Linda,
I'm happy with "event" as long as it is thought of very flexibly. I was
trying to make the point that adverbial complements are more flexible
than "events" implied. Richard had said "Emily was after final exams"
is not acceptable, and I was trying to point out that context would
change that. It's not ungrammatical.
Are God and death events?
The adverbial complements tend to locate the subject in space or time.
If we go backward from that function, I suspect we can stretch the
application.
"Courage is in my corner." Even abstractions can be located. "Fear was
all around us." "Acceptance was after grief."
I don't like the term "subject complement" because it's the verb that
is being complemented, though the choice of subject limits what will
seem meaningful. If something is metaphorically seen as event, does
that make it an event?
I am also much more comfortable seeing this as a pattern than as a
rule. These rules don't "govern" anything. They are available patterns.
Craig
Craig:
> I don't see any difference between what you call "transitory" and what
> Martha has called 'events'.
>
> All of your examples refer to events, right? (e.g. Emily's interview, the
> births of children, etc.)
>
> Best--
> Linda
>
>
>
> Linda Di Desidero, Ph.D.
> Acting Director, Communication Studies & Professional Writing
> University of Maryland University College
> 3501 University Boulevard, East
> Adelphi, MD 20783
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf of Craig
> Hancock
> Sent: Mon 5/19/2008 10:42 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Prepositional Phrases as Subject Complements
>
>
> Martha, Dick,
>
> I think it's more the notion of being transitory (rather than events)
> that limit the adverbial time complements for the verb "to be." Even
> Emily can be "after lunch" in the right context. "We interview John this
> morning. Emily is after lunch." Emily, of course, stands in for "Emily's
> interview."
> Or consider someone asking about the birth order of children. "John was
> first. Paul was second. Craig was after Paul. Barbara was after
> Craig..." And so on. Or how about "God is forever"? "Death is
> imminent"?
> The constraints seem more semantic than syntactic.
>
> Craig
>
>
> Martha Kolln wrote:
>
> I certainly agree, Dick, that these adverbials have limitations. Time
> adverbials are limited, I suspect, to events.
>
> Martha
>
>
>
> Martha,
>
>
>
> We probably should make a distinction between time/place adverbials that
> are complementary (describing the subject) and those that are
> non-complementary (purely adverbial, describing the predicate). For
> example, in your sentence "The car is here now," "here" is
> complementary but "now" is not. We can say "The car is here," but we
> can't say "The car is now."
>
>
>
> Likewise the sentence "Emma was at the beach after final exams" allow us
> to say "Emma was at the beach," but it doesn't allow us to say "Emma was
> after final exams." "At the beach" is an adverbial that complements the
> subject (answers "Where was Emma?). "After final exams" is a
> non-complementary adverbial (answers "When was Emma at the beach?"
> rather than "When was Emma?").
>
>
>
> Dick
>
> ________________________________
>
> Richard Veit
> Department of English
> University of North Carolina Wilmington
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Martha Kolln
> Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 2:58 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Prepositional Phrases as Subject Complements
>
>
>
> Hi Patty,
>
>
>
> In traditional grammar, be is classified as a linking verb. That system
> leaves out sentences like Peter's second one, "Deb was in her car,"
> where what follows be is an adverbial.
>
>
>
> This is a pattern that , in my grammar book, I identify as "NP be
> ADV/TP"--where be is followed by an adverbial of time or place, rather
> than by a subject complement. Such adverbials are often prepositional
> phrases. Here are some other examples:
>
>
>
>
>
> Deb was there.
>
>
>
>
>
> The car is here now.
>
>
>
>
>
> The party will be tomorrow.
>
>
>
>
>
> The election was on Tuesday.
>
>
>
>
>
> These "completers" of the predicate don't describe or rename the
> subject, as Peter's first example does. "Cornelia was in a bad mood" is
> another way of saying "Cornelia was cranky." I suppose you could call
> the adverbial completers complements, but they aren't subject
> complements as adjectivals and nominals are.
>
>
>
> And note too that the adverbials that complete be sentences are limited
> to time or place; adverbials of manner, for example, don't work here.
> It's not that we can't say "Deb was quickly"--it's just that we don't.
>
>
>
> Martha
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sincere question, here:
>
> Would it be OK/accurate to say that, in the first sentence, "in a bad
> mood"
> is a prepositional phrase functioning adjectivally, where in the second
> sentence, "in her car" is more of an adverbial function?
>
> Tell the truth, I'm not sure how to classify "location" as a subject
> complement.
>
> My thinking is: how would I explain this to students, who might not
> have had
> the exposure to this grammar list?
>
> -patty
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> 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/
|
