Notice that the adjectives mentioned take a prepositional phrase as complement: "happy about the fact that . . ." without changing meaning. The noun clause (appositive to "fact" in the paraphrase) does not need nor can it use the preposition when the complement is the noun clause by itself. The verb phrase "worry about" has to go without the preposition as well: "I worry that he might be sick." This is normally taken as an direct object; the presence of the preposition in the paraphrase seems to be telling us that the object is a complement (not an adjective): "I worry about the fact that he might be sick."
Bruce
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 1:01 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: What kind of clause is this?
Scott (and Marshall),
I forgot to say the obvious, which is that these are complements in
part because they complement (and are in effect licensed by) certain
kinds of adjectives. Generally speaking, modifiers aren't constrained
that way.
As Marshall points out here, these are sentient (mental, emotional) and
the complement clause will give us the source or the nature of the
emotion.
We also have prepositional phrases that will do that. (eager for. happy
for. happy with. sad for. and so on.)
We can't say "I am beautiful that you are here". Or that "I am thin to
be around you." The fields can't be wet that it rained, but they can
be happy that it rained or eager for it (metaphorically feeling.)
From a cognitive or functional view (since it has been in discussion),
these are highly functional forms, able to expand a feeling or give its
roots.
Craig
Scott,
>
> Klammer et al. in Analyzing English Grammar discusses this particular
> construction and notes that in addition to "happy" lists "glad," "sad,"
> "angry," "hurt," "confident," "doubtful," "positive," and past participles
> functioning adjectively like "disappointed," "distressed,"and "pleased"
> take "noun phrases as adjective complements." Pretty unusual stuff, eh?
>
> Marshall Myers
> Eastern Kentucky University
>
> ________________________________
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Scott Woods
> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 11:30 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: What kind of clause is this?
>
> What kind of clause is the underlined part below? I think it is an
> adverbial clause modifying happy. Is this reasonable? Are there other
> reasonable analyses?
>
> The boy was very happy that his mother did not see him being such a pig.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott Woods
>
>
> 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/
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
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/
|
