Search results for 'tag:Nouns tag:Determiners' matching tags 'Nouns' and 'Determiners'

Re: Simple, short phrase question.

CalifJim — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 06:42:39 GMT

Eddie88
Are phrases words that are additional parts to a sentence (namely advectives or nouns) which are not constituents of the actual clause

No. Clauses are made up of phrases. The phrases of the clause are the constituents of the clause. Clauses generally have a subject, which is a noun phrase, and a predicate, which is a verb phrase, although sometimes these elements are understood. (They may be implicit rather than explicit). The verb phrase may contain, besides a verb (or more), one or more noun phrases to act as a direct object (or in some other function). Generally speaking, at the highest level of analysis of a sentence, all the words belong to one phrase or another, and all the phrases together make the clause (which is the whole sentence).

But phrases may contain clauses as well. Relative clauses, for example, act as adjective phrases. Noun phrases may contain adjective phrases within them. Verb phrases may contain adverb phrases and noun phrases within them, and so on. A single word can even be considered a phrase. Any of these phrases may also contain (lower-level) clauses within them.

The whole system is hierarchical. Everything tends to be embedded in everything else, so to speak! What is a phrase on one level of analysis can be a clause on another level.

Eddie88
1) How come 'He has hosted' is not an indep. clause? A subject exists and there is the auillary verb, which I thought helps the non-finite/verbal, hosted, become a verb. Or is it something to do with intransitive verbs where it the verbs needs an object for it to be grammatical?

It has nothing to do with transitivity considerations. the other parties he has hosted: he has hosted is not an independent clause because it is a dependent clause. It depends on the other parties. It acts as an adjective phrase to modify parties. It answers Which parties? Here the usual relative pronoun is omitted.

the other parties [that / which / ---] he has hosted comes from the other parties [he has hosted (those) other parties]

When the relative pronoun is omitted, it is implicit -- understood. This is called a "contact relative (pronoun)". It is actually missing! There is no word there! Its function is carried out simply by direct contact between the antecedent (the other parties) and the following words (he has hosted (the other parties)) The implicit relative pronoun is the direct object of has hosted, just as that or which would be, if it were explicitly stated.

Eddie88
2) Finally, the verbal hosted...How is it a verbal (can't stand as the main verb in a clause) if it can be the main verb in a clause, for example, 'He hosted the event'

It is the main verb of its clause. I would not call it a verbal. It's the main verb of its clause. See above: He hosted the other parties is understood.

_____

Maybe you should review whatever texts you have on the topic of relative clauses. These are clauses that act as adjectives on a higher level in the hierarchy of the sentence.

the water [that / which / ---] I drank is a noun phrase. Let's break it down into its parts, starting with the level of the whole noun phrase.

Determiner: the

Head noun: water

Adjective phrase = Relative clause: [that / which / ---] I drank

___

Analysis of the adjective phrase. (We're "down one level" here.) The adjective phrase IS a relative clause. [Some grammarians just say that the relative clause is an adjectival clause instead of bothering to call it an adjectival phrase. Or they just say that the clause modifies a noun without bothering to characterize it as adjectival.]

The relative clause starts with a relative pronoun: that, or which, or 'null' (the contact relative pronoun) and continues with the remainder of the relative clause, which contains a "gap" (____) where the relative pronoun came from before it was moved to the beginning of the clause.

the water [I drank the water] > the water [I drank ___] > the water [I drank that] > the water [that I drank].

the water [I drank the water] > the water [I drank ___] > the water [I drank which] > the water [which I drank].

the water [I drank the water] > the water [I drank ___] > the water [I drank ___] > the water [___ I drank].

In this case the gap is where the direct object goes. So the relative pronoun (that, which, or 'null') has the function of direct object.

Subject: Noun phrase : Personal pronoun: I

Verb: drank

Direct object: Relative pronoun: that, or which, or 'null'.

___

This explains three noun phrases. (Pick whichever you want; they all have the same structure.) the water that I drank, the water which I drank, the water I drank

A noun phrase can function as a subject, a subject complement (after a linking verb), or a direct object, or an object of a preposition, and so on. So the noun phrase the water that I drank can be placed in different sentences in different ways:

The water that I drank made me sick. [used as subject]

That water in the green glass was the water that I drank. [used as subject complement]

Miss Scarlet poured the water that I drank. [used as direct object]

I am glad that poison was not added to the water that I drank. [used as object of a preposition]

Note that the noun phrase contains a (relative) clause, and it is also contained within a larger clause in each case above.

P.S. Part of your frustration may be because not all writers use the terms ''phrase' and 'clause' (and others) completely consistently at all times, and you may run across many alternate technical terms that mean the same thing. For example, there may be other members of the forum who would not agree with my analyses, or who would use different terminology to describe the parts of the same sentences.

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: Is this "that" a determiner or a relative pronoun?

Avangi — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 09:50:34 GMT

Thanks, CJ. I don't know why I thought it was so mysterious. I guess I could think of it as analogous to a participial phrase being so-named because it starts with a participle, but at the same time being an adjectival phrase because it functions as an adjective in modifying a noun.

- A.

Re: Is this "that" a determiner or a relative pronoun?

CalifJim — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 03:04:22 GMT

The noun phrase in question is:

that reactions can happen slower at lower temperatures

Informally stated, anything that occurs in its context the way a noun might occur is a noun phrase. All subjects and objects are noun phrases, even if they are lengthy groups of words.

The person whom I saw yesterday at the supermarket was carrying an umbrella.

Noun phrases: the person, whom, I, the supermarket, the person whom I saw yesterday at the supermarket, an umbrella.

The problem is that she tripped on a display case and fell on the floor.

