Attachments_setltd@mail.ru_2012-06-24_15-33-11 английский язык / 37 complex sentence
.docx37 THE COMPLEX SENTENCE
1. A complex sentence, unlike a compound sentence, is a hierarchical syntactic structure. It is a multiple sentence that consists of an independent clause (also called a main or principal clause) and at least one dependent (or subordinate) clause, grammatically subordinated to the former. The complex sentence, therefore, depends for its existence on the asymmetrical relationship of subordination. For example:
(1) J didn't suppose (2) anyone would object to my absence.
This sentence, in which clause 1 is an independent, or main clause, and clause 2 grammatically dependent upon it, or subordinate, can be graphically represented in the following way:
2. A dependent clause can be joined to the main clause asyndetically, i. e. without any linking elements (She says she loves me), or syndetically, i. e. by means of subordinators or subordinating conjunctions (as if, because, although, unless, since, etc.) and connectives or wh-words such as who, whom, whose, which, what, whoever, whichever, whatever, how, when, where and why.
Unlike conjunctions, connectives do not constitute a separate part of speech, or word class; they include relative pronouns (whatever, which, who, etc.) and relative adverbs (when, where, how, etc.). Subordinating conjunctions have the sole function of joining clauses together, whereas connectives not only join clauses together, but also have a syntactic function of their own within the clauses they introduce. Cf.:
I didn't know if they had rented that apartment, (a conjunction)
I didn't know who had rented that apartment, (a connective serving as subject)
In the first sentence, the conjunction if serves as a formal link; it is a dependent clause marker. In the second sentence, the connective who (a relative pronoun) is also a dependent clause marker, but in addition to this it functions as subject in the dependent clauses.
Whether, though it looks like a wh-word is a subordinator because it does not perform any function in the structure of the clause it introduces.
Only connectives can be preceded by a preposition:
It is a good time for us to think about where we have come from.
The musicians were arguing about whether or not they should do that interview.
3. In terms of their structure, that is, with regard to the number of elements and their arrangement, all connectives are one-member, and subordinators can be divided into one-member, or simple (if, because, until, although, etc.), and multi-member, such as in that, as though, not so...as, etc. The second group can be further subdivided into compound and correlative subordinators.
Compound subordinators invariably consist of two or more elements: in case, insofar as, in order that, as soon as, in spite of the fact that. Some of them could be described as optionally compound, since their final element may be omitted: now (that), provided (that), seeing (that). However, optionally compound conjunctions appear as such chiefly in informal style; in formal written English the second element is not normally dropped.
The components of correlative subordinators are spaced apart, with one component (the endorsing item) found in the main clause and the other, in the subordinate clause: no sooner... than, barely... when, the... the. Correlative subordinators ensure a stronger interdependence between the clauses, sometimes making it difficult to decide which clause is grammatically dominant in the sentence. It is for this reason that some linguists treat this type of structure as "mutual subordination".
Strictly speaking, the term "correlative subordinator" is largely conventional, because the endorsing item can be a notional part of speech (e. g., an adverb) or even a morpheme (-er in comparatives). Furthermore, a few conjunctions are optionally correlative: if... (then), so... (that).
Within these groups there are a number of subordinators of comparatively later origin, such as directly, immediately, provided (that), the last time (that), considering (how, what, etc.), in view of the fact that. They coincide in form with other parts of speech or with free word combinations. The process of formation of such subordinators is still going on. Most of the recent grammar books treat them as conjunctions in their own right.
Many subordinators and connectives (wh-words) combine with intensifying or limiting adverbs: only if, exactly the way, not nearly so... as, just what, etc.:
Anne cooks fish exactly the way her mother did.
Subordinators and connectives may appear in coordinate pairs; this use, however, is restricted and largely idiomatic: if and only if; if and when; when and where.
4. Many subordinators and connectives are polysemantic. For instance, while can be used as a conjunct or as a connective; that can serve as either a subordinating conjunction or a connective; as can convey the meaning of time, reason, concession and manner. If a subordinator combines two grammatical meanings in the same usage, it is described as "syncretic". For example, now (that) combines the meanings of time and reason, with the latter predominating. Some of the subordinators coincide in form with free word combinations (in the way, as long as, every time, etc.). Cf.:
The second act was as long as the first one. (free word combination)
You can stay here as long as you don't ask any more questions. (a conjunction)
Am I in the way? (free word combination)
The girls curtsied in the way the governess had taught them. (a conjunction)
5. If a sentence has two or more dependent clauses, they can be arranged in various ways. In the first place, dependent clauses can be homogeneous, i. e. performing the same function, related to the same element in the main clause, and coordinated with each other:
(1) A classic is something (2) that everybody wants to have read (3) and nobody wants to read.
This sentence can be graphically represented in the following way:
that
and
Clauses 2 and 3 are homogeneous subordinate clauses which are linked by the copulative coordinator and.
Secondly, a dependent clause may be subordinated directly to the main clause (as in the above examples), in which case it is a clause of the first degree of subordination, or to another dependent clause, in which case it becomes a clause of the second, third, etc. degree of subordination. Consider the following example:
(2) If men knew (3) how women pass the time (4) when they are alone, (1) they'd never marry.
if
how
when
Clause 2 is a subordinate clause of the first degree of subordination and clause 3 is a clause of the second degree of subordination. The third degree of subordination is represented by clause 4 that is a subordinate to clause 3. We can also say that clause 2 (subordinated to the main clause) becomes a superordinate clause to clause 3, which, in its turn, serves as superordinate to clause 4.
A subordinator and a connective, each introducing its respective clause, may be placed alongside each other; in this case a superordinate clause is interrupted by a dependent clause of the next degree of subordination:
(1) This is not to say (2) that ((3) what I'm trying to point to here) has not been discussed before.
that
what
In this sentence, clause 3 is a clause of the second degree of subordination even though it is within subordinate clause 2 where it serves as subject.
Finally, a multiple sentence can include two or more independent clauses, connected in one of the ways described above, and at least one dependent clause. A syntactic structure of this type is termed a "compound-complex" sentence.
6. Dependent clauses are classified according to their syntactic function in relation to the main clause. Therefore, taking a unified approach to analysing simple and multiple (complex) sentences, we distinguish subject, predicative, object, attributive (relative) and adverbial clauses. Although some British and American grammars also recognize other types of clauses, such as those of preference, exception, precaution, etc., we believe that these categories are based on lexical or communicative meaning rather than syntactic function; therefore, they will be treated here as semantic subtypes of relevant grammatical structures.
Subject, predicative and object clauses are referred to as nominal clauses because their counterparts in the simple sentence are characteristically expressed by nominal parts of speech. It is also reasonable to distinguish that-clauses introduced by the subordinate conjunction that and wh-clauses which introduce subordinate clauses with the help of connectives. That-clauses are all nominal and wh-clauses can be both nominal and relative. Adverbial clauses are introduced by subordinators other than the conjunction that.