See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/309397017

Units of grammar

Chapter · October 2015

CITATIONS READS

0 8,699

4 authors:

Ana Díaz-Negrillo Marta Falces

University of Granada University of Granada
16 PUBLICATIONS   136 CITATIONS    7 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Encarnacion Hidalgo Tenorio Salvador Valera Hernández

University of Granada University of Granada
52 PUBLICATIONS   125 CITATIONS    21 PUBLICATIONS   97 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

ANACOR: A corpus-based approach to anaphora resolution in second language acquisition: beyond the interfaces View project

Societas Linguistica Europaea View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Encarnacion Hidalgo Tenorio on 24 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 CHAPTER THREE
UNITS OF GRAMMAR
A. DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, M. FALCES SIERRA
E. HIDALGO TENORIO, S. VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

3.1 The morpheme

3.2 The word
3.3 The phrase
3.4 The clause
3.5 The sentence
Further reading
Exercises

Summary
As explained in chapter 1, the grammar of a language can be described in terms of a
number of units which are hierarchically organised in a rankscale. This chapter
reviews the units in that hierarchy following an order of increasing complexity, i.e.
from the most basic unit, the morpheme, to the most complex one, the sentence.

3.1 THE MORPHEME

Morphemes are each of the individually meaningful units found in words. In

turn, morphemes are not further divisible into smaller units of meaning. This is why
a morpheme is often defined as the smallest meaningful unit of linguistic analysis,
as shown in:
(1) over·re·act·ed
re·mark·able
42 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

In addition to meaning, morphemes also have a formal representation, which

can be expressed in phonetic transcription or spelling. Accordingly, one may readily
identify a morpheme in a word by its form. However, form can be deceptive. For
example, the words in (2) below are analysed morphologically in the following
way:
(2) a. print·able
b. vegetable·s
Note that we have identified -able as a unit within a word only in (2a) even if
we find exactly the same word string in (2a) and (2b), namely /əbl/. This is because
the sequence able /əbl/ is a unit of meaning only in the first example, where it adds
to the word the meaning ‘that can be Ved (printed)’. Indeed, all the units that have
been identified as morphemes in our examples so far are associated with a particular
meaning, and their presence contributes to the overall meaning of the word. In
addition, none of the units are further divisible into further meaningful elements:
(3) print: ‘to produce writing or images on paper or other material with a
machine’
-able: ‘that can be Ved’
(4) vegetable: ‘a plant, root, seed, or pod that is used as food’
-s: plurality
Morphemes may be associated with more than one related meaning, i.e.
morphemes, just like lexemes, may be polysemous. For example, the prefix un-
means ‘reverse action of Ving’ when attached to verbs, as in unbutton, but it means
‘not X’ when attached to adjectives, as in unhappy, and ‘lack of X’ when attached
to nouns, as in unease. Another example is -er, which has a variety of meanings
related with animate and non-animate participants involved in processes or events.
For example, a writer is someone who writes a printer is a machine that prints, a
Londoner is someone who lives in London and a container is an object which
contains or can contain things.
Morphemes enter in combination with units of the same nature, and this happens
in an unarbitrary fashion. This statement has three main implications:
 As a result of their combinatory potential, morphemes can yield words. The
resulting words will be complex or polymorphemic words, that is, they will
consist of more than one morpheme, as opposed to simplex or
monomorphemic words, which consist of only one morpheme. In examples
(3) and (4) above, both printable and vegetables are complex words, while sky
and cold are examples of simplex words.
 Morphemes are recurrent. This means that morphemes will appear in other
complex words and, since morphemes are essentially units of meaning, they
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 43

will contribute the same meaning to other words. As we will see later in
chapter 4, this statement has exceptions, for example:
- there are morphemes that occur in words which are lexicalised and the
meaning of those morphemes is not transparent (see section 4.1.2 in
chapter 4), and
- there are morphemes that appear only in one word (see section 4.1.2 in
chapter 4).
In principle, recurrence is a property of morphemes that can be used to test
morpheme identity: if you can think of other words where a potential
morpheme stands with the same meaning, then the potential morpheme is
likely to be a morpheme. The examples below illustrate this property in the
morphemes discussed above (print, -able, vegetable, -s):
(5) a. print·er b. process·able c. vegetabl·ly d. chair·s
print·ing conceiv·able vegetabl·ize door·s
 The combination of morphemes in words is rule-based, that is, morphemes are
not susceptible to combine with every other morpheme in the language. For
example, the plural morpheme only combines with nouns in English, as in
vegetables above, and not with adjectives or articles, as it does in other
languages like Spanish. The prefix mis- only attaches to nouns or verbs, as in
mismatch or misunderstand, but not to adjectives. This means that certain
morphemes that are attached to the central part of the word, or bases, that is,
affixes, can only co-occur with certain bases and that the word-class of the
base, that is, whether it is a noun, verb, adjective etc., is significant for the
identity of affixes.
Another reason why morphemes may not combine freely is that they can
be phonologically constrained. For example, the nominal suffix -al attaches
only to verbs which have final stress, as in arrival, refusal, or denial. This
means that affixes can also be defined by the structural restrictions imposed by
the base. Constraints of this kind will affect the productivity of morphemes,
which is discussed later in the book (see section 4.1.5 in chapter 4).

From the discussion above we may then say that morphemes are indivisible
units of meaning with a particular form and combinatorial definition. The definition
of morphemes according to these three pieces of information, namely meaning,
form, and a combinatorial definition, can be expressed in terms of morphological
rules (see section 4.1.4 in chapter 4).
Many linguists believe that every language user has a mental lexicon where
morphemes and their rules are stored. The information comes in the mental lexicon
when acquiring a language and is therefore shared by the speaker community of the
language in question. This way words formed according to the morphological rules
44 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

of that language are recognised by the speaker community as possible or new words
and, conversely, words which are not formed according to the rules of the language
are identified as impossible words. For example, a plural adjective would be
identified by an English language user as an impossible word in English, while a
plural noun would be labelled as a possible word in English, even if the listener has
not encountered that particular noun in the past. Similarly, the existence of a mental
lexicon of these characteristics would explain that language users are able to
produce possible words they have never heard before: they are actually forming
words making use of the rules stored in their mental lexicon. For example, an
adjective that has just entered the language will naturally not be used by the
language user in the plural, while they would most probably use a new noun in the
plural, just as in the singular.
Of course, this does not mean that the mental lexicons of a language community
are all exactly the same. Mental lexicons develop with age and their richness
depends on a number of factors, including the degree of exposure to the various
areas of world experience. The mental lexicon of a non-native user of the language
also differs from that of a native user, although the higher the proficiency level, the
more similar it would be to the mental lexicon of a native speaker.

