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

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: heartily

Grammar Geek — Sat, 10 Jun 2006 23:32:26 GMT

I think you need to replace "it" with the specific antecedent - presumably his victory? or perhaps just his strong finish? As it reads now, the reader is mostly likely going to try to attach "it" to the most recent noun phrase - in this case, the congratulations. And once the reader realizes that that doesn't make sense, he'll have to try to figure out what you mean. They'll be able to infer, like I did, that it has to do with his performace or his win, or whatever the larger paragraph is about, but if you can avoid making your readers work harder to get your meaning, it's a good idea.

(By the way, from whom did he receive the congratulations? From everyone in town? From his competitors? From his loyal fans? From the Queen of England?)

Re: Explain the terms

paco2004 — Wed, 16 Nov 2005 23:29:19 GMT

Hello Thebest again

Your questions are tough. I can give the definition to three phrases but not to other two. I think Mr CalfJim could give you complete answeres.

1. 'Notional passive' is such a sentence that its syntactic construct is not passive but the sense is passive. We often call it "ergative construct" or "activo-passive". In the given paragraph, "they don't cut' is the one.
2. 'Noun phrase functioning as direct object and subject'. I can't understand it.
3. 'Alternative disjunction'. As to this, I agree with you. In the given paragraph, 'or' is the one.
4. 'Concomitative adverbial' is an adverbial that explains the circumstance. In the given paragraph, 'when cold' is the one.
5. 'Non-subject sentence theme'. I don't know what it is.

Muesli bars can be bought in better supermarkets. They can be eaten either as a snack or with a meal. When very cold[4], they don't cut[1] easily with a knife, so it's better to let them warm up before using them. Nutritionally, they are packed with healthy ingredients and are far better than oily or[3] salty junk foods.

paco

Re: Much too much much

viognier — Mon, 01 Aug 2005 08:42:19 GMT

Hello paco, in connection with your previous thread about 'adverbial objectives' I've just read an interesting paragraph. I'm not sure whether it concerns your question, but let me cite it. But I mention to your post first â only partly, though.
ââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââ
Time/Duration
[1] Did you see him this morning?
[4] I'd like to start Wednesday, the first jury day.
[5] Please tell me what day you are free.
[7] They walked two hours.
#Some other examples of noun phrases of this use:
every day, next week, next Monday, the day after tomorrow, one of these days, one day, any day in this week, etc.
ââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââ
The folloing is fromãVerkuyl 1999:10ã, I cite it as it is:
ââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââ
I have added a squib, '(In-)definiteness and Temporal Measure Phrases,' in which a problem is discussed dating back to 1969 when I discovered that Nouns are sensitive to the referential force of the determiner in making up an NP. That is, one may say [I called him in/during/on a/the weekend] but not [I called him in/during/on a/the week]. The difference between the sentences disappears as soon as the determiner has sufficient referential force. The temporal setting prepositions may even be dropped in that case: [I called him that week] and [I called him that weekend]. This phenomenon has remained puzzling and so I offer it to those interested in issues of quantification and aspectuality, especially in the formation of temporal 'islands', entities which are made discernible so that they are made available for the computation.

{!} The temporal setting prepositions may even be dropped {!}
{!} This phenomenon has remained puzzling {!}

I have not read its content yet. When I read, I make a further comment. Seems interesting, doesn't it, paco! Thanks.

Re: Am I using the word "syntax" correctly in this paragraph?

John C. — Mon, 17 Nov 2003 10:02:49 GMT

If you want more suggestions, I have a few:

If the interpretation came from someone called Griffis, then it would be Griffis's interpretation.

"Whether such a label ..." This pronoun is quite far from its antecedent (presumably Hermit Nation) and several nouns intervene, so I would be inclined to repeat it, i.e.: "Whether such a label as "Hermit" can be ..."

"... in late Choson ..." Should this be, "... in the late Choson period ..." ?

"I argue King Konjong's hermitic ..." This looks like "King Konjong's hermitic tendencies" is the object of "argue". It would be better to make an explicit noun phrase by writing, "I argue that King Konjong's ...".

"... would be describing ..." This would be more natural as, "... would be to describe ...".

Cheers

John.