Attachments_setltd@mail.ru_2012-06-24_15-33-11 английский язык / 39 subordinate clauses of secondary nominal positions

39 / OBJECT CLAUSES

The object clause denotes an object-situation of the process expressed by the verbal constituent of the principal clause.

He bought what he wanted. If we drop the subordinate clause what he wanted we get the unfinished sentence He bought .. ., which has no definite meaning until we add some word that will function as an object. This may of course be any noun denoting a thing that can be bought, for instance, He bought a briefcase. The similarity in syntactical position between a briefcase and the subordinate clause what he wanted appears to be sufficient reason for saying that what he wanted is an object clause.

The same may be said about the sentence Tom may marry whom he likes. ¹ Here the clause whom he likes may be replaced by any noun that will fit into the context, for instance, by any feminine name: Tom may marry Jane, where Jane will be an object. This, again, seems sufficient reason for stating that the clause whom he likes is an object clause: its syntactical function is the same as that of the noun Jane which we put in its place. This sentence differs from the preceding in one respect: the subordinate clause may be eliminated without the sentence becoming impossible or incomplete: Tom may marry. This of course depends on the meaning of the verb marry, which in the sense 'enter upon a married state' does not necessarily require a noun or pronoun to make the meaning of the sentence complete.

There is also another type of object clause. This is found in sentences having in the main clause a predicate verb which combines almost exclusively with object clauses and only with a very few possible objects (within a simple sentence). A typical verb of this kind is the verb say. Compare the following example: She could not say what is was. If we drop the subordinate clause we get the unfinished sentence She could not say. . . The words that can come after the verb say and perform the function of object in a simple sentence are very few indeed: these are chiefly the pronouns this, that, anything, everything, and the noun the truth.

On the whole it may be said that subordinate clauses are much more characteristic of the verb say than an object in a simple sentence.

The same may be said about the verb ask. If we take the sentence She asked whether this was true, and drop the subordinate clause, we shall get the unfinished sentence She asked. . . The possibilities of completing this sentence by means of an object within the framework of a simple sentence are again very limited: there may be the pronouns this, that, something, nothing, and the noun a question. In this case, too, a subordinate clause is much more characteristic of the verb than an object in a simple sentence.

Occasionally an object clause may come before the main clause: .. .whatever courtesy I have shown to Mrs Hurtle in England I have been constrained to show her. In this example the object clause, which of course depends on the predicate have been constrained to show of the head clause, comes first. This is a clear indication that the object clause represents the theme of the sentence, whereas the rheme is represented by the head clause, and the most important element in this rheme is of course the word constrained. In fact the essential meaning of the sentence might have been put briefly in these words: My courtesy to Mrs Hurtle was constrained. In that case the theme would be represented by the subject group, and the rheme by the predicate.

In speaking of object clauses, special attention must be paid to clauses introduced by prepositions. These clauses may be termed prepositional object clauses, on the analogy of prepositional objects in a simple sentence.

We must note that a prepositional object in a simple sentence does not always correspond to a prepositional object clause: for instance, the verb insist, which always combines with the preposition on (or upon) in a simple sentence, never has this preposition when followed by an object clause.

Most verbs, however, which combine with a preposition in a simple sentence, do so in a complex sentence as well: a case in point is the verb depend, which always combines with the preposition on (or upon), no matter what follows: compare It depends on what you will say, It depends on whether you will come.

The following example is very illuminating since a prepositional clause going with the verb think is then followed by prepositional objects within the main clause: He thought for a few minutes of what she had said, and of all that they stood for.

Compare also the following example: He questioned me on what Caroline had said. By substituting a phrase for the clause introduced by the preposition on, we get a simple sentence with a prepositional object, e. g. He questioned me on Caroline's opinion. So the prepositional clause is clearly shown to be the equivalent, in a complex sentence, of a prepositional object in a simple one.