3.1.1 Morph and allomorphs

We said above that one of the components of morphemes is their formal

representation. Indeed, most morphemes have a formal representation (see,
however, zero morphs in 3.1.2 below), and some of them may actually have more
than one realisation. If you were to decompose girls, children and feet into
morphemes, you would probably identify the common morpheme in each of the
three words: the plural number morpheme. Crucially, you would also realise that
the actual form of the plural morpheme is different in each of the plural forms cited
above (girl > girls; child > children; foot > feet) When we want to refer to the
formal representation of a morpheme, we use the term morph. The phenomenon by
which a morpheme takes different forms is known as allomorphy, and each of the
possible forms or morphs of one and the same morpheme is referred to as an
allomorph or morphological alternant. We may then say that allomorphs are
semantically equivalent, and therefore linguistically non-contrastive, because they
represent the same morphological unit, even if they are formally different.
When we talk about allomorphs, we should take into consideration their
phonological form, and not just their spelling. In fact, morphs are very often cited
by their phonological form. This is so because language is primarily oral, and also
because many languages, like English, are non-phonetic and spelling often conceals
morphological differences. Spelling may behave predictably in some cases, but not
always. For example, in girls and boys both word-forms show the same plural
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 45

allomorph /z/ and the same spelling <s>, whereas books, which orthographically
seems to have the same allomorph as girls and boys, it actually has a different plural
allomorph: /s/.
A central property of allomorphs is that they stand in complementary
distribution, that is, out of all the possible allomorphs of one and the same
morpheme, only one particular allomorph would make the resulting word
grammatical. In practice, this property is reflected in the ungrammatical nature of
*girlen and *girls /s/ (instead of /z/, so it would probably sound non-native to a
native speaker of English), or *worken and *readed. As a counterexample, take the
possible pronunciations of the morpheme -ing. This morpheme has the form /ɪƞ/.
However, sometimes it may take the non-standard form /ɪn/, as in looking /lʊkɪn/, as
opposed to /lʊkɪƞ/. The non-standard form of the morpheme, /ɪn/, stands in free
variation with the standard form, /ɪƞ/, and not in complementary distribution.
Therefore, the form /ɪn/ is not considered as an allomorph of the morpheme -ing,
but a free variant. In fact, the morpheme -ing has only one associated morph /ɪƞ/.
The selection of one allomorph over another is system-dependent. This means
that the rules in the system of the English language govern the selection of
allomorphs. Basically, allomorphy is associated with three types of structural
constraints: phonological, lexical and morphological:
 Allomorphy is phonologically-conditioned when the phonological properties
of the surrounding elements govern the occurrence of one allomorph or
another. This is the case, for example, of the selection of one over the five
possible forms for the prefix in-:
- /ɪm/, spelt <im->, selects bases starting with bilabial sounds /p, b, m/, for
example, im·possible, im·balanced and im·material,
- /ɪl/, spelt <il->, selects bases starting with /l/, for example, il·literate,
- /ɪr/, spelt <ir->, selects bases starting with /r/, for example, ir·regular,
- /ɪƞ/, spelt <in->, selects bases starting with velar sounds /k, g/, for
example, in·capable and in·glorious, and
- /ɪn/, spelt <in->, selects the rest of the bases, for example in·active,
in·decisive, in·tolerable or in·formal.
This case of phonologically-conditioned allomorphy can be explained on
the grounds of assimilation, that is, the morph selected is phonologically
similar to the sound in the base that the allomorph is to stand next to.
Another example is the adjectival suffix -al. In this case, the allomorphic
variant -ar /ər/ attaches to bases ending in /l/, as in molecul·ar and pol·ar,
and the variant -al /əl/ attaches to the rest of bases, as in mod·al and caus·al.
So here we find the opposite phonological preference to assimilation:
46 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

dissimilation, that is, the allomorph selected is one that is phonologically

different from the final sound in the base word.
In the examples above, phonologically-conditioned allomorphy affects
affixes. Phonologically-conditioned allomorphy may also affect the central
part of words, as in the pairs wife vs. wives or bath vs. baths, where the
central part of the word shows voicing of the final consonant after the
attachment of the plural morpheme. We refer to this latter type of
allomorphy as root or base allomorphy.
 Allomorphy is lexically-conditioned when a lexeme governs the selection of
one allomorph or another. This is, for example, the case of child > children or
foot > feet, where the lexemes child and foot condition the occurrence of a
particular allomorph of the plural number morpheme.
 Allomorphy is morphologically-conditioned, when the identity of the affix to
be attached to a base conditions the form of the base. In general,
morphologically-conditioned base allomorphy affects Latin bases. An example
is -ceive in receive which often becomes -cept before -ion, as in deception,
conception and reception. Bases attaching -ity and -ic also tend to show base
allomorphy, as in sincere /sɪnˈsɪə/ > sincerity /sɪnˈserɪti/ and economy
/ɪˈkɒnəmi/ > economic /iːkəˈnɒmɪk/.

An issue at stake regarding allomorphy is how much variation we are ready to

accept to consider that two realisations either belong to the same morpheme or
actually represent two different morphemes. A discussion of two examples may
bring some light to the issue. The first example concerns in- and un-. These two
units are associated with the meaning ‘not X’, as in im·possible and un·complicated
and both occur in adjectives. They stand in complementary distribution and the
morphological conditioning they are subject to is explained in their different
origins: in- is Latinate and un- is Germanic. The origin of morphemes may impose
combinatorial restrictions, so while in- is limited to occurrence in Latinate
adjectives, un- combines with Latinate and non-Latinate adjectives. From this
discussion, we may think that they could be taken as allomorphs of the same
morpheme as they seem to meet the criteria set for allomorphy. A major aspect that
sets them apart, however, is that un- may also combine with verbs and nouns, and
thus shows a wider semantic spectrum. Attached to verbs, un- adds reversative
(‘opposite of Ving’) or privative (‘remove X’) meaning, as in un·do and un·cork,
and attached to nouns it means ‘lack of X’, as in un·ease or un·education. The
conclusion to be drawn then is that in- and un- are not fully semantically equivalent
and this is why they are listed as different affixes.
The second example concerns -er and more for the expression of the
comparative degree of superiority, as in bigger and more intelligent. This example
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 47

is similar to the previous one in that the forms considered stand in complementary
distribution and contribute the same meaning to the adjectives or adverbs they
combine with. However, even if -er is an inflection and pertains to the level of
morphology, and more is not and pertains to the level of syntax, unlike the previous
example, the meaning they both express is ‘comparative degree’, which makes them
fully semantically equivalent. As a result of their semantic equivalence, they are
described as two possible realisations, that is, two allomorphs, of the comparative
degree morpheme (see also section 4.2.1 in chapter 4 on English inflections).

3.1.2 Types of morphs

You may have noticed from examples above like girls and foot, illustrating the
allomorphy for the plural number morpheme, that morphs may relate formally to
the base word in various ways:
 Most morphs relate to the base form in terms of attachment, that is, a
morphological element is added linearly as a concatenative sequence to the
base, as in girl·s. These morphs are called additive morphs.
 Other morphs relate to the more basic word by partial suppletion or total
suppletion, that is, a morph replaces part of the more basic word, as in foot >
feet, or the more basic word completely, as in go > went, or good > better.
This type of morph is known as a suppletive morph. Partial suppletion often
affects the central vowels of the basic word. This type of replacement is called
vowel change or vowel alternation.
 Finally, there are morphemes that are present in words but which do not cause
modifications with respect to their bases, as in sheepSing vs. sheepPl, or in
putBase vs. puted1 or puted2. We can say that there is no formal change in these
cases. The morph that takes part in this process is known as zero morph, after
the absence of formal representation. Note that change of (grammatical)
meaning is taken as sufficient evidence of morpheme status. Other examples
of zero morphs involving lexical meaning are:
(1) bottleN > bottleV
‘a container for liquids, ‘to put something into
usually made of glass or plastic, bottles or jars’
with a narrow neck’
48 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

Table 1 lists the cases of formal modification that have just been discussed:
Table 1. Formal modifications and types of morphs

Example
Formal modification Morph
Base Inflected form
Attachment Additive morph girlSing girl·sPl
Sing
Partial suppletion Suppletive morph foot feetPl
Base
Total suppletion Suppletive morph go wented1
Sing
No formal change Zero morph sheep sheepPl

Note than more than one type of modification may also occur, as illustrated by
children, showing vowel change and affixation.
Attachment is far more frequent in English than any other form of
morphological change, including lack of apparent change by use of a zero morph.
Morphological processes involving attachment are called concatenative processes
and processes where morphemes do not arrange sequentially are called non-
concatenative processes. In general, language users prefer concatenative processes
as they are easier to process, both on the part of the speaker and on the part of the
listener, than processes where the more basic material becomes altered. This has
implications for the morphological productivity of the word-formation rules that use
one or the other type of processes, concatenative or non-concatenative.
Accordingly, a higher degree of productivity is often associated with concatenative
processes (see section 4.1.5 in chapter 4).

