Hi Everyone,

I know what a phrase is and I know what a subordinate clause is. However, I still grapple with trying to explain the difference between a phrase and a subordinate clause.

I know phrases are prepositional, verb, noun, gerund etc. Is it correct that a subordinate clause simply begins with a subordinate conjunction?


CC Emotion: smile

1 2
Comments  (Page 2) 

Oh yes - you're right. I knew you would be.

You need to write some grammar books, CJ.

I'd be the first to buy. Lol Emotion: smile

Cup cakeI would have thought that in [2] Ed arrived and [5] What a bargain it is, could arguably be full sentences. They are both complete thoughts that make sense. Granted that the meanings change with the balance of content, but nonetheless, they do stand on their own.

Here, there is no internal marker of subordination: they are shown to be subordinate by virtue of their function in the larger construction, complement of a preposition and complement of a verb respectively.

Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Cup cakeI would have thought that who she was, is a relative clause.

No, as CJ has explained.

However, "who" can occur in the so-called 'fused' relative construction, but only in the 'free-choice' kind, where it is an alternant to "whoever".

Feel free to invite who(ever) you like.

Here, the antecedent and the relative word are combined, or fused together, into the single word "who". The meaning can be glossed as Feel free to invite anyone you like.

Yes, that makes sense.

Thank you. Emotion: smile