I could not write what is known as the popular historical biography. The corresponding simple sentence would be, I could not write a popular historical biography. So if we term the noun a biography the direct object in the latter sentence, there seems to be no reason whatever to deny that the subordinate clause in the former sentence is an object clause.

The specific qualities of an object clause as distinct from an object in a simple sentence are not difficult to state.

An object clause (clauses of indirect speech included) is necessary when the notion to be expressed cannot conveniently be summed up in a noun, or a phrase with a noun as its head word, or a gerund and a gerundial phrase, but requires an explicit predicative unit, that is, a subject and a predicate of its own. Or, to put it in a different way: an object clause is necessary when what is to be added to the predicate verb is the description of a situation, rather than a mere name of a thing.

In some cases, though, an object in a simple sentence may have a synonymous object clause, as in the following cases: I heard of his arrival — I heard that he had arrived, etc. The meaning of the two sentences in each case is exactly the same, but there is a certain stylistic difference: the simple sentence with the prepositional object sounds rather more literary or even bookish than the complex sentence with the object clause, which is fit for any sort of style.

39/ Attributive Clauses

An attributive clause is a dependent clause that serves as attribute to a noun or pronoun in the main clause (with one exception to be pointed out below); the noun or pronoun thus qualified is termed the antecedent.

Anyone who goes to a psychiatrist ought to have his head

examined. I told them about my brother Michael, who is married and lives

in Sheffield.

On the basis of their semantic and syntactic relationship with the antecedent, attributive clauses are divided into two major classes: appositive (or appositional) and relative clauses.

15.2.4.1. Attributive Appositive Clauses

1. Attributive appositive clauses are also termed content clauses because they disclose the semantic content (i. e. meaning) of the antecedent:

I agree with the old saying that fortune favours the brave.

The impression that the experiment has been carefully designed is erroneous.

Appositive clauses differ from relative ones because they are used to tell us what exactly the fact, idea, suggestion, or impression is and not just to say something about it. Cf.:

The news that John received a letter from Bill is a real surprise. (appositive)

The news that John received from Bill is a real surprise, (relative)

2. An attributive appositive clause is always joined syndetically, by means of the conjunction that; other subordinators are found only occasionally. Because an attributive appositive clause is closely connected with its antecedent, it is not set off by a comma in writing, nor is it pronounced as a separate tone group in speaking.

The syntactic relationship between the antecedent and the attributive appositive clause is defined as apposition¹. As with apposition generally, the apposed units could be linked with the verb be: The impression is that the experiment has been carefully designed; The old saying is that fortune favours the brave. The that-clause in this case functions as part of the predicate of a sentence.

3. The antecedent of an attributive appositive clause is most typically a countable abstract noun, such as one of these:

admission conclusion message rumour

advice decision notion saying

agreement demand opinion statement

announcement dream principle suggestion

answer explanation promise thought

argument fact proposal threat

assertion feeling reply view

assumption hope report warning

belief idea requirement

claim impression rule

The Mayor expressed the opinion that the old warehouse should be converted into a gym.

There was little hope that the climbers would be found alive. This candidate does not meet the requirement that secondary school (should) be completed.

Another group of frequently used antecedents to appositive clauses includes such uncountable abstract nouns as news, information and knowledge:

Have you heard the news that the border has been closed?

The antecedents question and problem stand apart in that they are followed by an attributive appositive clause introduced by a subordinator other than that, which can be preceded by the preposition of:

The question of whether we should demand a payment for our services was not even discussed.

The use of a plural antecedent is rare:

The colonel gave orders that he was not to be disturbed.

Practically speaking, the antecedent of an appositive clause is nearly always singular and generally takes the definite article. The use of the indefinite article is rare but not impossible:

A message that the expedition should change its destination was waiting for us at the next stopping-place.

The audience was shocked by an ungrounded and clearly provocative declaration that the recently adopted law was unconstitutional.

4. After such volitional antecedents as demand, requirement, request, proposal, etc. the predicate of the attributive appositive clause stands in the subjunctive mood:

They yielded to our demand that the children (should) not be punished.

