ATEG Archives

July 2006

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Craig Hancock <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 27 Jul 2006 08:22:22 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (153 lines)
Here's another forwarded post from Johanna.--

-------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Proposed grammar terms
From:    "Johanna Rubba" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:    Wed, July 26, 2006 5:40 pm
To:      "New Public Grammar public grammar" <[log in to unmask]>
         "Craig Hancock" <[log in to unmask]>
Cc:      "Johanna Rubba" <[log in to unmask]>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Hi, Craig,

I hope you'll post this to ATEG.

Want terms? Here are some terms. This isn't a complete list, and I
haven't defined many terms. But how about getting it started?

My suggested terms, first round:

 

One major principle: treat the surface as all there is. In other words,
do not present terms as if, say, a participial phrase is ‘an underlying
clause’, or, in fact, any type of clause. We do need to discuss how
these can be viewed as “reduced versions” of clauses, but I disfavor
calling them clauses. That does not leave enough ways to differentiate
clauses from other things. We also need to deal with ellipsis, though I
don’t like using that term. “Omission”? I favor treating different
phrase and sentence types as related in meaning, structure, and
function, but not as derived from one another or somehow “understood”
to be equivalents of one another.

I am not suggesting that all of these be introduced at once, but be
accreted over 12 years of instruction. Also, I recognize that this list
follows my beliefs about how English works. I don't expect to know
everything or have an answer for everything.

Terms: 

discourse roles: topic, focus, old/given/known information (I favor
‘known’); new information


Syntax:
constituent (“phrase” in much modern syntax)
grammatical roles (head, mod., subj., pred., DO, IO, etc.) (Also:
sentence-modifying adverbial)
head
modifier
complement
clause (one subject-predicate pair -- that is, predicate is about
subject)
 finite (has a tense-marked AUX or main verb; consider modals
tense-marked)
 nonfinite (lacks above)
sentence (at least one, finite, independent clause)
 subject (not agent, doer, or “what the sentence is about”. Based on
structure and discourse function.)
 predicate
 verb phrase (main verb and AUXs)
 main verb
 auxiliary verb
 modal auxiliary verb
 (quasi-modals? ‘going to’, ‘ought to’, ‘have to’, etc.)
 predicate roles: direct object, indirect object, subject complement,
object complement (or pred. N, Adj.)
   restrict ‘indir. obj.’ to noun phrases after the verb, not “for” or
“to” phrases at end of sentence.
phrase
noun phrase
adjective phrase
adverb phrase
prepositional phrase

Verb forms
Base (inf. w/o ‘to’)
Infinitive (‘to V’)
present tense - a marker, not a meaning
past tense - a marker, not a meaning
present participle (consider ‘progressive’ or ‘imperfective’ participle)
past participle (consider ‘perfect’ or ‘perfective’ or ‘completive’
participle)
gerund (yes, I’m for it)

tense
aspect
tense-aspect construction (simple present, simple past, present
perfect, etc.)

Sentence types:
simple  (one independent clause with no clausal constituents)
complex (at least one indep. clause with at least one clause as
constituent)
compound (at least two independent clauses joined by a co-ord conj.)

Declarative
 active
 passive
 negative
 emphatic
 exclamatory
 it-cleft
 pseudo-cleft (or WH-cleft)
 left-topicalized
 right-topicalized
 presentational (“there”)
 existential (?”It’s raining” (need two?) )

Interrogative (I prefer ‘Questions’)
 yes-no
 negative yes-no (these do not function in discourse as negations of
yes-no Qs)
 Wh-question (or “information-gap question”)
 negative Wh-question (ditto as with yes-no)
 indirect question
 echo question

Imperative (prefer “Commands”)
 Simple imperative (Go!)
 Imperative with subject (You come here!)
 (Does “Let’s” belong here?)

participial phrase:
 imperfective: “_Holding the vial of liquid nitrogen perfectly still_,
Dr. No walked across the room.”
 perfective: “_Having paid the restaurant bill_, we got up and left.”
gerund phrase: “_His inviting his ex-wife to the wedding_ was a
mistake.”

 

------end (for now)---------




Dr. Johanna Rubba, Associate Professor, Linguistics
Linguistics Minor Advisor
English Department
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Tel.: 805.756.2184
Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596
Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374
URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba

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/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2