3.2 THE WORD

Words are the free units of meaning that belong in the vocabulary of a
language, typically any of the elements listed in a dictionary. This definition views
words as dictionary entries or lexemes and is acceptable as a general principle.
However, the double dimension of words as signs, i.e. their double dimension as a
complex of signifier + signified, results in mismatches where the concept word does
not always coincide from the semantic and the formal (either orthographic or
phonological) points of view. The term word can thus be used in a number of ways
depending on whether we are concerned with formal, grammatical or semantic
considerations.
Like other languages, English contains examples of items that qualify as words
according to the above definition, i.e. as free units of the vocabulary of a language,
but do not according to others. The most evident cases are:

 Homography: one and the same orthographic form, i.e. one and the same
orthographic word, corresponds with several phonological and lexical words:
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 49

(1) leadV /li:d/ vs. leadN /led/

windV/waind/ vs. windN/wɪnd/
 Homophony: one and the same phonological form, i.e. one and the same
phonological word, corresponds with several orthographic and lexical words:
(2) knight /nait/ vs. night /nait/
right /rait/ vs. write /rait/
 Complete or total homonymy: one and the same form or formal word, both
orthographically and phonologically, corresponds with several (semantically
unrelated) lexical words:
(3) ball [social event] vs. ball [round object]
sewer [person who sews] vs. sewer [underground conduit]
 Homomorphy: one and the same form or formal word (orthographically and
phonologically), corresponds with several grammatical and (morphologically
related) lexical words, as in conversion-related pairs and related cases:
(4) concerningV vs. concerningPrep
startN vs. startV
 Lexicalisation: the process whereby several orthographic and phonological
forms or several orthographic and phonological words become one and the
same lexical form or lexical word:
(5) blow up vs. explode
give in vs. surrender
One and the same word may also take variant forms for the expression of
grammatical categories so as to adjust to their particular grammatical context of
occurrence, for example, walk, walks, walked, walking, to walk, etc. These variant
forms do not alter the basic lexical meaning of the word, only the grammatical
meaning associated with it. These forms are the word-forms, i.e. the different
forms that a word may take according to grammatical categories: 1
(6) goPr vs. wentPast
highPos vs. higherComp
Similarities like the ones listed above are extended by some authors to
comparisons between words and word-forms, and are also excluded by some others,
because the terms of the comparison are at different levels of description. In the

1. In specialized publications, words are usually represented in CAPITALS or SMALL CAPITALS when
the focus is on their properties as vocabulary items, whereas word-forms are not. In this book, we will
follow this convention only where the contrast is relevant.
50 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

latter interpretation, when words have the same form as word-forms, they are
described as cases of formal identity rather than as cases of homonymy:
(7) ledN vs. ledV.Past
roseN vs. roseV.Past
Attempts at a universal definition of word find even more difficulties, because
the range of cases that such a universal definition should comprehend is naturally
wider and, as a result, more heterogeneous and difficult to embrace by one and the
same working definition, e.g. as the one presented here for English.

3.2.1 Word-classes

In addition to free morphological status and meaning, just as lexemes, another

property of words is that they can be classified as word-classes or parts of speech.
Certain specific approaches, where the emphasis is on the inflectional properties of
each class, use the term form-classes for the categories of this classification.
The classification of word-classes is an essential part of the description of a
language, because it is actually the description of the grammar of that language, so
which classes and what type of relations may exist between them is a major
descriptive point. In this classification, every word is labelled as a noun, verb,
adjective, adverb, article, preposition, etc., such that the labels should respond to the
main properties of the word-class, e.g. formal, syntactic, or semantic.
The description of words usually takes the form of a system of word-classes or
categories like, e.g. nouns and adjectives. How many and which word-classes
should be in this system depends on a number of theoretical decisions, e.g. whether
the classes should be universal or language-specific (in this case, for English
instead of for other languages), whether the classes should be viewed as discrete
categories or as continuous categories, i.e. with a clear-cut separation between
themselves or not, or, more importantly, whether the classes should be defined
according to the form, the function or the meaning of words.
Regarding the first decision, the description of English word-classes has been
based on universal categories in practice, even if the categories may not have been
intended originally as such. This is because the description of English has been
modelled on the description of the classical languages for over two millennia. This
means that essentially the same classes that were described for classical Greek and
were then used for the description of Latin have also prevailed in the description of
the grammar of the western languages. This can be seen still today in the name (and
the concept) of the classes, which often leads to deceiving assumptions such as, e.g.
the fact that pronouns should always replace nouns. English is not very different
from most languages in this respect, as those categories have also been used for the
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 51

description of most modern European languages, which could not be in the mind of
the classical Greek grammarians.
The evolution of linguistic thought has called into question the suitability of the
classical categories but the names and the number of classes remain essentially the
same in the standard description. Even so, and concerning the second theoretical
decision above, three major approaches stand out in the description of word-classes,
also as regards English:

 Word-classes are discrete categories, like astronomical seasons, where each

season is separated from the next on a given day and time. In this view, word-
classes do not allow intermediate positions between categories, even if not all
the word-classes of the classical system can be recognised as such, and not all
have a place in a system of discrete categories;
 Word-classes are continuous categories, like meteorological seasons, where
the transition from one season to the next is gradual as the weather slowly
changes from, e.g. winter to spring. In this view, word-classes are defined
according to a prototype or central members, where the prototype displays all
the properties of the class and represents a standard with respect to the
members that do not; the less prototypical or peripheral members, which
display fewer properties that are typical of the class along others that are
typical of a different class, represent the fuzzy boundaries of word-classes;
 Word-classes are an approximate representation of cognitive categories, and
they do not always exist as a defining property of a word: instead, they may be
just secondary features of lexical entries, i.e. of words, that are specified in the
context just as certain grammatical properties are specified according to the
context and are not usually inherent properties of words, like number in nouns,
tense in verbs or degree in adjectives.
Of these, the most widespread approach in the current description of English
assumes that:
 Word-classes are based on prototypical categories, i.e. each word-class is
based on words which display all or most of the features assigned to the
category (central members), but it comprehends other words that deviate
from the prototype in lacking some characteristic features (peripheral
members). Thus, high is a central member of the word-class adjective because
it can take the prototypical inflection of adjectives for the comparative and the
superlative degree (higher, highest), and can take the typical attributive and
predicative positions, i.e. can occur in adjective phrases that premodify nouns
(e.g. a high hill) or follow copulative verbs (e.g. The hill is high). By contrast,
afraid is a peripheral member of the same word-class, because it cannot take
52 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

the prototypical inflection of adjectives (*afraider, *afraidest) and does not

usually take attributive position (?the afraid girl);
 As a result of the above, the classes established allow a degree of
heterogeneous membership and not all members display the same formal,
syntactic and/or semantic properties. Thus, the word-class noun comprehends
simplex words but also complex words with a number of typical suffixes for
this word-class, e.g. -(a)tion, -hood, -ity, -ment, -ness, and many others (see
section 4.3.1 in chapter 4);
 Finally, word-classes form a categorial gradient where some words display
properties of only one class, and others display properties of several word-
classes. This means that the system allows considerable word-class overlap,
i.e. that words may lie in-between two or more classes because they display
properties of several classes at the same time. For example, lexical verbs and
auxiliary verbs have a number of properties in common and also others that
separate them, but the separation is not clear-cut because there is a group of
verbs that displays properties both of lexical verbs and also of auxiliary verbs,
e.g. the semi-auxiliaries dare and need (see section 5.3.2.1 in chapter 5).
Word-classes may share a variable number of properties with several other
word-classes at the same time and for a number of reasons, i.e. the overlap is
not always between two categories.

