"Minor sentence", a functional label?

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 9:17 am

<Sentences can in fact be divided into major sentences and minor sentences. Major sentences (or full sentences) have a verb agreeing with a subject, i.e. a finite verb; and minor sentences (or part-sentences) have no finite verb element (presumably the equivalent full sentence to the last example given would be ‘This is great gravy!’).>

http://www.arts.gla.ac.uk/SESLL/EngLang ... extfin.rtf

The term "minor sentence" (and "major" sentence") is used by many linguists and quite a few teachers, but just as many others from such groups consider the term inadequate or even in error.

The latter groups prefer the terms "fragmented sentence" or "sentence fragment". Which term do you use, and why? Do you have any opposition to either term being used?

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 9:34 am

Why not just give the whatever a functional label (e.g. "an exclamation", not that this is any easier to decide upon over "a statement" or "a comment" etc), and be damned with working out just what the sum total of its parts equals?

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 9:47 am

fluffyhamster wrote:Why not just give the whatever a functional label (e.g. "an exclamation", not that this is any easier to decide upon over "a statement" or "a comment" etc), and be damned with working out just what the sum total of its parts equals?

Good question. Then, what would you suggest calling "a full/major sentence"? Denying sentencehood to constructions such as minor/fragment sentences also has the intention denoting "less" or "inferior" - at least that has been the main drift of most arguments against the term "minor sentence".

JuanTwoThree · Post by **JuanTwoThree** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 11:13 am

Does "fragment" mean that the surrounding words have been ellipsed or are understood in some way? "Ballox!" could be a fragment of: "What you said is ballox!" (not that it was of course, I hasten to add) but if you drop a hammer on your foot, "Oh Ballox!" is just "Oh, Ballox", unless it's a fragment of "Oh ballox, I appear to have just dropped this sledgehammer on my foot and it hurts somewhat".

"Whoopee!" isn't a fragment of anything either. There must be things other than exclamations that aren't fragments of anything in particular.

So I don't think much of "Sentence Fragment". The Spanish oración could be translated as something like "Verbless Speech Act" which might do the trick.

Not that the definition of it being verbless is much cop either. Agree?

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 11:46 am

JuanTwoThree wrote:Does "fragment" mean that the surrounding words have been ellipsed or are understood in some way? "Ballox!" could be a fragment of: "What you said is ballox!" (not that it was of course, I hasten to add) but if you drop a hammer on your foot, "Oh Ballox!" is just "Oh, Ballox", unless it's a fragment of "Oh ballox, I appear to have just dropped this sledgehammer on my foot and it hurts somewhat".

"Whoopee!" isn't a fragment of anything either. There must be things other than exclamations that aren't fragments of anything in particular.

So I don't think much of "Sentence Fragment". The Spanish oración could be translated as something like "Verbless Speech Act" which might do the trick.

Not that the definition of it being verbless is much cop either. Agree?

Superb answer, Juan 2-3. Thanks.

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:56 pm

metal56 wrote:Good question. Then, what would you suggest calling "a full/major sentence"? Denying sentencehood to constructions such as minor/fragment sentences also has the intention denoting "less" or "inferior" - at least that has been the main drift of most arguments against the term "minor sentence".

These things don't (and can't!) care about rights to or being denied "sentencehood", they just get on, selflessly, with achieving their functional effects in conversation.