She made a suggestion that each worker (should) contribute a day's pay.

We submitted a request that more lights (should) be installed on our street.

5. Note that if a noun preceding a that-clause is subject predicative, the that-clause may be easily confused with a clause functioning as extraposed subject. Cf.:

It's a well-known fact that wild animals can be dangerous, (extraposed subject) It was a message that they wouldn't come, (appositive clause)

15.2.4.2. Attributive Relative Clauses

1. Attributive relative clauses are so called because they are joined with the help of relative pronouns or adverbs (wh-words and the relative pronoun that). Their function, broadly speaking, is to qualify the antecedent:

The dean saw all the students who had received poor grades.

I'll never forget the day when we first met.

New York, which has a population of over eight million, is one of the largest cities in the Western hemisphere.

These examples show that there is a considerable difference between the subtypes of attributive relative clauses. In fact, they can be classified in various ways, but for practical purposes it seems expedient to divide them into two groups: limiting and non-limiting.

2. Attributive limiting relative clauses are also called "defining", "restrictive" or "essential". As can be deduced from these terms, limiting clauses limit (or restrict) the semantics of the antecedent; they are essential to the meaning and structure of the sentence and could not be eliminated. Cf.:

Each generation imagines itself to be more intelligent than the one that went before it and wiser than the one that comes after it.

*Each generation imagines itself to be more intelligent than the one and wiser than the one.

Restrictive (limiting) clauses are so called because their content is used by the speaker to distinguish those members of a set (class) of objects which have the property designated by the clause from those members of the set which do not have this property. The difference between the sentence They have two children who go to school and the sentence They have two children, who go to school is that only the first sentence implies that "they" have more than two children.

Because limiting clauses are closely connected with the main clause, they are not set off by a comma in writing, nor are they pronounced as a separate tone group in speaking.

3. Limiting clauses qualifying a personal antecedent are joined by means of the connectives (relative pronouns) who, whom, whose, that². That and who are equally appropriate if the antecedent is a vague or generalized noun or a pronoun:

He is the sort of person that I who never goes back on his promises. We need someone that I who can handle the matter with discretion.

If, however, the antecedent is more definite or particularized, who is a far more likely choice:

The uncle who came to see us yesterday is my mother's younger brother.

The use of the object form whom to introduce a limiting clause is considered formal:

The workers whom we employ get paid by the hour, (formal)

Possible alternatives are:

The workers that we employ...

The workers who we employ... . (informal)

The workers we employ...

In a formal style, the preposition is placed before the connective:

The man to whom I spoke was a retired engineer.

In an informal style, it is more usual to move the preposition to the end of the limiting clause:

The man who/whom I spoke to...

Whom then is often replaced by that, but it is still more common to omit the connective altogether:

The man (that) I spoke to...

4. Limiting clauses qualifying a non-personal antecedent are joined by means of that, which, whose I of which, when, where, why, (such)...as:

She retired to the town where she had spent her youth.

He didn't work hard enough, and such work as he had done was very poor.

That's the reason why I didn't marry him.

This is a requirement that/which I refuse to comply with.

The choice between that and which often seems to be a matter of individual taste; however, there are a few cases where that is clearly preferred to which:

1) when the antecedent is an indefinite pronoun:

The governor promised to do all that lay in his power to help the flood victims.

2) when the antecedent is qualified by an ordinal number:

The first church that was built in the new capital city was to become a burial place for members of the ruling dynasty.

3) when the antecedent is qualified by a superlative adjective:

"Hamlet" is perhaps the most profound tragedy that has ever been written in the English language.

4) when the limiting clause has a compound nominal predicate:

It is a novel that will become a best-seller.

On the other hand, that cannot be used after a preposition, whether the antecedent is personal or non-personal. Cf.:

This is the person that/who(m) I was telling you about.

This is the person about whom I was telling you.

Relative adverbs can be replaced by prepositional groups:

The year when (= in which) he was born marked the turn of the century.

