There exist two different bases of classifying subordinate clauses: the first is functional, the second is categorical.

In accord with the functional principle, subordinate clauses are to be classed on the analogy of the positional parts of the simple sentence. Subordinate clauses function as different parts of the sentence (subject, predicative, object, apposition, attribute, adverbial modifier). Traditionally these numerous types of clauses are arranged in three groups: nominal clauses (that is, clauses functioning as nouns in various syntactical positions), attributive clauses, and adverbial clauses (Fig. 148).

Fig. 147

All nominal clauses have a function approximating to that of a noun or a nominal phrase. They may fulfill the function of a basic part of the main clause: a subject clause functions as subject of the main clause which has no subject of its own, a predicative clause functions as predicative to the link verb within the main clause; an object clause refers to verbs in different forms and functions, to adjectives, statives and occasionally to nouns, and may be obligatory or optional (Fig. 149). All nominal clauses are very closely connected with the main clause, and if such a clause is removed, both the structure and meaning of the sentence are changed or become ungrammatical.

Fig. 148

Fig. 149

Attributive clauses function as modifiers to a word of nominal character, which is generally called the antecedent. Usually an attributive clause immediately follows its antecedent, although some types may occasionally be distant.

An attributive clause may be introduced by connectives – relative pronouns (who, whose, whom, what, which, that, as), or relative adverbs (when, where, whence, wherein). The choice of relative word depends on the categorical meaning of the antecedent.

Attributive clauses fall into two types, depending on the degree of connection and the relation they bear to the antecedent (Fig. 150).

Fig. 150

Attributive limiting clauses are very closely connected with the antecedent and cannot be removed from the sentence, because the information contained in the attributive clause singles out, determines, or particularizes the person, thing, idea, etc., expressed by the antecedent. Therefore the meaning of the main clause is not complete or is altogether changed without the subordinate clause. The lack of completeness is manifested by some deictic elements (determinants) before the antecedent (mainly articles, demonstrative pronouns, or words with a demonstrative or particularizing meaning, such as the same, the only, the best). The presence of such elements is justified only if the attributive clause is following.

In these sentences the main part taken separately is not clear because of the article which has a classifying or a demonstrative force and therefore requires some explanation in the form of an attributive clause or some context to make explicit what kind of place the library was, what fact was meant.

Attributive descriptive clauses are characterized by a looser connection with the main clause. Usually they contain additional information about the antecedent and may be left out without any serious change in the meaning of the main clause.

Attributive descriptive clauses are generally comma off. They are joined by the same connectives as limiting clauses, except the relative pronoun that, and asyndetic connection hardly ever occurs. The additional descriptive character of the attributive clause is determined by the fact that the antecedent denotes a definite person, place, thing, notion, etc. It is either specified by a limiting attribute, or is expressed by a proper name, or else denotes a unique notion (or one specified by the situation).

An attributive descriptive clause referring to a whole clause, sentence, series of sentences, or even a whole story is called a continuative (or sentential) attributive clause. It is generally introduced by the connective which, occasionally by that.

Adverbial clauses are usually classified according to their meaning, that is, according to the relation they bear to the main clause. They differ from nominal and attributive clauses in that they are introduced by conjunctions with a more distinct meaning.

Some types of adverbial clauses may be introduced by at least a dozen different conjunctions (as for instance adverbial clauses of time). On the other hand, many of the conjunctions are used to introduce more than one kind of clause (as, since, that, when, now that). In some cases the meanings and functions of the conjunction are so numerous that it is really difficult to say what the basic meaning of the conjunction is, as its function depends on the meaning of the clauses and their relationship.

Conditional clauses may be joined asyndetically, though they have link-inversion in this case. Here the meaning and function of the clause can be inferred only from the meaning of the subordinate and the main clause.

An adverbial clause may qualify the whole main clause, the verbal predicate or any verbal part, and also parts expressed by an adjective or adverb. Its position therefore varies: it may be initial, medial, or final – depending on the position of the part of the sentence it refers to and on the general structure of the main clause.

According to their semantics several types of adverbial clause are distinguished (Fig. 151).

