I have a question. I work with many ESL students. I teach them ( or
try to) about dummy 'it' and 'there.' But, I also teach them that a
verb can be compound: Joe ran to the store and bought milk. (This isn't
the way I actually view this, but we are so short on time I don't want
to get into ellipted clauses). Recently, a student wrote this one a
paper:
I chose the brand Nike because it's a popular brand and wasn't going to
be hard to find sites that sell Nike.
It seems as though logically the first 'it' should be able to function
as the subject of the second dependent clause, but it doesn't. Is it
the linking verb that is driving this? But I can say this:
He was a thinker but wasn't a doer.
What is going on here?
Janet
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 8:59 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Question about expletive "there"
Herb,
I think we have the same functional motivation behind extraposition
with infinitives.We have "It is easy to love watermelon" (where
"watermelon" is the new information) and "watermelon is easy to love"
where "love" is prime (new) focus. The first might be an answer to "tell
me about things that are easy to love." The second might be a response
to "tell me about watermelons."
Craig
On 10/28/2010 11:32 AM, Stahlke, Herbert F.W. wrote:
> Let me add a functional reason for the syntactic behavior Bob lays
out. Initial position in a sentence is typically topic position.
Topics are things already known or referred to, and for that reason they
will be definite. If a pronoun is used, that pronoun will usually have
definite reference. While indefinite subjects are by no means
impossible in English, indefinites are typically new information, and we
generally put new information later in a sentence, hence the shift of
the indefinite subject to after the verb. The subject position is now
empty, and, English not liking null subjects, we insert "there" as a
syntactic subject, subject to all of the behavior Bob describes below.
In text and in speech, existential sentences overwhelmingly have
indefinite noun phrases after the linking verb.
>
> Herb
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robert Yates
> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 11:14 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Question about expletive "there"
>
> John,
>
> Let me offer a formalist answer to your question.
>
> There in both of your examples is clearly in the subject position. I
base this claim on the nature of tag questions.
>
> 1) Throckmorton is married, isn't he?
>
> In tag questions, the pronoun that is repeated in the tag question has
as its antecedent the subject of the main clause.
>
> So, consider the tag questions in your two examples.
>
> 2) There never was, was there? [was is not negated because of the
never and no context was necessary to figure out the tag question]
>
> 3) There was a life here then, wasn't there?
>
> If the extraposition analysis is correct, and (3) is really (4).
>
> 4) A life was here then.
>
> The tag question for (4) is
>
> 5) A life was here then, wasn't it.
>
> If that is the case and "a life" is the subject, then the tag question
for 3 really should be:
>
> 6) *There was a life here then, wasn't it?
>
> And, (6) is clearly ungrammatical.
>
> The extraposition analysis requires a very separate explanation for
tag questions of sentences with the existential there analysis; the
there is the subject position doesn't.
>
> By the way, the there as subject position provides an explanation to
the following.
>
> We know that standard English says the agreement of the verb should be
based on the following following noun phrase. So, (7) is non-standard
and (8) is standard.
>
> 7) There is a lot of reasons for this.
> 8) There are a lot of reasons for this.
>
> Many native speakers say (7) because "a lot of reasons" is not in the
canonical subject position.
>
> And, let's consider conjoined noun phrases in this construction.
>
> 9) A book and a pencil are in the table.
>
> In the existential there construction, I think most of us would find
10 decidedly odd and prefer 11.
>
> 10) ?There are a book and a pencil on the table.
> 11) There is a book and a pencil on the table.
>
> On the other hand, this agreement principle is very much influenced by
a proximity rule. 12 is not so odd.
>
> 12) There are two books and a pencil on the table.
>
> This proximity rule does not come into play for sentences like (9)
>
> 13) A book and two pencils are on the table.
> 14) Two pencils and a book are on the table.
>
> If the extraposition analysis is correct, the sensitivity of
proximity determining agreement should not exist.
>
> ***
> Finally, unlike most languages of the world, English, French, German,
and a few other languages of the world do not allow null forms in tensed
clauses. It is for this reason that (7) is ungrammatical in English,
but not in Spanish or Russian or Chinese or Japanese or most languages
of the world.
>
> (15) *is raining.
>
> Bob Yates, University of Central MIssouri
>
>
>>>> Craig Hancock<[log in to unmask]> 10/28/10 7:57 AM>>>
> John,
> My own perspective on your second example would be that "there"
is not the subject of the sentence, but is a place holder for the
extraposed subject, which shows up on the right (other) side of the
verb. You could unravel it to "A life was here then.:
> It's hard to explain your first example outside of context.
Example (I'm guessing). "Was there ever a good reason to marry her?"
"There never was." In this instance "A good reason to marry her" would
be the understood subject.
> For some reason, we don't like to say things like "raining is,"
so we say "It is raining." I think "there" (in these instances) is
functioning in the same way. A sentence can be called existential when
you are asserting the existence of something. Your second sentence does
a little more than that with "here" and "then" as modifiers.
> I look forward to other views.
>
> Craig
>
> On 10/27/2010 8:36 PM, John Chorazy wrote:
>> Hello to all...
>>
>> Please share some wisdom on the use of "there" as an expletive
>> expression taking the dummy role/position as subject (not an adverb)
>> in the following models taken from Sam Shepard's /True West. /My
>> understanding is that the expletive "there" must be the subject of a
>> verb of existence, which happens here in the past tense, to be the
>> subject of a sentence... it's not in the locative, if I'm correct.
>> Thank you!
>>
>> "There never was."
>>
>> "There was a life here then."
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> John Chorazy
>> English III Academy, Honors, and Academic Pequannock Township High
>> School
>>
>> Nulla dies sine linea.
>>
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>> interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and
select
>> "Join or leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