Figure 1. A representation of three interpretations of word-classes

Finally, and concerning the third and more influential theoretical decision on the
weight of each of the three criteria considered, the description presented in this
book is based mainly on the form and the syntactic function of words, with meaning
as a subsidiary criterion, or as a criterion for internal classification of the categories
obtained from the criteria of form and function:

 Form, i.e. by inflectional and/or by derivational features rather than just

orthographic or phonological form, in two respects:
- inflectional morphology, i.e. the word-forms that each word can produce
for the expression of grammatical categories. This is usually described as
inflection, even if grammatical categories may be signalled by inflection,
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 53

as in the a. series, but also by other resources, like suppletion, as in the b.

series:
(1) a. Number dog vs. dog·s
Tense play vs. play·ed
Degree small vs. small·er
b. Number man vs. men
Tense go vs. went
Degree good vs. better
Inflectional morphology does not signal word-class unequivocally, among
other reasons, because Modern English retains little of the complex
inflectional system of Old English, i.e. few of the open word-classes and
very few of the closed word-classes mark their members univocally and
systematically for grammatical categories. Within the closed word-classes,
the category personal pronoun is different in this respect and may be used
as an example of systematic inflectional marking to help identify word-
class by inflection. Thus, personal pronouns, unlike most other word-
classes, can be identified by their morphological expression of
grammatical categories like person, number, gender and case, because
many of the possible forms of personal pronouns are different according to
the above categories:
(2) I vs. me
we vs. our
- derivational morphology, i.e. certain word-formation patterns are
characteristic of certain word-classes, e.g. un-, in-/im-/il-/ir- are
characteristic for adjectives and en- or em- are characteristic for lexical
verbs. However, like inflectional morphology, derivational morphology is
not an unequivocal mark of word-class. This is because derivational
morphology is present only in complex words and not all members of a
word-class are complex words, i.e. not all words are the result of word-
formation (e.g. quickly is a complex word that bears a typical adverb-
forming suffix, but fast is a simplex word without any morphological mark
and can be an adverb just as well). Also, derivational morphology is not
necessarily class-changing (e.g. child > childhood within the word-class
noun, or consider > reconsider within the word-class lexical verb), and it
may not signal the new word-class in all cases (e.g. -ize, forms lexical
verbs whereas -al may form nouns but also adjectives, as in refusal vs.
industrial, respectively).
Unlike inflectional morphology, where the description is based on the
grammatical categories that apply in each word-class, the description of
54 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

derivational morphology is often based on forms (e.g. affixes), rather than

on semantic categories.
 Function, i.e. the relation or relations that a word has with respect to others
and the level at which it has that or those relations. The class of a word can be
told from how it behaves, i.e. from its relation with respect to other words that
occur in a context. Function can disambiguate cases of morphological identity
based on syntactic and its inherent semantic difference:
(3) The dry winds from the mountains will dry the clothes soon.
 Meaning, i.e. the type of meaning that a word has and according to which it
can be classified or described. Meaning has usually been accepted to play a
subsidiary role, as an element for internal subclassification at best. Thus, some
semantic properties are specific to certain word-classes, like countability in
nouns or gradability in adjectives. Others are cross-cutting and apply in
several word-classes, like stativeness in lexical verbs and adjectives.
It should be emphasised that distinct morphological marks and syntactic
functions are prototypical properties of a word-class, but that not all members of the
word-class display all the prototypical properties, and that the members of word-
classes are, by definition, not (morphologically, syntactically, semantically)
homogeneous.
Specifically, morphological mark is not systematic in English and the same
form may be shared by several word-classes, either because morphemes may be
homonymous, as in a., or as a result of mere formal identity, as in b.:
(4) a. refuse > refus·al vs. addition > addition·al
b. function vs. extinct·ion
Similarly, univocal relations between word-classes and syntactic functions are
rare or inexistent, because one and the same word-class may belong in structures
that perform various syntactic functions, and one and the same function may be
realised by structures headed by various word-classes:
(5) A thickAdj wall was built vs. A stoneN wall was built.
Some descriptions of word-classes use a fourth criterion: distribution or
distributional properties. The reason why it is not present in all word-class systems
at the same level as form, function, or even meaning is that this can be considered a
consequence of the syntactic function of the word, or an external materialization of
syntactic properties. Thus, in this book distributional properties of word-class
members will be included in the sections devoted to their syntactic function.
This is a controversial point, because distribution does not refer to the positional
properties of a word, but to its combinatorial potential too, i.e. to the type of words
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 55

that may combine with a specific word. Distribution stems from syntactic, but also
from semantic properties, as the combinatorial possibilities of the following
examples show:

(6) Amy just loves coffee.Mass vs. One coffeeCount is not enough.
(7) The sum is wrong.Non-grad vs. We were very wrongGrad to judge you so.
Thus, in the examples above the mass term of the noun coffee disallows
combination with numerals because it is viewed as a substance and cannot be
counted, and the non-gradable term of the adjective wrong disallows combination
with intensifiers because it is viewed as a property that either applies or not, i.e.
cannot apply by degrees.
Overall, the description of English word-classes remains a descriptive issue for
reasons that are specific of English (English is under the influence of processes that
have extended formal, syntactic and semantic properties of some word-classes to
members of others, i.e. that blur away the contrast between word-classes), but also
for reasons that apply in other languages too (e.g. the criteria available, i.e. form,
function and meaning, may be in conflict and it is not always clear how to rank
them). The effect of the latter is such, that, in the case of English, linguistic theory
is often in favour of an approach where word-classes are underspecified or multiple
word-class membership is a defining property of words. Word-classes and their
defining properties are described in detail in chapter 5.

3.3 THE PHRASE

In this section, we present a very brief account of English phrasal structures.

Given the complexity of this subject matter, which needs to be dealt with separately
in its own, here we will mainly draw attention to its basics, that is, to the central
constituents of these linguistic units of description, based upon which a widely used
taxonomy of phrases will be established.
With this purpose in mind, let’s start first by defining this particular structural
unit. Phrases consist of one word or more that belong together and fulfil one
specific syntactic function. For instance, see example (1):
(1) My sister is admired by many European young people now.
In this sentence, we can identify four main groups of words, or phrases. As
illustrated in the tree diagram below, My sister (a noun phrase) plays the role of
Subject, is admired (a verb phrase) is the Predicator, now (an adverb phrase) is an
Adverbial of Time, and by many European young people (a prepositional phrase),
the Agent Adverbial:
56 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

Figure 2. Phrases within sentences

At the same time, these phrases can consist of others, that is, they can be
embedded inside each other. As the diagram below indicates, in by many European
young people, European and young form two different phrases (i.e. adjective
phrases) that modify the Head noun people:

Figure 3. Phrases within phrases

The name of each phrase is claimed to depend upon which content word is its
most central element and core component, both syntactically and semantically. If
the most important part of the phrase, or Head, is a noun, the phrase will be called
noun phrase (2); if the most important part of the phrase is a lexical verb, the
phrase will be a verb phrase (3); finally, the Head of the adjective phrase and of the
adverb phrase is an adjective (4) and an adverb (5), respectively.
(2) many European young people
(3) is admired
(4) young
(5) now
Grammatical words such as determinatives or auxiliary verbs are said not to
form phrases of their own but to function inside some of the phrases listed above;
that is the case of many and is in our sentence. Many determines the Head noun
people, expressing amount or quantity; the verb is adds information concerning,
among others, tense (i.e. present), person (i.e. third), number (i.e. singular), mood
(i.e. indicative), aspect (i.e. non-perfective and progressive) and voice (i.e. active).
This is a controversial issue that needs special attention. For example, if our
sentence above were changed into My sister is admired by very many European
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 57

young people now, we should wonder how to analyse the new constituent in the
noun phrase (i.e. the intensifier very), and to decide the type of relationship it holds
with the other elements of this structure. After applying deletion, one of the various
constituency tests at hand (see below), if we can finally prove that this word
depends on the quantifier many, and not on the Head noun (i.e. people) or the
Modifiers (i.e. European and young), we would perhaps consider the assumption
above incorrect; consequently, we should add that, in some cases, grammatical
words such as many can be the Head of phrases as well; if that is the case, then, we
should speak about the existence of the quantifier phrase.
(6) a. *very (many) European young people
b. (very) many European young people
This brief sketch of what a phrase is will be followed now by a description of its
constituents in 3.3.1; and, in 3.3.2, we will try to set up a classification that can
embrace a very broad range of structures, both canonical and non-canonical.

