|
Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007 Posts: 11061 Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2013 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
spiral78 wrote: |
Quote: |
'Complementizer'. Great word, eh? |
Sounds to me like the overly-practiced guy at the bar with the huge collection of pick-up lines . |
You mean along the lines of "Is that a ladder in your tights...? Hic!" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
spiral78
Joined: 05 Apr 2004 Posts: 11534 Location: On a Short Leash
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2013 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ick. Not so sure what that's supposed to mean...probably would be an ineffective complementizer who came out with that one . |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007 Posts: 11061 Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2013 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
".... or is it a stairway to heaven?"
Seriously, you've never heard that old chestnut before. Oh dear, I'm aging before my own eyes...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkKScW1Rx0s |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005 Posts: 3292 Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Until Sasha and John started going back and forth, I wasn't sure quite what the problem of analysis was. I was imagining that there was a student who was somehow positing "The common belief (that; That) this is false (is...)" rather than "is false (full stop: .)". That being said, does the complementizer in NCCs really need to be retained like the LSGSWE insists it must?
Just playing around with a few more examples:
Maybe a more verb-all than nouny phrasing would be a good idea: Many people believe (that) the tomato is a vegetable, but this (belief) is false. (*Many people believe (that) the tomato is a vegetable is false. (There'd need to be speech marks around "the tomato is a vegetable" for this one to work!)).
Hmm, The common belief that/which holds (that) the tomato is a vegetable is false (is...) LOL. (Too much recursion allows yet more?!).
Last edited by fluffyhamster on Sat Feb 09, 2013 2:17 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Qaaolchoura
Joined: 10 Oct 2008 Posts: 539 Location: 21 miles from the Syrian border
|
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
While you guys seem to be doing a pretty good job sorting this out yourself, I just want to note that I don't like the definition of the dependent clause as part of a sentence that cannot stand on its own. Often the only thing keeping the clause from standing on its own is the complementizer, which can sometimes be left out. (In analysis we say that it's implicit, and draw it into the tree anyways.)
For example I can take an example from the Wikipedia article and remove the complementizer:
- I know that he likes me. -> I know (that) he likes me.
- Independent clause = "I know."
- Dependent clause = "He likes me."
I like the "incomplete thought" definition even less, because not only is it vague, but because in many cases, including the one in the OP, the "independent clause" feels more incomplete than the dependent clause.
Because of that, if I had to teach syntax to students, I would want to teach that while the independent clause can always focus as a full sentence, the dependent clause can take many forms, including that of a full sentence subordinated by a complementizer, and that the complementizer can sometimes be left out in cases where it's also a subordinating conjunction. (And no, I wouldn't use those words; I'd show as I did in my first response to Sasha.)
Regards,
~Q |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Qaaolchoura
Joined: 10 Oct 2008 Posts: 539 Location: 21 miles from the Syrian border
|
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Cennet," meaning "Paradise" is a fairly common female name in Turkish, though unfortunately it seems to be less so in my part of Turkey.
Which means I haven't had the chance to try out my "tonight, I shall enter paradise" line.
(To be sure, I'm uncertain I'd have the cojones to use that line even if I were in a part of Turkey with more Cennets.)
~Q |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007 Posts: 11061 Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Qaaolchoura wrote: |
While you guys seem to be doing a pretty good job sorting this out yourself, I just want to note that I don't like the definition of the dependent clause as part of a sentence that cannot stand on its own. Often the only thing keeping the clause from standing on its own is the complementizer, which can sometimes be left out. (In analysis we say that it's implicit, and draw it into the tree anyways.)
For example I can take an example from the Wikipedia article and remove the complementizer:
- I know that he likes me. -> I know (that) he likes me.
- Independent clause = "I know."
- Dependent clause = "He likes me."
I like the "incomplete thought" definition even less, because not only is it vague, but because in many cases, including the one in the OP, the "independent clause" feels more incomplete than the dependent clause.
Because of that, if I had to teach syntax to students, I would want to teach that while the independent clause can always focus as a full sentence, the dependent clause can take many forms, including that of a full sentence subordinated by a complementizer, and that the complementizer can sometimes be left out in cases where it's also a subordinating conjunction. (And no, I wouldn't use those words; I'd show as I did in my first response to Sasha.)
Regards,
~Q |
Yes, the terminology is always fraught. However, 'dependent' and 'independent' do have something to recommend themselves. There are embedded clauses that really do not seem to exist comfortably on their own, due to transitivity, as in the following:
'Not all posters accepted the opinion that Sasha voiced.'
While 'Not all posters accepted the opinion' is fine on its own, the relative clause sounds just as unfinished with or without that - 'Sasha voiced'? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
johnslat
Joined: 21 Jan 2003 Posts: 13859 Location: Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
|
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Qaaolchoura,
I take your point; however, your alternative might, I'd say, tend to make understanding, at least in some cases, more difficult.
Am I wrong in thinking that it's only with relative clauses that the using the complementizer is always optional (when it's the object in the clause)?
I can't think of a case offhand where it could be omitted with adverb clauses, and in the case of noun clauses while it's optional with reported speech (again, when the complementizer is an object) there are many times when it can't be omitted (e.g. I know what the teacher did last night.)
Regards,
John |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005 Posts: 3292 Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
@Q: if you have a problem with the terminology, perhaps try changing it. For example, embedded rather than dependent clause. That might beat implying (that) those who've used a term you don't care for (even though you're the one who introduced the term into the thread in the first place! Which others then simply ran with) haven't had similar thoughts or used similar approaches to yours (e.g. bracketing or even deleting 'that'). And I'm sure students meet enough genuinely independent clauses that they can recognize the textually-embedded easily enough. Anyway, the most important thing obviously is (that) they learn to form complex noun phrases and appreciate when 'that' or similar needs to be retained. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Qaaolchoura
Joined: 10 Oct 2008 Posts: 539 Location: 21 miles from the Syrian border
|
Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fluffyhamster wrote: |
@Q: if you have a problem with the terminology, perhaps try changing it. For example, embedded rather than dependent clause. That might beat implying (that) those who've used a term you don't care for (even though you're the one who introduced the term into the thread in the first place! Which others then simply ran with) haven't had similar thoughts or used similar approaches to yours (e.g. bracketing or even deleting 'that'). And I'm sure students meet enough genuinely independent clauses that they can recognize the textually-embedded easily enough. Anyway, the most important thing obviously is (that) they learn to form complex noun phrases and appreciate when 'that' or similar needs to be retained. |
Fluffy, I'm fine with the term "dependent clause" but I object to the common definition, used by Wikipedia and in at least a few other places, that a dependent clause doesn't contain a full sentence, and I feel like johnslat's alternative suggestion, that it doesn't contain a complete thought, doesn't seem to quite cover all the cases either.
However johnslat's suggestion gets to the point better than a strictly syntactical treatment. Perhaps a better definition for EFL students might be that a dependent clause contains further information about a word or phrase in the independent clause, and thus depends on the independent clause as its reason for existing.
~Q |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005 Posts: 3292 Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If some teachers make Wikipedia their first or only port of call for grammar, there isn't a whole lot we can do about that (...or is there? ). Thanks for clarifying, Q. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cool Teacher
Joined: 18 May 2009 Posts: 930 Location: Here, There and Everywhere! :D
|
Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 3:37 am Post subject: Re: A sneaky, trick grammar question... |
|
|
Sashadroogie wrote: |
How would you analyse the clauses in this sentence?
The common belief that the tomato is a vegetable is false. |
The common belief "the tomato is a vegetable" is false.
The common belief is false.
"the tomato is a vegetable".
"that" is optional |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling. Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|