan't spend more time here on it.

Re: grammatical exercises

Pastsimple — Sat, 15 Jul 2006 02:32:26 GMT

Inchoateknowledge wrote:

Directions say Identify the noun clause and tell how it is used: subject, predicate nominative, direct object, indirect object or object of a perposition.

Shouldn't it say noun phrase? Just guessing...

Re: The meaning of 'Gonna'

Anonymous — Sun, 29 Jan 2006 07:43:18 GMT

What is the word sucks in "Homework sucks"? Is it a verb or an adjective? If it is a verb, what does homework suck?

This brings up an excellent point, and a wonderful opportunity to discover the beautiful syntactic structure of the English language. The question at hand is "Does an English verb need to have an object?" Consider the simple construction, "I eat" (Subject-ActionVerb). It is a coherent English thought; there is no need to express what is eaten. Just because an English sentence contains an action verb does not mean an object of that action must occur. The neat thing is, though, that it can occur and the thought is just as coherent. "I eat pizza" (Subject-ActionVerb-Object) is an equally logical thought.

Action verbs that have an object of their action are said to be transitive, while those that do not are said to be intransitive. Objects can receive the action of their verb either directly or indirectly. An object which is indirectly acted upon only occurs when there is one which is directly acted upon as well. Objects which receive their verb's action directly are said to be direct, whereas those which receive it indirectly are said to be indirect. In the sentence "I baked them pizza," pizza is a direct object, and them is an indirect object.

We have observed three fundamental patterns of the English language:
                        Subject-IntransitiveVerb                                              (S-InV)                I eat.
                        Subject-TransitiveVerb-DirectObject                          (S-TrV-DO)         I eat pizza.
                        Subject-TransitiveVerb-IndirectObject-DirectObject (S-TrV-IO-DO)    I bake them pizza.

As it turns out, the entire English language follows only about six different fundamental patterns, depending on how you count them. Essentially, there are only three more. I find this fascinating, so here I have written a short exposition on the topic. I intend to learn as much from those who view this forum as they can learn from me, so please read, enjoy (hopefully), and critique it.

        An Inquiry into the Syntactical Structure of the English Language

Fundamental Parts of Speech
There exist various schemes that depict the fundamental parts of speech in the English language. The underlying assumption of them all is that every English word can be classified into a fairly small number of categories. According to a word's inherent qualities these are somewhat nebulous, but according to how the word is used in a sentence they our definitive. The scheme I adopt here models English words in seven divisions: nouns* (N), verbs (V), adjectives** (Adj), adverbs (Adv), prepositions (Prep), conjunctions (Conj), and interjections (Interj). No attempt will be put forth to define these whether operationally or inherently. That being beyond the scope of this work
*Nouns in this work refers to both nouns and pronouns. Though they constitute two distinct categories they are used virtually interchangeably distinguishable only by the inherent qualities they possess. (A point in which syntax is largely uninterested.)
**This class contains what other schemes might divide into the categories of articles, determiners, qualifiers, modifying nouns, etc.
A Steal Framework
Again the various models of English syntax would number the fundamental patterns differently. I have adopted a scheme of six. The patterns are concerned only with two parts of speech: verbs and nouns. They form a sort of a metal framework upon which the rest of the fundamental part bestow their graces connecting and decorating it into a beautiful masterpiece. I model English nouns as possessing eight unique functions (subject (S), direct object (DO), indirect object (IO), objective complement (OC), subjective complement (SC), object of the preposition (OP), noun of direct address (DA), and appositive (App)) and English verbs as possessing four unique functions (action verb*, linking verb (LV), state of being verb (Be), helping verb** (Aux)). Only the first five of the noun functions and the first three of the verb functions are used in constructing the patterns. The rest are added on later for decoration.
*As it has been aforementioned actions verbs are either transitive verbs (TrV), possessing objects, or intransitive verbs (InV), not possessing objects.
**Helping verbs also known as auxiliary verbs or simply auxiliaries serve solely to aid the one main verb of a syntactic pattern in expressing such complexities as tense, mood, or voice. Unlike other languages, English verb ending are unable to accomplish this consisting of only four principle parts with little variation or no variation for person or number. Rarely will you find a verb written more than four ways.