3.3.1 Phrasal constituents

Phrases are built around a word fulfilling the function Head; this is modified
both semantically and grammatically by all sorts of Dependents, sometimes
preceding them (i.e. Pre-Head Dependents), sometimes following them (i.e. Post-
Head Dependents).
(1) The nicest thing I have ever seen
Pre-H Dep Pre-H Dep H Post-H Dep
In our body, the head is the top part that has our face at the front and is
supported by our neck; in a group or organisation, the head is the person who is in
charge of its functioning; and the head of something is the front or the most central
position. Accordingly, on this occasion we use the term ‘Head’ to convey how
relevant this constituent is; in fact, technically, phrases cannot exist without them; a
couple of exceptions will be discussed later on.
Its main features are as follows. Firstly, Heads are the only compulsory
constituent within a phrase; thus, if we delete politicians in the noun phrase below,
the sentence will not be grammatically correct:
(2) *The (politicians) you support cannot escape from their responsibility.
Quite the opposite, if we remove the auxiliary verb cannot in the verb phrase
cannot escape, the resultant unit, whose meaning has obviously changed
unfortunately for the citizen, is still acceptable and equivalent structurally speaking
to the original sentence:
(3) The politicians you support escape from their responsibility.
58 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

Secondly, Heads are the controller of the phrases whose meaning and syntactic
function they govern; therefore, it is them and only them which select their
Dependents. In our sentence, The politicians you support cannot escape from their
responsibility, the Head noun has to be preceded by any Determiner which
encompasses a plural reference; otherwise, the lack in agreement would result in
unacceptability:
(4) a. These/some/few politicians you support cannot escape from their
responsibility.
b. *A/one/this politicians you support cannot escape from their
responsibility.
This does not affect grammatical Dependents only; lexical Dependents such as
Modifiers, Qualifiers and Complements are also subcategorised by the Head of
the phrase. Therefore, in a prototypical world, a voice, a noise, a colour, a taste or
an object can be metallic, but politicians cannot as in (5):
(5) *Metallic politicians cannot escape from their responsibility.
Additionally, in line with the above, the Head noun politicians cannot be post-
modified by a prepositional phrase such as in vinegar and sugar; nonetheless, as
any good cook knows, cucumbers can, as in (6):
(6) The idea of adding ginger to the traditional cucumbers in vinegar and
sugar comes from Caprial’s Seasonal Kitchen.
Last but not least, when politicians want to know or learn more about
something, they show some interest in something, towards something or to do
something else, not at something or for something or with something; in other
words, the Head noun interest needs a particular Post-Head Dependent known as
Complement, with a particular structure, which tends to be a prepositional phrase as
in (7) and (8), or a non-tensed clause as in (9):
(7) Why don’t federal politicians show some interest in this solution?
(8) It is good to hear that these politicians show some interest towards
railways.
(9) When politicians show some interest to become simple, why is the media
making hue and cry?
The last characteristic of Heads we will make reference to is closely related to
the latter. As we have seen above, the Head of a phrase can be expanded into a
larger structure by means of its Dependents and, conversely, as result, the phrase
can be reduced to its Head only; that is the reason why in (10) we have been able to
delete both the Modifier federal, and the Determiner some, with no grammatical
repercussion whatsoever; examples such as Many show little, These show any or A
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 59

few show much, where the Head nouns politicians and interest have been omitted,
will need to be explored in the future.
(10) (Federal) politicians show (some) interest in this solution.
Taking all the above into consideration, we can conclude that, in contrast,
Dependents are typically optional constituents; that is the case, especially, of
Modifiers or Qualifiers; however, there are some cases which encourage us to
reconsider this hypothesis; thus, in countable noun phrases with a singular Head
noun, we need to have a Determiner realised by an article (either definite or
indefinite), a demonstrative or a numeral:
(11) *(A/the/this/that/one) woman looked up as the waiter made a great show of
placing the glass with its golden contents beside her.
We have already mentioned that, within the umbrella term Dependent, there are
two subcategories based upon their distribution in the phrase; some of these go
before the Head (i.e. Pre-Head Dependents) and some others follow the Head (i.e.
Post-Head Dependents). Since this is an intricate puzzle that goes beyond the scope
of this course book, we will simply list them so that the reader can start getting
familiar with them.
Table 2. Pre-Head Dependents

Type of
Phrase Formal realization Examples
Dependent
Indefinite article a house
Definite article the computer
Possessive my blog
Determiner
NP Demonstrative those sheep
Cardinal three children
Ordinal their fifth novel
AdjP a slightly uncomfortable sofa
Modifier
AdvP a back room
Intensifier very clever
AdjP Modifier
AdvP unacceptably expensive
Intensifier rather incomprehensibly
AdvP Modifier
AdvP incredibly slowly
60 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

Table 3. Post-Head Dependents

Type of
Phrase Formal realization Examples
Dependent
PP people from Greece
Relative clause the family who left for Ghana
Qualifier
-ing clause those kids dancing flamenco
to-infinitive clause the book to read
NP
PP the description of the issue
the claim that sea levels will go
Complement that-clause
down
to-infinitive clause his intention to accept it
Intensifier very happy indeed
Qualifier
to-infinitive clause young to live on their own
AdjP PP scared of the new syllabus
Complement that-clause sure that he’ll be there
to-infinitive clause keen to help
Intensifier often indeed
AdvP Qualifier
PP yesterday in the evening

Nonetheless, we will clarify the differences between a pair of terms which

cannot perhaps be taken for granted at this early stage. In the table above and
throughout this section as well, we have alluded to Qualifiers and Complements;
although their features could seem to be more than obvious, here we include the
most distinctive ones in tabular format.
Table 4. Main characteristics of Complements

a book on mathematics
Mainly realised by PPs, that-clauses
very concerned that this is happening now
and non-tensed clauses
her determination to finish the paper
Potentially related to an underlying SheS desiredP to come backOd
clause (especially with deverbal H ↓ ↓ ↓
nouns) herDet desireH to come backC
Fixed structure *her desire at / *her desire in / her desire to
Intrinsic, or essential, meaning her interest in poor children
?
Difficult to omit I asked her about her interest (in poor children).
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 61

Table 5. Main characteristics of Qualifiers

quite active for his age

Mainly realised by PPs, relative clauses and the kid who crossed the river
non-tensed clauses the woman reading the book
far too old to change now
Transformed into a relative clause the book on the desk =
(with any type of H noun) the book I found on the desk
Flexible structure the book by John / the book of John
Circumstantial, or additional, meaning I like those books in that library.
Easy to omit I like those books (in that library).

As for the verb phrase, it follows a different pattern. To put it simply, its Head,
called Main Verb, is realised by a lexical verb such as be, have, do, read, sleep,
jump, like, decide or think; and its Dependents, or Auxiliary System, are realised as
follows:
Table 6. Realisations of the Auxiliary System in the verb phrase

Zero realisation Ø They work a lot.

