Flashcards in Test 3 (Chapters 7-9) Deck (16):
Participles and tense
Participles are recognized in terms of form = Progressive or Perfect
Particles do not carry tense, as the derive from aspectual forms
Morenberg says that some verbs cannot be made progressive.....is this correct?
This is correct.
Not all verbs can become progressive
(CORRECT)-----The "screwball comedies" which featured Cary Grant defined humor.
(INCORRECT) ----- The "screwball comedies" featuring Cary Grant defined humor.
----Verb tenses/ aspects don't match?
How do we derive perfect participles?
By deleting BE and a GRAMMATICAL SUBJECT from a relative clause.
EX---Students who are taught phonics can sound out words.
EX---(Perfect Participle)----Students taught phonics can sound out words.
What's the problem here:
They are seeming smart VS. They are looking smart.
Although their constructions are the same, the linking verb SEEMING + the Progressive doesn't make sense.
SEEMING is more vague than looking
Given the perception of the speaker, they are unsure of something that they actually would know
Constituency determines whether a prepositional phrase functions as an adjective or an adverb....
Is it a constituent of a noun or verb? sometimes hard to tell.
EX----We hid from the neighbor in the attic.
----Can't tell if "in the attic" is constituent of "hid" (adverbial)
Explain how the statement about "the neighbor in the attic" can create ambiguous sentences
"We hid from the neighbor in the attic"
-Ambiguous because =
----If "we hid...in the attic" (Adverbial PP) then we are hiding inside the attic from the neighbor
----If "the neighbor (is) in the attic" (Adjectival PP) then we are hiding elsewhere from the neighbor who is in the attic
Different functions of THAT
Subordinator---introduces a noun clause
----EX...Americans claim that America is the greatest country.
Relative Pronoun---Connects a phrase or clause or phrase to a noun or pronoun
----EX....I bought the book that is required.
Deictic Determiner--- shows proximity or distance
----EX.... I want that car.
Chinese cook sentences (THAT)
Chinese cooks claim that snake meat keeps you warm in winter.
-THAT functions as the DO of the verb; it is a subordinator. THAT also introduces a noun clause but has no function within it
Chinese cooks prepare snake meat dishes that keep you warm in winter
-THAT is a relative pronoun and serves as the subject of the relative clause
You must introduce a subject THAT- clause with THAT. Why?
THAT has to appear first when the THAT- clause functions as the subject for it to make sense.
EX (incorrect)----Plants will cut jobs this year worries management.
EX (Correct)-----That plants will cut jobs this year worries management.
Explain how we extrapose THAT- clauses
Sometimes when THAT- clauses function as a subject, they are movable to the end of the sentence.
The subject is filled with "it" (expletive) which functions as the grammatical subject
THAT- clause moves to logical subject slot.
EX----That we were poor never occurred to me.
(extraposed)-----It never occurred to me that we were poor.
only functions as a Subordinator
EX----I have to choose whether I want to wear red or blue.
How do we define / determine a sentence modifier?
Sentence modifiers are a structure that, while part of a sentence, aren't a constituent of the independent clause
when two processes are ongoing at the same time.
EX---He produced the novel writing in longhand.
--------producing and writing happened at the same time
Explain how restrictive and nonrestrictive relative clauses work differently in terms of constituency
What is the controversy between generative and structural grammar here?
what is your position?
Restrictive clauses become constituent of the noun slot. Thus, they can't be set off by commas. Nonrestrictive clauses are not constituent of the subject and are separated by commas.
Structuralists believe that the nonrestrictive relative clause is constituent of the preceding noun phrase.
Generalists believe that a nonrestrictive relative clause is not constituent of the noun phrase.
In the bus driver sentence, ", who are on strike," = nonrestrictive relative clause. I believe the relative pronoun "who" shows constituency in the sentence, since without the nonrestrictive clause, the group of bus drivers would not be specified and the meaning would be altered.
Explain the semi-modal problem in the Jimmy Fallon sentence
"Be able to" is a semi-modal, or at least carries a sense of modality. You can't have more than one modal in a sentence, so coupling it with "should" is incorrect