The Fundamental Syntactic Patterns
Some schemes include adjective and adverb elements. I do not, however, because I do not consider them the pegs on which other elements can hang. They are merely filler. I have put alternate examples in boldface type for where some find grounds for other patterns.

                                            1. S-Be*                    I am. or I am here.
                                            2. S-LV-SC*,*              I am Daniel. or I am good.
                                            3. S-InV                         I eat.
                                            4. S-TrV-DO*                I eat pizza.
                                            5. S-TrV-IO-DO*        I bake them pizza.
                                            6. S-TrV-DO-OC*,*    I consider pizza food. or I find pizza tasty.
* "I am here," or, "I am of the tribe of Benjamin," are examples of an adverb element on the S-Be pattern. Under some schemes this would be a new pattern, S-be-Adv. The adverb element, often referred to as the adverbial modifies the verb indicating where or when.
*The subjective complement is the completer of the subject. If it is an adjective it is called the predicate adjective (PA). If it is a noun it is called the predicate nominative or noun (PN). As a noun it is said to rename the subject (Daniel). As a adjective it is said to modify the subject (good). Under some schemes these two cases form distinct patterns (S-LV-PN and S-LV-PA).
*Depending on whether or not the definition of linking verb is broadened to include the state of being verbs, a separate pattern (S-be-SC) is often employed which in turn is typically divided into the two distinct patterns (S-be-PA and S-be-PN).
*Both direct and indirect objects are considered to be predicate complements (PC). So the distinction between them is sometimes lost and these patterns can be depicted S-TrV-PC, S-TrV-PC-PC, and S-TrV-PC-OC with the former two occasionally fusing into one pattern (S-TrV-PC).
*Sometimes a distinction is made between an objective complement that functions as a noun (pizza), objective noun (ON), and one that functions as a adjective (tasty), objective adjective (OA). Thus two distinct patterns are formed (S-TrV-DO-ON and S-TrV-DO-OA).

Whether or not it is wise to exclude the patterns S-Be-Adv, S-LV-PA, and S-TrV-OA, I do not know, but since I maintain that the fundamental syntactic units are composed of certain nouns and verbs I will. For now the other parts of speech and remaining nouns and verbs are for filling out the framework.

The Decorations and Connections
The remaining verbs, helping/auxiliary verbs (Aux), come before the verbs in the patterns and give them tense. Of the remaining nouns, nouns of direct address (DA) are when you address the person you are talking two by name, appositives come right after one of the nouns in the fundamental patterns and serve to rename them, and objects of the preposition are the words the prepositions (Prep) are relating to the rest of the sentence. Prepositions (Prep) then relate nouns to the rest of the sentence. Conjunction (Conj) join elements whether they be fundamental patterns, subject, or verbs. Interjections (Interj) do just that. Butt in breaking the flow of everything. Adjectives (Adj) modify nouns, and adverbs (Adv) modify verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs.

These nine links and flesh may simply be one word or, as four of them (OP, App, Adj, and Adv) often are, be expanded into multiword units composed themselves of smaller units which in turn are linked to other units. Thus you have the massive interlocking structure of the English language.

What are these large units with in units though? They are either clauses or phrases.

Clauses
Clause contain both a subject and a verb but cannot stand alone as a complete thought. They are one of the fundamental units fleshed out. They come in three varieties those that will function as an adverb (Adv), those that will function as a adjective (Adj), and those that will function as a noun (not just OP and App, but the fundamental makeup of the patterns S, DO, IO, OC, and PN/SC).

