Linda, There's a long-standing tradition in traditional grammar that partiple phrases(clauses)>modify their implied subjects. (Hence the notion of the dangling participle.) "Jumping over the curb, he twisted his ankle." In postnominal slots, especially when restrictive, that seems much more intuitive. (Anyone jumping over the curb risks twisting an ankle.) I hesitate to complicate things further, but if this is indeed an existential clause (I love Johanna's tag question test, which seems the final evidence to me) the sentence doesn't really have a complement. The source sentence (If you want to grant that kind of move) would be "There is a patch of white hair running from the back of his skull ..." In this form, there is a dummy subject and everything else (except the verb) is part of the displaced subject. If we "front" the running... structure, we are technically fronting part of the subject. Copular sentences link the subject with a copular complement. An existential sentence does not link anything. It just presents the existence of something. It's all subject plus existential verb. "There are squirrels in the attic." Literally, if the language would let us do that, we could have "Squirrels in the attic are." English seems to resist be verbs as the lone element in a predicate, so we get these mixed messages, displaced subject elements thsat seem like predicate elements. "In the attic are squirrels" seems like a fronted predicate, but may very well be better understood as partial displacement of the subject. It sure does feel adverbial at first glance, and I wouldn't quarrel with you if you wanted to hold onto that view. I hope that does more good than harm. That's my current understanding of it. Craig Hello. I think I must have missed the explanation about the complement > being > adjectival as opposed to adverbial. Here was my post on Sunday: > > "The structure is preposed. The base structure is something like this: > > [A patch of white hair]...[is] [running from the back of his skull..] > Subject----------------Linking verb---------------------Complement (adverb > phrase) > > For purposes of style, focus, and/or clarity, the writer has preposed the > adverbial complement. Other examples: > > The election is in November.--> In November is the election. Same deal." > > And it seems as if I was close to the explanation that seems to be most > widely accepted. I've just missed the bit about the nature of the > complement. > Does anyone have the patience to explain it once more? (Just about why it > is > an adjective and not an adverb) > > I appreciate it! > > Linda DiDesidero > > > > 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/