The day when (= on which) they arrived was uncommonly hot.

The hotel where (= in/at which) they were staying was by far the most expensive in that area.

The reason why (= for which) he refused is unclear.

The use of the connective whose to refer to non-personal antecedents is considered acceptable, although some speakers tend to avoid it:

The house whose roof fell in has now been repaired.

The alternative use of the prepositional group of which is formal and may sound awkward:

The house the roof of which fell in... /The house of which the roof fell in...

5. Limiting clauses are the only type of attributive clauses that can be joined both syndetically and asyndetically. If the antecedent is not the subject of the limiting clause, the relative that (who, which) is very often omitted in spoken and written English:

That was the only proposal I could come up with. Was the man you spoke to just now our new editor?

Asyndetic limiting clauses are called "contact" clauses.

6. Attributive limiting relative clauses are found in a number of proverbs and idiomatic expressions:

He laughs best who laughs longest, (a proverb)

ЛИ that glitters is not gold, (a proverb)

How can you bite the hand that feeds you? (= do harm to someone who does good things for you) (a cliché)

If you fire your best office worker, you'll be killing the goose that laid the golden eggs, (a proverb)

7. Attributive limiting relative clauses can be further subdivided into particularizing and classifying, depending on whether they correlate with the definite or indefinite article before the antecendent.

Limiting particularizing relative clauses restrict the meaning of the antecedent by establishing a reference to a particular person or thing (or a particular group of persons or things). Their antecedent is accompanied by the particularizing definite article or the demonstrative pronoun that/those:

The students who did not come to class yesterday explained their absence to the instructor.

We enjoyed the city where we spent our vacation.

The girl I told you about is my next door neighbour.

We invited only those people whom we had met at the summer camp.

Limiting classifying relative clauses restrict the meaning of the antecedent by establishing a reference to a certain class (or category) of persons or things. Their antecedent is accompanied by the classifying indefinite article (or the zero article in the plural) or an indefinite determiner (e. g. some, any, no):

She lectured on a topic I know very little about.

Can you recommend any up-to-date audio or video courses that could be used in class?

A passenger who is not in possession of a valid ticket may be fined.

It's time you knew your duties.

The expression It is time... can be used in simple sentences (where it is followed by an infinitive or a for + to-infinitive construction) and in complex sentences (where it is followed by an attributive relative limiting clause with a predicate in the past indefinite). There is a slight difference in meaning between these two structures: It is time + for N + to-infinitive merely states that the correct time has arrived; It is time + limiting clause implies that it is a little late. Note that It is time + I / he / she / it cannot be followed by the past subjunctive were:

It's time he was independent.

Classifying clauses typically qualify pronouns; the meaning of pronouns is rather vague and often needs to be limited by context:

Clive caught sight of someone he knew.

Is there anything I could do to help out?

He admires those who succeed. (= people who succeed)

In old-fashioned English, the pronoun he used in the general sense (= a person) can also serve as antecedent for a classifying clause. This use is mostly found in proverbs and sayings:

He who can, does; he who cannot, teaches.

A similar usage is found with the pronoun they (= people):

And what should they know of England who only England know?

8. Attributive non-limiting relative clauses are also called "non-defining", "non-restrictive" or "non-essential". As can be deduced from this terminology, they do not restrict the meaning of the antecedent; rather, they provide some additional information about a person or a thing denoted by the antecedent. They are not essential to the structure of the sentence and could be left out:

I am reading a book about Helen Keller, who was the most remarkable woman in the history of the United States.

Tom was late, which surprised me.

In my class there are only advanced students, most of whom are from Eastern Europe.

Non-limiting clauses are loosely connected with the main clause; they are set off by commas (or sometimes by parentheses) in writing and pronounced as a separate tone group in speaking.

9. Non-limiting clauses are always joined syndetically, by means of relative pronouns and adverbs. The relative that is not used in present-day English to introduce non-limiting clauses:

In the same way as limiting clauses, non-limiting ones can be preceded by prepositions:

Mr Lee, with whom I played golf yesterday, is a prominent architect.