Noun phrases: the problem, she, a display case, the floor, that she tripped on a display case and fell on the floor.

To be or not to be; that is the question.

Noun phrases: to be, not to be, to be or not to be, that, the question.

The fact that I saw him there proves that he was not in the hospital.

Noun phrases: the fact, I, him, he, hospital, that I saw him there, that he was not in the hospital

____

Some more traditional approaches exclude the pronouns (I, him, whom, ...), but they are also replacements for nouns, so they count as noun phrases in the more recent approaches.

As you see from the examples above, noun phrases can occur "nested". A noun phrase can occur within another noun phrase.

Re: Is this "that" a determiner or a relative pronoun?

Avangi — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:10:13 GMT

<<However, they do not have to "cry" if they know the short science lesson, that reactions happen slower at lower temperatures.>>

CalifJim
Does that introduce a whole clause? Yes. The clause is Reactions can happen slower at lower temperatures.
that is a complementizer. (Some people call it a conjunction.) It links a whole clause into a larger sentence and makes the whole stucture, including that, a noun phrase.

Hi CJ
I need to understand "noun phrase." How much of the above captioned are you saying is considered a noun phrase?

- A.

Edit. After he downed his last double shot of Jack Daniel's, I heard him remark, "Now that is a complementizer."

Re: Is this "that" a determiner or a relative pronoun?

CalifJim — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 06:43:00 GMT

exodejavu
Is the "that" a determiner or relative pronoun?

A determiner goes with the following noun.

What is the noun following that? reactions. A plural noun.

The determiners that and this are singular; they go only with singular nouns. these and those are plural. They go with plural nouns.

So, does that go with reactions? No. that is singular, and reactions is plural. So that is not a determiner in this sentence.

______

A relative pronoun stands for the noun that the relative clause modifies. The relative pronoun replaces a noun phrase and usually acts as the subject or object of the relative clause.

If that reactions can happen slower at lower temperatures is a relative clause, that replaces the preceding word lesson.

So the relative clause means

Lesson reactions can happen slower at lower temperatures.

What are lesson reactions? There is no such thing as a lesson reaction. This is nonsense. Is lesson a subject or object in that relative clause? No. reactions is the subject and there is no object because happen is intransitive. It can't take an object.

So this clause is not a relative clause, and that is not a relative pronoun.

_____

Does that introduce a whole clause? Yes. The clause is Reactions can happen slower at lower temperatures.

that is a complementizer. (Some people call it a conjunction.) It links a whole clause into a larger sentence and makes the whole stucture, including that, a noun phrase.

_____

It doesn't matter a lot in this case whether there is a comma after lesson or not. What you have here is a content clause that is an appositive to lesson.

Re: Is this "that" a determiner or a relative pronoun?

Avangi — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 06:42:51 GMT

I'm not really into the "determiner" definition, but my ear tells me that "which" in this case would be a relative pronoun, and would make no sense here, since the clause already has a subject, "reactions." "That" works fine, so I guess it must be a determiner, by default.

Again relying on my ear, there's a difference in meaning without the comma. With the comma, the following clause appears to be in apposition to "lesson." That is, we already know which lesson we're talking about, and the following clause simply confirms it.   Without the comma, the clause becomes essential, actually telling us which lesson we're talking about.

- A.

Edit.

They'll understand this if they studied the lesson   -   that water expands when it freezes. (assumes they should know which lesson we're talking about - i.e., it's obvious.)

They'll understand this if they studied the lesson that water expands when it freezes.   (There are several possible lessons. If they have not studied, it may not be obvious which lesson applies.)

I'm not comfortable saying the lesson is X (although it's sometimes used that way). I'd prefer on or about X.

Anyway, somehow my ear has trouble taking the second one as an appositive.

Is this "that" a determiner or a relative pronoun?

exodejavu — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:48:29 GMT

Hello,

What follows is an inquiry posted on a Taiwanese-BBS board.

--

However, they do not have to "cry" if they know the short science lesson,
__ reactions happen slower at lower temperatures.

--

The given answer for that blank is "that."
S/he is wondering why "which" cannot be filled in that blank.

What is strange is that I find on the Internet a document in which there is no comma after "lesson," but the poster said there is one in his/hers. (The same wording)
I am not sure if the sentence conveys the same meaning with or without the comma after "lesson."

Is the "that" a determiner or relative pronoun?

Best Regards

correction of the analyse

ericsteef — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 20:21:15 GMT

a professional background

this phrase is NP

"a" is indefinite article function as determiner
"professional" is an adjective.
"background" is the head noun of the NP.

Is this right?

review

somer — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 19:49:02 GMT

3a) A cat ate the small animal.

3b) A cat is a small animal.

The syntactic analyses of the two sentences are differents. In the sentence 3a) we have (s, v, do) while, in the second sentence 3b) we have (s, v (copular), sP).

In 3a) âa cat âis noun phrase (a is determiner indefinite article, cat is head noun of noun phrase âa catâ), âateâ is verb in past simple tense,â the small animal â is noun phrase consist of determiner âtheâ, âsmallâ is adjective , âanimalâ is the head noun of the noun phrase, all the noun phrase functions as direct object.

In 3b) âa catâ is noun phrase (a is determiner indefinite article, cat is head noun of noun phrase âa catâ) function as subject, âisâ copular verb in simple present tense,â a small animalâ noun phrase consist of the indefinite determiner âaâ , the adjective small , and the head noun of the noun phrase âanimalâ, the noun phrase function as subject predicative.

Differences in the meaning: the first sentence means that there was a cat and it ate the small animal "the small animal" should be mentioned before, or known to the reader, while the second sentence means that a cat is a kind of animal and it is small. We are talking generally here.