Third person, singular, present
Inflectional She always goes barefoot.
tense, indicative mood
morphemes
Past tense They never walked alone.
Operators Do they live in the UK?
Auxiliary verbs
Modal verbs You may go there.
They are swimming now.
be/keep + present participle
Auxiliary verb + He kept asking.
inflectional They are often laughed at.
be/get + past participle
morphemes Carl got arrested.
have + past participle They have cleaned it.
Negative particle They are not happy.
Grammatical words
to-infinitive particle To be or not to be…

3.3.2. Types of phrases

Phrases can be classified into two main categories, namely, endocentric and
exocentric phrases. Whilst the former contain a Head element capable of being a
syntactically adequate substitution for the whole construction, the latter do not.
Within the first class, or major type of phrases, four subcategories are included:
noun phrases, verb phrases, adjective phrases and adverb phrases. See some
examples below:
(1) I want [those ugly chairs from her flat]NP.
(2) They [may have been affected]VP by John’s pneumothorax.
62 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

(3) He was [very worried about choosing just one friend]AdjP.

(4) You have defined the crime [very clearly indeed]AdvP.
The second class comprises two minor types of phrases, namely prepositional
phrases and genitive phrases. Both show similarities in their structure, given that it
is a grammatical word such as the preposition or the grammatical modification of
case marker that fulfil the function Relator:
(5) The spontaneous recovery of his brother didn’t last long.
(6) His brother’s spontaneous recovery didn’t last long.
The Relator is normally followed by what we have termed Axis. In the case of
the genitive phrase, the Axis is realised by a noun phrase as in (7):
(7) My youngest sister’s boyfriend was the brother of one of our local judges.
In the case of the prepositional phrase, apart from noun phrases (8), the function
Axis can also be played by adverb phrases (9), prepositional phrases (10), -ing
clauses (11) or wh-interrogative clauses (12):
(8) Your brother met them near the garden.
(9) I will sell it before tomorrow.
(10) They couldn’t show any part from below the knee.
(11) He phoned her before arriving at the station.
(12) My friend was worried about where they were going to take him.
Since typically noun phrases tend to be the most frequent Axis of genitive and
prepositional phrases, to refer to both of them, some scholars opt for the use of the
label marked noun phrase, in opposition to unmarked noun phrase. Likewise, many
textbooks describe these structural units by adopting the same categories discussed
above in connection with noun phrases, adjective phrases and adverb phrases; thus,
in prepositional phrases, the Head is claimed to be realised by a preposition, and
genitive phrases are claimed to be headed by the -s genitive and/or the apostrophe
(e.g. Mark’s final results vs. students’ final results); on the other hand, the other
constituent in prepositional and genitive phrases can be called Complement, and it
is realised by a noun phrase (e.g. with the hammer; my niece’s smile). Interestingly,
as we can see below, in these cases, both Head and Complement are compulsory,
which makes this theoretical alternative subject to discussion.
(13) a. *He arrived at (the station). (14) a. *My friend(’s) father was nice.
b. *He arrived (at) the station. b. *(My friend)’s father was nice.
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 63

3.4 THE CLAUSE

The clause is the grammatical unit immediately more complex than the phrase
in the rankscale. As a grammatical unit, the clause is structured around a central
obligatory element known as the Predicator, formally realised by a verb phrase and
semantically identifying the action or state taking place in the clause as a whole.
The Predicator may be accompanied by one or more additional constituents, such as
Subject, Objects, Complements and Adverbials, also typically realised by
phrases, and semantically identifying the participants in the action, their properties
or the circumstances surrounding the action, state, etc. Thus, the full description of
clause structure includes information of different nature, namely, functional, formal
and semantic. Functional (or syntactic) criteria allow the identification of the
different clause constituents in terms of their mutual relationships, mainly with the
Predicator (e.g. Objects, Adverbials) or with each other (e.g. Subject and Subject
Complement). Formally, each of these constituents is realised by grammatical
units, typically phrases and sometimes by clauses as well. Semantically, each of
these syntactic constituents can be assigned a semantic role, so that the clause can
be viewed semantically as expressing some kind of process in which a number of
participants are involved and which takes place in a set of given circumstances. The
three levels of analysis are related in complex ways so that a large number of
combinations of functional, formal and semantic elements are possible. The
following trees illustrate some of these possibilities:

Functional elements
(‘constituents’)
Formal realizations
(‘grammatical units’)
Semantic roles

Figure 4 Figure 5
 64 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

Functions

Forms

Semantic roles

Figure 6

In the following section we describe briefly the main constituents that make up the
core of the clause. The characterization of clause constituents is based on their formal,
syntactic and semantic properties.

3.4.1 Clause constituents: P, S, O, C, A

3.4.1.1 Predicator

The Predicator (P) is the most central constituent of the clause in a number of
senses: it is always obligatory; it largely determines the number and type of the other
constituents that may appear with it in the clause; it also determines important syntactic
and semantic properties of the clause as a whole, such as its tensed or non-tensed
character, its semantic content as state, process, etc.
 Form. The Predicator is always realised by a verb phrase. This is its most
distinguishing property since no other clause element can be realised by verb
phrases. In English, the Predicator shows limited agreement in number and
person with the Subject: with most verbs this only happens in the present tense
(e.g. I/You/We/They love peanut butter vs. He/She loves peanut butter); with the
verb to be agreement takes place both in the present and the in the past tense (e.g.
I am very tired vs. He/She is very tired vs. We/You/They are very tired; I/He/She
was sick vs. You/We/They were sick).
 Function. The Predicator is the only constituent that is always obligatory in all
kinds of clauses. It usually appears in a central position in the basic type of
clause, that is, in declarative clauses, where it tends to be preceded by the Subject
and followed by Objects, Complements and Adverbials (e.g. They elected him
President last month). In interrogative clauses, on the other hand, the Predicator
(or part of it: the so-called Operator) may appear before the Subject (e.g. Is John
happy? Have you seen him recently?).
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 65

 Meaning. The Predicator determines whether the situation expressed by the

clause is a state (e.g. Andrew is sick), an action (e.g. Birds fly) or an event (e.g.
The building collapsed) and, consequently, it also determines the semantic roles
of other clause constituents.

3.4.1.2 Subject

After the Predicator, the Subject (S) is the second most central constituent of the
clause in that it is obligatory in most cases. It typically identifies the entity about which
something is predicated in a clause. Thus, whereas an active clause like e.g. The
students were reading Moby Dick can be said to be about what the Subject The
students were doing, the corresponding passive, i.e. Moby Dick was being read by the
students, is about what was happening to the Subject Moby Dick.
 Form. The Subject is usually realised by nouns phrases or nominal clauses. It
determines number and person agreement with the Predicator (see examples
above). When realised by personal pronouns, the Subject appears in the so-called
nominative or subjective form (cf. I like her vs. She likes me).
 Function. The Subject is obligatory in most tensed clauses (cf. It is raining vs. *Is
raining) with the sole exception of imperative clauses (e.g. Close the door,
please). It normally precedes the Predicator in declarative clauses (e.g. She lives
in Athens) and follows the Operator in interrogative clauses (e.g. Where does she
live? Is she there now?).
 Meaning. In active clauses, the Subject typically identifies the Agent, i.e. the
agentive participant or doer of the action expressed by the Predicator (e.g.
Valentina went to London last semester), but it can also have other roles such as
Experiencer (e.g. Giles heard an explosion) or Characterised (e.g. Gardening is
so relaxing!).

3.4.1.3 Objects: Direct, Indirect and Prepositional

Objects identify additional participants in the process indicated by the Predicator.

