Bob, I was already there with the separable phrasal verb. Thanks for
contributing.
Richard
On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Richard Grant <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> *subscribe to the myth
>
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Robert Yates <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Off is not a "modifier" of send: It is a particle of the phrasal verb
>> "send off."
>>
>> Consider the following sentences:
>>
>> 1a) We sent off the message.
>> b We sent the message off.
>> c) *We sent off it.
>> d) We sent it off.
>>
>> (In fact, for this particular type of phrasal verb, when its object is a
>> pronoun, the movement of the particle is obligatory.)
>>
>> Consider immediately, which is an adverb.
>>
>> 2a) *We sent immediately the message.
>> b) We sent the message immediately.
>> c) *We sent immediately it
>> d) We sent it immediately.
>>
>> In English, it is ungrammatical to put an adverb between the main verb
>> and its object.
>>
>> The purpose of sentences 1 and 2 is to show that "off" is a different
>> category of word from immediately.
>>
>> As native speakers of English, we never notice phrasal verbs like "send
>> off" but they are one of the difficulties non-native speakers of English
>> have in learning English.
>>
>> There are those who claim there is no important distinction between
>> surface structure and some underlying deeper structure. If that is the
>> case, then obviously these two sentences have to have the same structure
>> and the distinction is useless.
>>
>> 3) John is easy to please.
>> 4) John is eager to please.
>>
>> Notice in (3) John is the one receiving pleasure (the object of please),
>> but in (5) John is giving pleasure (the subject of please).
>>
>> So, we have the following: :
>>
>> 5) It is easy to please John.
>> 6) *It is eager to please John.
>>
>> If there is no distinction between surface and some deeper structure, if
>> also follows that the following sentence has no ambiguity.
>>
>> 7) Flying planes can be dangerous.
>>
>> 8a) Flying them can be dangerous.
>> b) They can be dangerous.
>>
>> It is possible for sentence diagramming to capture what I have noted
>> above, but that requires the ability to show some kind of "movement" to
>> account for the surface order of words.
>>
>> Bob Yates
>> University of Central Missouri
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 12:27 PM,
>>
>>
>> Richard Grant <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> Craig,
>>>
>>> I like the idea of distinguishing a conjunction (in this case two
>>> conjunctions: 'and so') whose adverbial function works beyond the sentence
>>> level. Perhaps they could be called *metaconjunctions *or* transitional
>>> conjunctions*.
>>>
>>> I've worked with undergraduate students for the past 16 years, and I've
>>> yet to meet one who doesn't ascribe to the myth that coordinating
>>> conjunctions "can't" start sentences, I'm assuming school grammars still
>>> ignore the fact that professional writers regularly use them in that
>>> position. And if secondary instructors deny the appropriateness of
>>> coordinating conjunctions at the beginning of sentences, they likely
>>> dismiss the conjunctions' other functions (such as being larger discourse
>>> markers or acting as markers of parenthetical comments).
>>>
>>> Your hunch that the "And so" is functioning as a larger discourse marker
>>> is correct. Here's the context that sets up the sentence I asked about.
>>> (I'm including a fairly large chunk to show that this particular
>>> sentence--which shows the consequence of an idea--is nested in a paragraph
>>> that is marked off by another 'transitional conjunction'--but.
>>>
>>> *Some Private Causes of Unclear Writing*
>>>
>>> Unclear writing is a social problem, but it often has private causes.
>>> Michael Crichton mentioned one: some writers plump up their prose, hoping
>>> that complicated sentences indicate deep thought. And when we want to hide
>>> the fact that we don't know what we're talking about, we typically throw up
>>> a tangle of abstract words in long, complex sentences.
>>>
>>> Others write graceless prose not deliberately but because they are
>>> seized by the idea that good writing must be free of the kind of errors
>>> that only a grammarian can explain. They approach a blank page not as a
>>> space to explore ideas, but as a minefield of potential errors. They creep
>>> from word to word, concerned less with their readers' understanding than
>>> with their own survival. I address that issue in Lesson 2.
>>>
>>> Others write unclearly because they freeze up, especially when they
>>> are learning to think and write in new academic or professional setting. As
>>> we struggle to master new ideas, most of us write worse than we do when we
>>> write about things we understand better. If that sounds like you, take
>>> heart: you will write more clearly when you more clearly understand what
>>> you are writing about.
>>>
>>> But the biggest reason most of us write unclearly is that we don't
>>> know when readers will think we are unclear, much less why. Our own writing
>>> always seems clearer to us than to our readers because we read into it what
>>> we want them to get out of it. And so instead of revising our writing to
>>> meet their needs, we sent it off the moment it meets ours.
>>>
>>> Williams, Joseph M. and Joseph Bizup. *Style - Lessons in Clarity and
>>> Grace*. 12th ed. pp. 6-7. Pearson. Boston. 2017.
>>>
>>> Richard
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Hancock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Richard,
>>>>
>>>> Bruce would be in a better position to say what the placement of
>>>> "and so" in that way means within the diagramming system.
>>>>
>>>> Sentence adverbials are usually intonationally marked--"as a
>>>> result, instead of"--and are usually movable. A coordinating conjunction is
>>>> pretty much locked into place at sentence opening. It has no role within
>>>> the sentence. If you think of "and so" as a paraphrase of "as a result,"
>>>> you can make that case.
