Dick,
I think the first comes the closest to what I am suggesting because it implies an outside agency. (The bone can’t bury itself, whereas eagles can climb and clouds can hang.) But you’re right; adjective forms as place adverbials are common. (Swing low, sweet chariot). What is the dog that burns the bone of language into our memory?
Unless we want to accept that language is already in our minds (in some form), we need to think about activity within the mind itself that routinizes what it learns. We need to accept the existence of other minds and our ability to observe patterns. Something like that. Our desire to be part of the group helps us get up to speed over time.
r [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dick Veit
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2016 11:01 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: A Question
Or maybe just a place adverbial?
The dog buried the bone deep in the ground.
The eagle climbed high into the sky.
The clouds hung low on the horizon.
On Mar 27, 2016, at 9:01 PM, Hancock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
What we may have here is a stranded object complement in an agentless passive clause.
X burned language deep into my memory.
Language is burned deep into my memory (by X).
Bruce gives some helpful examples of verbs that routinely take adjective object complements.
The kids painted the wall black. (complex transitive, with "black" as object complement.) The wall was painted black by the kids. (passive version.) The wall was painted black. (Agentless passive. Black feels like a stranded adjective.)
"Deep," though, seems to show up in non-passive clauses. "Still waters run deep." "Her remarks cut deep." (Perhaps I was cut deep by her remarks?)
The big question might be what burns language deep into our memories. Is that an accurate or helpful metaphor for the process? The mind allows itself to be burned by language?
To me, it makes more sense to say that much of language has become routinized. There is an evolutionary advantage to routinization in so many human activities. The language has been learned, becomes routinized, and then resists being brought to conscious attention, especially when the value of conscious attention has been denigrated and people have very little experience with it.
________________________________
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of John Crow <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2016 5:19 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: A Question
The following sentence bothers me:
As a result, most of what native speakers “know” about their language is burned deep into the circuitry of their brains.
What I cannot seem to come to grips with is the word "deep." It is, to me, obviously an adverb, so it should be "deeply." However, when I make that substitution, my internal grammar checker informs me that that's wrong. What's going on here?
Thanks!
John
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/
|