Phrases:*
Phrases certain either a subject or a verb, but not both. The prepositional phrase--the unit Prep-OP (sometimes fleshed out with other elements)--functions as either an Adj, Adv, or a N. There are three phrase which are one of the six or nine depending on how you look at it fundamental patterns with the S severed from them. The gerund phrase is the one in which the main verb must be in the second principle part** and functions as a N. The participle phrase is the one in which the main verb must be in the second or fourth principle part** and functions as an Adj. The infinitive phrase is the one in which the verb must be in the infinitive (nearly synonymous with the first principle part** and functions as an Adj, Adv, or a N. A fifth and unusual type of phrase functions as a modifier (Adj or Adv) of the entire sentence, and is composed of a noun followed by a participial phrase.
*Sometimes the classifications of phrases are broadened to include a noun phrase, verb phrase, adjective phrase, adverb phrase, and appositive phrase. However, I will abstain from such a measure because noun phrases are just simply any of the five above which can function as a N, appositive phrases are just simply any of the five above which can function as an appositive (a N), adjective phrases are just any of the five above which can function as Adj, adverb phrases are just simply any of the five above which can function as Adv, and verb phrases are just the verb of the six fundamental patterns with its auxiliaries.
**Sometimes English verbs are depicted as having three principle parts, (1) present, (2) past, and (3) past participle, presumably because the present participle of all English verbs is the present + -ing. However, the scheme used here is that which depicts four principle parts, (1) present, (2) present participle, (3) past, (4) past participle, which can be derived from the infinitive [to . . .] by asking the four questions (1) Today, [I/we, you, he/she/it/they] . . .Currently, [I/we, you, he/she/it/they] [to be] . . . , (3) Yesterday, [I/we, you, he/she/it/they] . . . , (4) Previously, [I/we, you, he/she/it/they] [to have] . . . of the infinitive.

Re: How to use i.e. /e.g./ for example /and so on

Jussive — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 17:47:52 GMT

CalifJim wrote:
If a student points to some construction and asks me if it's the subjunctive or not, I can't reply, 'No, it's a monkey!'

Now there you are wrong! You are the teacher and can say any dang thing you want!
In fact a smart retort like that might go a long way toward making your students realize that knowing the correct terminology for this or that word or phrase is not at all the same as gaining competence in the use of English.

It rather depends on whether you want your students to be able to express themselves naturally in the real world, or whether the important thing is for them to pass tests in which they correctly identify word groupings as "noun phrase", "progressive tense", "gerund", "possessive adjective", "pronoun in the nominative case", and other such lingo of no use to them once they walk out the classroom door. It's quite amazing the number of students who know the word "nominative" but draw a blank on "lease a car" or "repair the light fixture". It is as if we were preparing them to live their entire lives in the English classroom.

Of course, if you are making your living in an academic institution where all those things are regarded as marks of competence in English, then you really have to concentrate on the lingo, like it or not, I suppose. If so, my condolences!

CJ

I completely agree with you bar a couple of things, CJ:

These technicalities are good for diagnostic reasons. It doesn't help anyone in the fluid process of speaking English, but if there is something wrong then it's easier if there's a technical understanding of grammar and the termonolgy involved so that the teacher can pinpoint the problem quickly. Also, I think, some particular and detailed aspect of any subject may be unnecessary and seem obsessive to some, however, to others it may play an important role to their overall understanding of that subject. It really does depend on how you've put the pieces together in your own mind as to whether one particular piece holds more or less value for you in your understanding of the subject.

As you indicated, though, the students have to pass exams, and I have been taught and am supposed to teach the language in this way, whether I like it or not. Personally, I'd rather just give the grammar where and when I think it's needed and not base their whole learning experience on it.

One last thing, I appreciate that sometimes and in some sense, termonology is just that, and you may as well call some things 'monkey', however, termonology also categorises important functions, elements and differences. For example, I get the sense that there IS a good reason why grammar books tend not to categorise the non-past and modals used hypothetically as 'the subjunctive'.

...but anyway, that's for:

http://www.englishforums.com/English/CoupleQuestionsAboutSubjunctive-Hypotheticals/bpkbn/Post.htm

Jussive