Complex sentence

Composite sentence as a polypredicative construction.

The composite sentence, as different from the simple sentence, is formed by two or more predicative lines. Being a polypredicative construction, it expresses a complicated act of thought, i.e. an act of mental activity which falls into two or more intellectual efforts closely combined with one another. In terms of situations and events this means that the composite sentence reflects two or more elementary situational events viewed as making up a unity.

Each predicative unit in a composite sentence makes up a clause in it.

As is well known, the use of the composite sentences, especially long and logically intricate ones, is characteristic of literary written speech rather than colloquial oral speech.

Composite sentences display two principal types of construction: subordination and coordination. By coordination the clauses are arranged as units of syntactically equal rank; by subordination, as units of unequal rank, one being categorically dominated by the other.

The means of combining clauses into a polypredicative sentence are divided into syndetic, i.e. conjunctional, and asyndetic, i.e. non-conjunctional.

All composite sentences are to be classed into compound sentences (coordination their clauses) (складно сурядні) and complex sentences (subordinating their clauses) (складно підрядні).

The complex sentence is a polypredicative construction built up on the principle of subordination. It is derived from two or more base sentences one of which performs the role of a matrix in relation to the others, the insert sentences. When joined into one complex sentence, the matrix base sentence becomes the principal clause of it and the insert sentences, its subordinate clauses.

The complex sentence of minimal composition includes two clauses - a principal one and a subordinate one. The subordinate clause is joint to the principal clause either by a subordinating connector (subordinator), or, with some types of clauses, asyndetically.

The structural features of the principal clause differ with different types of subordinate clauses. In particular, various types of subordinate clauses specifically affect the principal clause from the point of view of the degree of its completeness. The principal clause is markedly incomplete in complex sentences with the subject and predicative subordinate clauses. E.g.: Your statement was just what you were expected to say. (The gaping principal part is outside the predicative clause).

Of the problems discussed in linguistic literature in connection with the complex sentence, the central one concerns the principles of classification of subordinate clauses. Namely, the two different bases of classification are considered as competitive in this domain: the first is functional, the second is categorial.

According to the functional principle, subordinate clauses are to be classed on the analogy of the positional parts of the simple sentence, since it is the structure of the simple sentence that underlies the essential structure of the complex sentence (located at a higher level).

According to the categorial principle, subordinate clauses are to be classed by their inherent nominative properties irrespective of their immediate positional relations in the sentence. The nominative properties of notional words are reflected in their part-of speech classification.

From the point of view of their general nominative features all the subordinate clauses can be divided into three categorial-semantic groups. The first group includes clauses that name an event as a certain fact. These pure fact-clauses may be terminologically defined as "substantive-nominal". Their substantive-nominal nature is easily checked by a substitute test: That his letters remained unanswered annoyed him very much. -> That fact annoyed him very much.

The second group of clauses also name an event-fact, but, as different from the first group, this event-fact is referred to as giving a characteristic to some substantive entity. Such clauses can be called "qualification-nominal"* The man who came in the morning left a message. —» That man left a message.

The third group of clauses make their event-nomination into a dynamic relation characteristic of another event or a process or a quality of various descriptions. It would be quite natural to call these clauses "adverbial". Adverbial clauses are best tested not by a replacement, but by a definite transformation. Describe the picture as you see it. —> Describe the picture in the manner you see it.

Subordinate clauses are introduced by functional connective words which effect their derivation from base sentences. Categorially these sentence subordinators fall into the two basic types: those that occupy a notional position in the derived clause, and those that do not occupy such a position. The non-positional subordinators are referred to as pure conjunctions. Here belong such words as since, before, until, if, in case, because, so that, in order that, though, however, than, as if, etc. The positional subordinators are in fact conjunctive substitutes. The main positional subordinators are the pronominal words who, what, whose, which, that, where, when, why, as. Some of these words are double-functional, entering also the first set of subordinators.

Complex sentences which have two or more subordinate clauses discriminate two basic types of subordination arrangement: parallel and consecutive.

Subordinate clauses immediately referring to one and the same principal clause are said to be subordinated "in parallel" or "co-subordinated".

As different from parallel subordination, consecutive subordination presents a hierarchy of clausal levels. In this hierarchy one subordinate clause is commonly subordinated to another, making up an uninterrupted gradation. E.g.: I've no idea why she said she couldn 't call on us at the time I had suggested.

Дата добавления: 2014-12-23