Fig. 151

In accord with the categorial principle, subordinate clauses аre to be classed by their inherent nominative properties irrespective of their immediate positional relations in the sentence (Fig. 152). The nominative properties of notional words are reflected in their part-of-speech classification.

The first group includes clauses that name an event as a certain fact. These pure fact-clauses may be terminologically defined as “substantive-nominal”.

The second group of clauses also name an event-fact, but, as different from the first group, this event-fact is referred to as giving a characteristic to some substantive entity (which, in its turn, may be represented by a clause or a phrase or a substantive lexeme). Such clauses can be called “qualification-nominal”.

The third group of clauses make their event-nomination into a dynamic relation characteristic of another event or a process or a quality of various descriptions. These clauses are called “adverbial”.

Fig. 152

SEMI-COMPOSITE SENTENCE

The semi-composite sentence is to be defined as a sentence with more than one predicative lines which are expressed in fusion. One of these lines can be identified as the leading or dominant, the others making the semi-predicative expansion of the sentence. The semi-composite sentence displays an intermediary syntactic character between the composite sentence and the simple sentence.

There are two different causes of the existence of the semi-composite sentence in language, each of them being essentially important in itself. The first cause is the tendency of speech to be economical. The second cause is that the semi-composite sentence fulfils its own purely semantic function, different from the function of the composite sentence proper. It is used to show that the events described in the corresponding sentence parts are more closely connected than the events described in the parts of the composite sentence of complete composition. This function is inherent in the structure – it reflects the speaker’s view of reality, his presentation of it.

Semi-composite sentences can be of two types (Fig. 153).

Fig. 153

The semi-compound sentence is a semi-composite sentence built up on the principle of coordination. The structure of the semi-compound sentence is derivationally to be traced back to minimum two base sentences having an identical element belonging to one or both of their principal syntactic positions, i.e. either the subject, or the predicate, or both (Fig. 154). By the process of semi-compounding, the sentences overlap round the identical element sharing it in coordinative fusion, which can be either syndetic or asyndetic.

Fig. 154

The semi-compound sentence of subject coordination is derived from minimum two base sentences having identical predicates, e.g. two subjects relate to one predicate when they are discontinuously positioned, so that the first starts the utterance, while the second concludes it with some kind of process-referred introduction.

The semi-compound sentence of predicate coordination is derived from minimum two base sentences having identical subjects. One of the base sentences becomes the leading clause of complete structure, while the other one is transformed into the sequential coordinate semi-clause (expansion) referring to the same subject.

The semi-complex sentence is a semi-composite sentence built up on the principle of subordination. The semi-complex sentences fall into a number of subtypes (Fig. 155). Their basic division is dependent on the character of predicative fusion: this may be effected either by the process of position-sharing (word-sharing), or by the process of direct linear expansion. The sentences based on position-sharing fall into those of subject-sharing and those of object-sharing.

The sentences based on semi-predicative linear expansion fall into those of attributive complication, adverbial complication, and nominal-phrase complication. Each subtype is related to a definite complex sentence as its explicit structural prototype.

Semi-complex sentences of subject-sharing are built up by means of the two base sentences overlapping round the common subject.

Semi-complex sentences of object-sharing are built up of two base sentences overlapping round the word performing different functions in them: in the matrix sentence it is the object, in the insert sentence it is the subject. The complicator expansion of such sentences is commonly called the “complex object”.

Semi-complex sentences of attributive complication are derived from two base sentences having an identical element that occupies the position of the subject in the insert sentence and any notional position in the matrix sentence. The insert sentence is usually an expanded one.

Semi-complex sentences of adverbial complication are derived from two base sentences one of which, the insert sentence, is predicatively reduced and embedded in an adverbial position of the other one, the matrix sentence.

Semi-complex sentences of nominal phrase complication are derived from two base sentences one of which, the insert sentence, is partially norminalised (changed into a verbal phrase of infinitival or gerundial type) and embedded in one of the nominal and prepositional adverbial positions of the other sentence serving as the matrix. The gerundial phrase is of a more substantive semantic character, the infinitival phrase is of a more processual semantic character. The gerundial nominalisalion involves the optional change of the noun subject into the possessive, while the infinitival nominalisation involves the use of the preposition for before the subject.

Fig. 154