This idea of complement was developed to describe those elements that belong to a phrase, without which its structural integrity would be compromised. You call the object (a complement to transitive verbs) a "sentential" complement. Direct object works well for me. That it has the form of a noun clause is an important consideration, but you have already used the term "nominal" for a different structure. Maybe "object" complement. But you probably have already used that term for something else. I guess we're left with "noun clause as direct object." This implies that we also have "noun clause as adjective complement" and "noun clause as appositive."

Whether the restrictive appositive is a noun phrase or a noun clause, it still seems to be identifying which instance is being referred to by the noun. "My sister Edna" tells us which sister you are talking about. "The rumor that Elvis is alive" is telling us which rumor you mean. If we want to make them non-restrictive, we must add information to something fully identified as you do in "my sister, a gifted artist." With a noun clause appositive we might get "the special theory of relativity, that the speed of light is absolute." This does seem awkward to some and we tend to want to make it a relative clause: "the special theory of relativity, that states that the speed of light is absolute." The only clause used for non-restrictive modification is an adjective clause. It can even modify noun clauses: "That the speed of light is absolute, which is hard to imagine because we think of light as a particle, was discovered by Einstein, who not long before proved that light must be a particle."

Appositives function like relative clauses in that they modify noun phrases and can be either restrictive or nonrestrictive.

(Restrictive relative clause) The thief that stole my computer should rot in hell.
(Restrictive appositive) My sister Edna married a kleptomaniac.

(Nonrestrictive relative clause) Zebras, which are striped quadrupeds, are native to Africa.
(Nonrestrictive appositive) My sister, a gifted artist, won a MacArthur fellowship.

Entirely different from relative clauses are complement clauses, which have three varieties:

(“Sentential” complements, which function as noun phrases)
He knows that chocolate is addictive.
That Milton raised a ruckus surprised nobody.
(“Adjectival” complements, which modify adjectives)
Martha is happy that she is no longer incarcerated.
(“Nominal” complements, which modify nouns)
The rumor that Elvis is alive spread wildly.

The clause in the cited example, “The fact that they didn't like chocolate surprised her,” is a nominal complement.

To illustrate the difference between relative and complement clauses, consider the following ambiguous sentence. With different interpretations, it can be read either as a relative or a nominal complement clause:

We believed the theory that Camilla proposed to Charles.

In the relative interpretation, Camilla proposed a certain unspecified theory to Charles, and we believe that theory.

In the complement interpretation, we believe the theory that it was Camilla who proposed marriage to Charles and non vice-versa.

Dick Veit

________________________

Richard Veit

Department of English, UNCW

Wilmington, NC 28403-5947

910-962-3324

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/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message may contain confidential information, and is
intended only for the use of the individual(s) to whom it
is addressed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------