10. Attributive non-limiting relative clauses can be further subdivided into descriptive and continuative, depending on the structural type of the antecedent.

Descriptive clauses provide a description of the antecedent. A typical antecedent is a proper noun, a "unique" noun, or a noun (group) made definite by the context or situation:

She introduced me to her husband, whom I hadn't met before.

The Mississippi River, which flows south from Minnesota to the Gulf of Mexico, is the major commercial river in the United States.

The use of the indefinite or zero article with the antecedent of a descriptive clause is also possible:

Rice, which is grown in many countries, is a staple food throughout much of the world.

Glaciers, which are huge masses of ice, form in the polar regions and in high mountains.

I bought a dozen eggs, two of which were bad.

The importance of punctuating descriptive clauses can be illustrated by the following examples:

1. The hikers who knew about the avalanche took another road.

2. The hikers, who knew about the avalanche, took another road.

Sentence (a), which contains a limiting particularizing clause, implies that only some of the hikers took another road, but there were presumably others who did not escape the danger. Sentence (b), which contains a non-limiting descriptive clause, implies that all the hikers knew about the avalanche and took another road.

11. Attributive non-limiting continuative relative clauses differ from descriptive clauses (and, for that matter, from all other types of attributive clauses) in that their antecedent is not just a noun or pronoun, but the whole main clause structure; they are added as an afterthought and continue, as it were, the idea expressed in the main clause:

Julia ignored their suggestions, which was unwise. (= and that was unwise)

Norman responded to my letter right away, which I appreciated. (= and I appreciated that)

Only the relative pronoun which is used to introduce continuative clauses; it can be preceded by a preposition:

Norman responded to my letter right away, for which I couldn't thank him enough.

It should be noted that the Russian equivalent of the continuative clause, joined by means of the relative pronoun что is treated by traditional Russian grammars as an object rather than attributive clause.

Sometimes a continuative clause is joined with the help of a preposition, the pronoun which and a noun (like case or event) which is a very general word for a situation:

The drug might have a slight soporific effect, in which case (= and then) the dose should be reconsidered.

I was reprimanded by the boss, at which point I gave her notice.

Although continuative clauses are widely used in formal writing, some grammar books (particularly American) label them as "dangling" or "unrelated" and insist that their use is informal. This opinion could be accepted only to the extent that a continuative clause is undesirable when the reference is unclear, especially when which follows a non-personal noun:

*Michael had made the complaint, which came as a shock.

12. To sum up briefly, it should be emphasized that 1) in restrictive (limiting) relative clauses

1. the relative pronoun that can be substituted for who or which;

1. in object position the connectives (pronouns that, who or which) can be omitted;

3. restrictive clauses are used in expressions those who..., that which... and the like;

4. no commas are used to punctuate limiting clauses;

2) in non-limiting relative clauses

1. relative pronouns (connectives) cannot be substituted by that and they cannot be omitted;

2. commas are usually used to set off a non-limiting clause;

3. quantifiers (half of, some of, none of, all of, etc.) or superlative forms (the largest of, the most of, the smallest of, etc.) may be used with relative pronouns to introduce non-restrictive clauses.

13. Notice also that a restrictive relative clause resembles the final part of a cleft sentence used to emphasize some element in the sentence structure It is + noun phrase + adjective clause:

It was in 1993 that he entered the university.

It is the relative pronoun that is used to introduce a limiting relative clause.

14. The following chart sums up our outline of attributive clauses.

Attributive clauses

appositive

relative

limiting

non-limiting

limiting

limiting

limiting

1 It may be reasonable to regard appositive clauses as noun complement clauses since they seem to have the same relation to the antecedent noun as clauses which function as complements (objects) to the main verb of a sentence. Cf.: to indicate that something happened and to be an indication that something happened.

2 Note that this relative that is different from the subordinator that which is used to introduce subordinate subject, object, predicative or appositive that-clauses.