Direct (Od) and Indirect Objects (Oi) appear with verbs that can be linked directly to
them, whereas Prepositional Objects (Oprep), as their name implies, appear with
verbs that need a preposition to link them with their objects, known as prepositional
verbs (e.g. remind (of), believe (in), depend (on), etc.).
 Form. Both the Direct and the Indirect Object are typically realised by noun
phrases or nominal clauses (e.g. I sent my husband a bunch of flowers).
Additionally, the Indirect Object can also be realised by prepositional phrases
(e.g. I sent a bunch of flowers to my husband) which is the typical realization of
66 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

the Prepositional Object (e.g. This reminded him of our anniversary). The
preposition that introduces an Oprep is determined by the verb that realises the
Predicator (cf. It depends on/*of the price; I believe in/*on you). When Objects
are realised or contain a personal pronoun, it appears in the so-called accusative
or objective form (e.g. She left me but I still love her), or in the reflexive form if it
is co-referential with the subject (e.g. Jill hurt herself, John sent himself a
postcard/a postcard to himself).
 Function. Objects are only obligatory with verbs that require them, known as
transitive verbs (e.g. I like peanut butter vs. *I like; cf. Birds fly). In declarative
clauses, Objects typically appear immediately after the Predicator. The Indirect
Object tends to precede the Direct Object when both are realised by noun phrases
(e.g. Google offered him a job), but the Oi can be moved after the Od and is then
realised by a prepositional phrase introduced by the propositions to or for (e.g.
Google offered a job to him). The most distinguishing syntactic property of
Objects is that they can become Subjects when an active clause is transformed
into a passive one. This is particularly frequent with both Direct and Indirect
Objects (e.g. A job was offered to him by Google, He was offered a job);
Prepositional Objects, on the other hand, passivise less readily and in those cases
where passivization is possible only the noun phrase contained in the Oprep
becomes Subject, leaving the preposition behind (e.g. The children are being
looked after by their grandparents).
 Meaning. Objects typically identify additional participants (besides those
introduced by the Subject) involved in the process denoted by the Predicator;
specifically, Od and Oprep identify entities that are Affected by the process (e.g.
The kids broke the window, Are you talking to me?, whereas the Oi identifies the
animate participant who receives the entity denoted by the Od (e.g. She sent me a
‘Dear John’ letter) or who benefits from the action specified in the clause (e.g.
Call me a taxi, will you?).

3.4.1.4 Complements: Subject Complement and Object Complement

Complements introduce properties or attributes that are predicated of the Subject or

the Direct Object.
 Form. Complements are mainly realised by noun phrases (e.g. My boss is a nice
guy but some people consider him a fool) and adjective phrases (e.g. She looks
tired, You drive me mad), this last realization being a distinguishing property
from Objects. Occasionally, Complements can also be realised by prepositional
phrases (e.g. Jane was in good spirits today, We elected her as the leader of the
pack). When they are realised by noun phrases, Complements tend to agree in
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 67

number with the element they are related to (cf. He is my best friend vs. They are
my best friends; I made her my confident vs. I made them my confidents).
 Function. Subject Complements (Cs) typically follow a copular or attributive
verb, such as be or become (see examples above), and less frequently an
intransitive verb (e.g. He died young). Object Complements (Co) immediately
follow a Direct Object (e.g. The witness called the accused a murderer).
 Meaning. Complements introduce properties or attributes that are used to
characterise or identify the Subject or the Direct Object, so that their typical
semantic roles are Characterizing Attribute (or Characteriser for short, e.g. I feel
rotten today, She called Jack a monkey) and Identifying Attribute (or Identifier,
e.g. Julia is my boss, You can call me Bond, James Bond).

3.4.1.5 Adverbials: Adjunct, Disjunct and Conjunct

Adverbial (A) is the clause constituent most difficult to define since the term is
usually applied to a number of elements with significantly different syntactic and
semantic roles within the clause. In any case, Adverbials are typically optional
elements, in contrast with all the other clause constituents that we have seen so far,
which tend to be obligatory in varying degrees.
 Form. Adverbials are typically realised by adverb phrases (e.g. Probably, they
are having lunch now), prepositional phrases (e.g. In the summer we like to go to
the beach) and adverbial clauses (e.g. If you go now, you will regret it), and less
frequently by noun phrases (e.g. I’ll see you next Monday).
 Function. As stated before, Adverbials are typically optional constituents which
can be omitted without affecting the grammaticality of the clause (in contrast
with Objects and Complements; e.g. He killed *(his best friend) (accidentally)).
However, in some clauses Adverbials may be obligatory as they provide essential
information required by the Predicator (e.g. She lives *(in New York) but she is
*(in Rome) now). Some grammarians refer to these as Obligatory Adverbials or
Adverbial Complements, as they combine the syntactically obligatory nature of
Complements with the semantically circumstantial nature typical of Adverbials.
Although their most typical position is at the end of the clause (e.g. Susan left
the room quietly), Adverbials can also occur initially (e.g. Quietly, Susan left the
room) and in a number of intermediate positions in the clause (e.g. Susan quietly
left the room). Also, in contrast with most other clause constituents, Adverbials
are recurring elements, which means that whereas in a single clause there is
usually just one Subject, one Predicate, one Complement and one or two Objects,
there can be a theoretically indefinite number of Adverbials (e.g. [Actually], [if it
68 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

doesn’t rain], I will [probably] drive [to Marks & Spencer] [tomorrow morning]
[to buy some chocolates], [unless you want me to stay here with you]).
 Meaning. The most typical Adverbials, known as Adjuncts, introduce different
kinds of circumstances surrounding the action denoted by the clause as a whole,
such as Place (e.g. Leave your books on the table), Time (e.g. I’ll see you
tomorrow), Purpose (e.g. Press the button to start the computer), Reason (e.g. I
did it because I had to), etc. Some other Adverbials, known as Disjuncts, convey
the speaker’s comments on some formal o semantic aspect of the clause that
follows (e.g. Unfourtunately, we missed the train); other Adverbials, known as
Conjuncts, have an essentially connective meaning, providing a semantic link
between clauses or sentences and acting as discourse markers that contribute to
textual cohesion (e.g. I enjoyed The Sopranos very much. However, I still prefer
The Godfather.)

3.4.2. Basic clause patterns

The basic patterns of English clauses result from combinations of some of the
obligatory constituents introduced in the preceding section. All basic clause patterns
contain at least a Subject and a Predicate and additionally they may contain Objects,
Complements or obligatory Adverbials. An indefinite number of optional Adverbials
can be added to any of these patterns.

Table 7. Basic clause patterns

Type of pattern Constituents Examples

S+P Violeta succeeded.
Intransitive
S+P+A She lives in New York.
S + P + Cs She is a brilliant opera singer.
Copulative
S+P+A She is in Rome.
Transitive
Monotransitive S + P + Od Violeta sang a difficult aria.
Ditransitive S + P + Oi + Od She offered the audience an encore.
S + P + Od + Co She drove the audience crazy.
Complex-Transitive
S + P + Od + A She put her coat on the table.

Verbs are traditionally classified as copulative, intransitive or transitive depending

on the type of pattern in which they tend to appear more frequently. Thus, verbs like
be, become or seem are examples of copulative (or ‘intensive’) verbs. Examples of
intransitive verbs are: walk, fall, die, fly, etc. Transitive verbs are, for instance: catch,
hit, see (monotransitive), give, tell, send (ditransitive), appoint, call, consider, put,
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 69

place (complex transitive). However, it must be noticed that most verbs can occur in
more than one clause pattern, as illustrated by the verb get in the following examples:
(1) She got home. Intransitive (~ arrive)
(2) She got angry. Copulative (~ become)
(3) She got the first prize. Monotransitive (~ obtain)
(4) She got him a nice present. Ditransitive (~ give)
(5) She gets me crazy. Complex transitive (~ make)

In the patterns summarised in Table 7, clause constituents appear in the unmarked,

neutral word order of simple declarative clauses. Additional non-basic or derived
patterns can be obtained by applying different kinds of syntactic processes or
transformations that will be studied in later volumes in this series. In Table 8 we
illustrate one of the most typical and frequent transformations that produce non-basic
patterns, the so-called passive transformation:

Table 8. Active and passive patterns

Basic transitive active pattern Derived passive pattern

S + P + Od They killed him. > S+P He was killed.