>>>>
>>>> Why start a sentence with a coordinating conjunction? The school
>>>> book grammars don't seem to account for it. Often, it's because the shift
>>>> is a larger shift in the discourse. I would be interested in the sentences
>>>> before it, whether "and so" refers back to a single clause or to a series
>>>> of clauses. Maybe we should have a term for that kind of conjunction. I use
>>>> the sentence "So we have come here today to dramatize an appalling
>>>> condition" from King's *I Have a Dream *speech as a good example. It
>>>> follows an opening paragraph talking about the hundred year old promise of
>>>> emancipation and another denouncing the the fact that "one hundred years
>>>> later" the promise hasn't been fulfilled, The march on Washington is
>>>> positioned as a response (result) of all of that. Conjunctions often
>>>> function to make connections at a higher level of the discourse.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think deep structure versus surface structure is all that
>>>> useful as a distinction. To say something differently is to say something
>>>> different. A good question might be why the sentence is organized to put so
>>>> much stress on "ours." "We send it off the moment it meets our needs
>>>> instead of revising to meet theirs" would be a more straightforward
>>>> version. I like their version much better, perhaps because it puts the two
>>>> choices in a more balanced opposition. "Ours" feels very selfish when it
>>>> comes. "The moment" makes it lazy. We are selfish and lazy. The structure
>>>> of the sentence (I am reading it out of context) seems to make that
>>>> judgment clear. Those are good choices if they fit the overall purposes of
>>>> the text.
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> *From:* Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <
>>>> [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Richard Grant <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 28, 2017 10:20 AM
>>>>
>>>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>>>> *Subject:* Re: Request for Help with Diagramming a Sentence
>>>>
>>>> Craig, he has indeed! I was stunned that Bruce replied so quickly and
>>>> that he was willing to go to such lengths to help a brother out. I
>>>> appreciate your taking the time to check it as well.
>>>>
>>>> Does the fact that "The introductory "and so" would be placed above
>>>> and to the left on its own horizontal line" mean the phrase is working as a
>>>> sentence adverb--the way 'Consequently' or 'Therefore' would? That's the
>>>> conclusion I came to when I was thinking about it, but my strengths lie
>>>> more with writing on the surface level rather than analyzing the deep
>>>> structure--or whatever folks are calling it these days.
>>>>
>>>> Richard
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Hancock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Bruce,
>>>>>
>>>>> You have done some heavy lifting.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would see "to meet their needs" as adverbial, probably modifying
>>>>> "revising" rather than "writing." It passes the "in order to" test.
>>>>> (Revising...in order to meet their needs) as paraphrase. I'm not sure how
>>>>> you handle adverbial infinitives in Reed/Kellog.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Craig
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>> *From:* Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <
>>>>> [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Bruce Despain <
>>>>> [log in to unmask]>
>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, January 27, 2017 8:26:39 PM
>>>>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: Request for Help with Diagramming a Sentence
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard,
>>>>>
>>>>> The fact that ATEG doesn't accept attachments seems to require a
>>>>> description of the Reed-Kellogg diagram in words.
>>>>> Here is how I would be inclined to do it:
>>>>>
>>>>> The introductory "and so" would be placed above and to the left on its
>>>>> own horizontal line.
>>>>> The phrasal preposition "instead of" would be on a diagonal line
>>>>> sloping away from the main verb "send" as and adverbial modification.
>>>>> The object of the said phrasal preposition, "writing." would extend
>>>>> above its base on stilts being a gerund object on a jagged line separated
>>>>> from its object by a short vertical stroke.
>>>>> The "our" is an adjective modifier of "writing" diagonally and
>>>>> extending from the jagged gerund line.
>>>>> The noun object of "writing" is an infinitive phrase and belongs on
>>>>> stilts with the "to" on a diagonal line down to the horizontal base of the
>>>>> verb "meet."
>>>>> The noun object "needs" of "meet" is separated from this verb with a
>>>>> short horizontal stroke and has it adjective modifier "their" on a diagonal
>>>>> line projecting downward.
>>>>> The main horizontal base line is for the subject "we" separated from
>>>>> its verb "send" with a perpendicular vertical line.
>>>>> The adverbial particle "off" is considered a modifier of the verb
>>>>> "send." It's direct object "it" is separated with a short vertical stroke.
>>>>>
>>>>> The time noun "moment" is taken as object of an understood preposition
>>>>> "x" also extending from "send" as an time modifier of the verb.
>>>>> The phrase "it meets ours" is taken as an adjective (relative) clause
>>>>> with an understood pronoun connective "x" meaning "at which."
>>>>> The "which" is a modifier of "moment." and joined with that noun by a
>>>>> dotted line. (If the understood nature is retained in the "x," that is
>>>>> where the dotted line ends.)
>>>>> The subject of the adjective clause "it" is on a base line separated
>>>>> from its verb "meets" with the perpendicular line crossing the line.
>>>>> The direct object of "meets" is represented by the pronoun "ours."
>>>>>
>>>>> Phew!
>>>>> I'll send a R&K diagram to your personal e-mail, if you'd like.
>>>>> Bruce
>>>>>
>>>>> --- [log in to unmask] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Richard Grant <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: Request for Help with Diagramming a Sentence
>>>>> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 18:18:59 -0500
>>>>>
>>>>> Could someone with more practice/experiencing with sentence
>>>>> diagramming please help me out with this?
>>>>>
>>>>> And so instead of revising our writing to meet their needs, we send it
>>>>> off the moment it meets ours. (from Joseph Williams and Joseph Bizup's *Style,
>>>>> Lessons in Clarity and Grace). *
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard
>>>>> 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/
>>>
>>
>> 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/
|
