Next Sentence
|
GRAMMAR |
|
Below is a complete schematic listing of all the terms that are used by "school" grammars to describe the static components of an English sentence, with the exception of two: the ellipsis and the expletive. These two are problematic in that their relation to the other parts of speech and sentence elements is quite hard to pin down (See below). But it would be wrong to claim that the grammar schematic presented here is unproblematic. Settling on an accurate and complete description for all the possible grammatical elements (syntactical and semantic) in a language hasn't happened yet in the same way that it has for the parts of the human anatomy or the chemical elements of the physical universe.
Today's grammar, in college linguistics departments around the world, is a messy, contentious affair with new terms coming aboard (determiner, adjunct, specifier etc.) and old standby terms being jettisoned (pronoun, conjunction, etc.). The grammar schematic presented here is essentially the old "school" grammar that has been taught over the last two or three centuries in classrooms around the English-speaking world. It is a wobbly structure at best. It has been under fire from all sides for as long as it has existed, but it has proven to be strangely durable, and it is still deemed to be worth the time needed to master it. At a minimum it will give students (and professors) an approximate vocabulary to use when discussing the intricacies of a style.
Today's grammar, in college linguistics departments around the world, is a messy, contentious affair with new terms coming aboard (determiner, adjunct, specifier etc.) and old standby terms being jettisoned (pronoun, conjunction, etc.). The grammar schematic presented here is essentially the old "school" grammar that has been taught over the last two or three centuries in classrooms around the English-speaking world. It is a wobbly structure at best. It has been under fire from all sides for as long as it has existed, but it has proven to be strangely durable, and it is still deemed to be worth the time needed to master it. At a minimum it will give students (and professors) an approximate vocabulary to use when discussing the intricacies of a style.
A GRAMMAR SKELETON
|
|
Parts of SpeechVerb
Intransitive Transitive Action Linking (State of Being) Noun Proper Common Collective Pronoun Personal Nominitive Objective Possessive Demonstrative Interrogative Relative Reflexive/Intensive Adjective Adverb Relative Conjunctive Conjunction Subordinating Coordinating Preposition Interjection _____________________________________________ Verbals --Participle (adj.) Past Participle (adj.) --Gerund (noun) --Infinitive (noun, adj., adv.) |
Parts of a SentenceSubject
Predicate Complement Direct Object Indirect Object Object Complement Subject Complement Predicate Nominative Predicate Adjective Kinds of Sentences Declarative Sentence Interrogative Sentence Imperative Sentence Exclamatory Sentence 
^The father of generative linguistics, Dakṣiputra Pāṇini was an Indian scholar, grammarian, and poet who lived during the 5th Century BCE.
|
PhrasesPrepositional Phrases
Adjective Adverb Verbal Phrases Participial--Adjective --Absolute (adverbial) Gerund --Noun Infinitive --Noun --Adjective --Adverb Appositives 
|
ClausesIndependent Clause
Subordinate Clauses Adjective Clause Adverb Clause Noun Clause 
^ Noam Chomsky, linguist, philosopher, genius, and political crank, whose theories challenge us to regard language as a wired-in, genetic and computational component of human nature.
< Robert Lowth, Bishop of London and grammar guru, is largely responsible for many of the sticky little rules of grammar that plague the otherwise peaceful childhoods of the well-educated. Thank him for: "It is I" instead of "It's me."
|
Ellipsis: An ellipsis, often represented by three dots ( . . . ), is a grammatical component that is not visible or audible in a sentence. A word or words have dropped out of the sentence, but their effect is still present in the sentence syntax. For example, read this: I said that it was raining. Now read this: I said it was raining. Both sentences seem to say exactly the same thing, but the first sentence has one more word in it: that. The space in the second sentence between said and it is an ellipsis that, as you can seen, could be filled by the that that appears in the first sentence. The that isn't really needed for the second sentence to have the same meaning as the first sentence. The magic of the ellipsis: Something is there, but it looks like nothing is there.
Or consider the grammar classic: I like Jack better than him could mean I like Jack better than I like him or it could mean I like Jack better than he likes Jack, in which case it should be I like Jack better than he ( . . .). The (. . .) does not actually appear in writing, but the ellipsis is there as an invisible and unspoken token for (likes Jack). Arguably, there is a ellipsis in the answers to all questions. (Do you believe me? Yes ( . . .). = Yes ( I believe you ). = Yes.) The answer carries with it an implied restatement of the question. The discussion of ellipsis blurs into an area of modern linguistics known variously as "silent syntax" or "deletion." What are called "verbless sentences" ("Of course not." or "So far so good.") are ellipse-bearing phenomenon because they happen only when actual, or implied, regular sentences are nestled against them in the linguasphere to infuse them with some elliptical content.
Expletive: An expletive is a word or words that play a syntactical role in a sentence, but make little or no real semantic contribution to the sentence beyond establishing a sort of dummy noun, or sometimes revealing a faint emotional attitude on the part of the sentence maker. Example: It is raining. It is an expletive. What really does "it" refer to -- the sky, the day, what is filling the window's rectangle? Like, it is raining. Both it and like are expletives. Like is not telling us much. Like, it is raining, yo! The yo is an emotion-colored expletive. It adds nothing to the meaning beyond giving the utterance a vague consensual or conspiratorial flavor. Curses, obscenities, and interjections are also regarded as expletives. Dang, this is fun!
Or consider the grammar classic: I like Jack better than him could mean I like Jack better than I like him or it could mean I like Jack better than he likes Jack, in which case it should be I like Jack better than he ( . . .). The (. . .) does not actually appear in writing, but the ellipsis is there as an invisible and unspoken token for (likes Jack). Arguably, there is a ellipsis in the answers to all questions. (Do you believe me? Yes ( . . .). = Yes ( I believe you ). = Yes.) The answer carries with it an implied restatement of the question. The discussion of ellipsis blurs into an area of modern linguistics known variously as "silent syntax" or "deletion." What are called "verbless sentences" ("Of course not." or "So far so good.") are ellipse-bearing phenomenon because they happen only when actual, or implied, regular sentences are nestled against them in the linguasphere to infuse them with some elliptical content.
Expletive: An expletive is a word or words that play a syntactical role in a sentence, but make little or no real semantic contribution to the sentence beyond establishing a sort of dummy noun, or sometimes revealing a faint emotional attitude on the part of the sentence maker. Example: It is raining. It is an expletive. What really does "it" refer to -- the sky, the day, what is filling the window's rectangle? Like, it is raining. Both it and like are expletives. Like is not telling us much. Like, it is raining, yo! The yo is an emotion-colored expletive. It adds nothing to the meaning beyond giving the utterance a vague consensual or conspiratorial flavor. Curses, obscenities, and interjections are also regarded as expletives. Dang, this is fun!