S + P + Oi + Od They sent her a letter. > S + P + Od She was sent a letter.

S + P + Od + Co They called their son John. > S + P + Cs Their son was called John.

S + P + Od + A He kept water in the fridge. > S+P+A Water was kept in the fridge.

3.5 THE SENTENCE

While the morpheme is the smallest unit of grammatical description since it

cannot be segmented any further at the grammatical level of analysis, the sentence
is at the other extreme of the grammatical hierarchy and is thus the largest and most
complex unit of grammatical description since it does not function in the structure
of a unit higher than itself. Although there are larger stretches of language, such as
paragraphs and texts, these cannot be properly assigned a grammatical structure and
must be analyzed using specific descriptive tools which are the subject matter of
other linguistic branches like text grammar or discourse analysis.
Sentences may consist of one or, more frequently, several clauses, in exactly the
same way that, as we have seen above, a clause consists of one or more phrases, a
phrase consists of one or more words, etc. Thus, sentences typically result from the
combination of clauses by means of different syntactic processes such as
coordination or subordination. Coordination involves the linking of two or more
70 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

clauses at the same syntactic level, i.e. without one being subordinate to the other.
Clauses linked by means or coordination produce compound sentences.
Subordination, on the other hand, involves combining clauses at different levels, so
that one of them, known as the subordinate clause is contained, i.e. functions as a
constituent, within the structure of another clause, known as superordinate or
main clause. If a sentence consists of just one clause, then it is normally called
simple sentence and in this case the distinction between the two units, clause and
sentence, becomes blurred. The following trees illustrate the three main kinds of
sentences traditionally identified by grammars:

Figure 7. Simple sentence Figure 8. Compound sentence

Figure 9. Complex sentence

By the repeated and combined application of the syntactic processes of

coordination and subordination, speakers, and particularly writers, may produce
extremely complex sentences, which can nevertheless be gradually decomposed
into the smaller units of the rankscale hierarchy presented in this chapter. The
following examples illustrate this kind of complexity and provide ideal material for
the practice of syntactic analysis:
UNITS OF GRAMMAR 71

(1) On Tuesday, when the President made the unusual gesture of personally
introducing his three nominees for the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit, he said that Americans would consider it
a ‘judicial crisis’ if the Supreme Court were similarly short staffed.
(2) Having said this, however, it is also true that an early start to language
learning is likely to lead to better long-term results if early learning is
maintained and reinforced as the child gets older.
(3) Covering a war is supposed to be every journalist’s dream, but after two
weeks of mud, blood, bombs and bullets on the Iraqi frontline, Chris Ayer’s
only thought was, understandably, to get back home.
(4) Beware, however, because although the literature may say that the exam is
optional, if you are also applying for a scholarship, the funding
department may require you to take it, even if the college does not.
(5) Unquestionably, small businesses are in a better position to get it right and
correct it quickly if it is wrong because owners of smaller firms are closer
to their customers and they are more likely to talk to them directly.

Further Reading

Burton-Roberts, N. 19972. Analysing Sentences: An Introduction to English Syntax,

Harlow: Longman; Chapters 3, 4 and 5.
Crystal, D. 1967. English word classes. Lingua 17: 24-56.
Plag, I. 2003. Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;
Chapters 1 and 2.

Exercises

1. Identify the morphemes in the following words:

left-headedness am clarification
sequentially undergone mispelt
murders spoke multicelularity

2. Discuss the allomorphy shown in the examples for the following morphemes:
a. Definite and indefinite articles:
the book, the idea, the European issue
a book, an idea, a European issue
72 DÍAZ-NEGRILLO, FALCES SIERRA, HIDALGO TENORIO, VALERA HERNÁNDEZ

b. en-: emprison, embody, enchain, endanger, enlist, enslave

c. -s: houses, thieves, mouths, cliffs, dwarfs/dwarves

3. Decide whether the items in bold are one and the same word or not, and whether
they belong to the same word-class or not, and justify your answer:
a. A family man would never do such a thing!
She is a very familiar TV presenter.
b. It is crystal clear that global warming is a scientific fact.
Authentic Bohemia crystal is unique.
c. The army approved the government’s request fast.
We reacted rapidly to the signs of collapse.
d. Jane is not a tea person.
An assortment of teas is available at the cafeteria.
e. The country grew many transgenic tomatoes that year.
Their pet boa has grown to a very dangerous animal.

4. Explain the reasons why the words in brackets are the Heads in their
corresponding phrases. Indicate all the constituents of the whole phrase as well:
a. [Many] who were too daring tried to flirt with the [girl] I had met [yesterday]
in the evening.
b. The [English] watched him [dance] with much [interest].
c. The [idea] that Carmen’s [friends] know more [intelligent] people than
Andrew pleased her a lot.
d. Don’t dare to [put] the book on [cooking] on the [table] by the window.
e. Very [few] [thought] she would arrive at Granada as [soon] as she had
suggested.

5. Find two examples for each pattern below:

a. NP: Det + Det + Mod + Mod + H + C (that-clause)
b. NP: Det + Mod + Mod + H + Q (PP) + Q (relative clause)
c. AdjP: H + C (to-infinite clause)
d. AdjP: Mod + H + Q (PP)
e. PP: Relator + Axis (NP)
f. PP: Mod + Relator + Axis (PP)
g. VP: AS (inflectional morphemes + modal verb + operator + operator) + MV

6. Identify all the phrases in the text below. Be ready to justify your decision:
To put it mildly, if it sometimes seems to be saying, on Salim’s behalf, that race
or kinship wins, it is also the case that it is full of losers, that it has a lively
 UNITS OF GRAMMAR 73

feeling for the Africans of market and bush, and for their African troubles, and
for the situation of Salim as someone evolved from a tribal narrowness to an
experience of love liberating and dramatic, which does justice to Metty’s last
state, left behind in the dangerous town at the bend in the river.

7. Identify the syntactic constituents of the following clauses and specify their
formal realization:
a. She felt a sharp pain.
b. He felt a complete idiot.
c. Mary made me a cake.
d. Mary made me happy.
e. Anna said that she was studying hard.
f. The soup is in the saucepan.
g. You should put the wine in the fridge.
h. She found her an excellent roommate.
i. I arrived this morning.
j. I wasted this morning.
k. She always travels first class.
l. She always prefers first class.
m. We are meeting the next sales manager.
n. We are meeting next Friday.

8. Illustrate the use of the following verbs in different clause patterns:

call find give grow leave make run turn
e.g. ask: Why are you asking? (Intranstive)
Children always ask difficult questions (Monotransitive)
She asked me something I couldn’t answer (Ditransitive)

8. Determine whether the following as complex or compound sentences and

identify their main/superordinate and subordinate clauses:
a. I believe that he is telling the truth.
b. Linda said that Lou wanted to go to Paris.
c. I ordered a new pair of shoes but I haven’t received them yet.
d. I know that he feels depressed but is he taking his medication?
e. We got up at six, the taxi was in time, but still we missed the plane.
f. If you want, we could go and see a movie tonight.
g. He must have believed what I said about the pub and that is why he joined.
h. You must admit that you knew that I had told my father that I was pregnant.

View publication stats