I agree with Herb's conclusion that the example is grammatical.
I would, however, go further to say that such examples are not limited to
informal registers and/or dialog but are rather intentional stylistic
options for conveying effects and are used frequently by professional
writers. In rhetorical circles they are referred to as a deliberate
fragments or virtual sentences. By definition, deliberate fragment-as
opposed to accidental ones-are complete thoughts represented by a basic
sentence pattern or even just a word and are functionally used for doing the
following:
1. introducing a topic
2. describing a scene
3. representing conversation
4. providing a succinct (perhaps even terse) conclusion
5. emphasizing a point or an idea
Here are three excerpts that demonstrate examples of deliberate fragments:
1. Early, grainy half-light in an old apartment by the frozen
river. Gerry slips in the brown-aired entryway and jiggles the key in the
lock, pulling outward the way Dot told him, closing the door after and
treading softly up the cat-grey carpeted stairs. -Louise Erdrich
2. He had been expecting something more definite-chest pains, a
stroke, arthritis-but it was only weakness that put a finish to his living
alone. A numbness in his head, an airy feeling when he walked. A wateriness
in his bones that made it an effort to pick up his coffee cup in the
morning. -Anne Tyler
3. But today, on this first day of May 2000, as Kerry sits in the
cab of his truck describing these wonderful playgrounds of his childhood,
the places themselves no longer exist, having all turned to open water years
ago. The bayous, the lakes, the forests, the magical islands - all gone.
It's not like having your house burn down with all your childhood mementos
in it, he tells me. Baseball cards, photographs, trophies. The loss is
absolute. Mike Tidwell, Bayou Farewell (112)
Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stahlke, Herbert
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 11:47 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some music
about"
I'd say it's a matter of register. It's certainly not formal academic
writing. The average freshman comp instructor would probably label it a
sentence fragment. Hoowever, in dialog or in informal writing of other
sorts it strikes me as both grammatical and apt. It has a clear
topic-comment structure. Before the dash is background information, and
after the dash is the predicate. Omission of subject pronoun and Be verb is
a marker of informal, casual style.
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 10:59 AM
To: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some music
about"
Herbert,
Please help with the following:
Is this grammatically wrong?
"Running errands, doing the laundry, walking the dogs--ready for this day to
be over."
Thanks!
--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 7/11/14, Stahlke, Herbert < <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some
music about"
To: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]
Date: Friday, July 11, 2014, 11:43 AM
< <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
[log in to unmask]>,<
<mailto:[log in to unmask]
com>
[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <
<mailto:[log in to unmask]
com>
[log in to unmask]>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [216.183.137.164]
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:
x-forefront-prvs: 02698DF457
x-forefront-antispam-report:
SFV:NSPM;SFS:(377454003)(199002)(189002)(36756003)(106116001)(2171001)(80022
001)(21056001)(31966008)(89122001)(19625215002)(20776003)(95666004)(10788600
1)(16236675004)(76482001)(64706001)(79102001)(99396002)(19580405001)(8585200
3)(66066001)(2656002)(74502001)(88552001)(83322001)(93886003)(99286002)(8307
2002)(19580395003)(81542001)(74662001)(106356001)(92566001)(50986999)(101416
001)(92726001)(85306003)(54356999)(75432001)(76176999)(105586002)(87936001)(
4396001)(77982001)(46102001)(19627405001)(81342001)(107046002)(86362001)(181
21605002)(19627315001)(19607625011);DIR:OUT;SFP:;SCL:1;SRVR:CO2PR05MB684;H:C
O2PR05MB682.namprd05.prod.outlook.com;FPR:;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoNoRecords;MX:1;LA
NG:en;
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_000_140509342553356225bsuedu_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: bsu.edu
X-Miami-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more
information
X-Miami-MailScanner-ID: s6BFhmmO029062
X-Miami-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-Miami-MailScanner-From: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]
X-Spam-Status: No
--_000_140509342553356225bsuedu_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1256"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'd like to take Craig's thoughts a step further. As one who began his
lin= guistic life doing field work on languages he knew little about, I'm
sensit= ive to the influence a standard orthography has on our analyses.
Suppose y= ou were doing field work on English with no orthography and
little other in= formation to rely on--or be misled by. When you hear
/aimn@go/ you would b= y no stretch of the imagination connect that to "I
am going to go." Rather= , you'd identify the first person singular
subject pronoun, the /m/ perhaps=
marking progressive aspect (although you'd properly have doubts about
that=
conclusion), and the /n@/ as some sort of future or intentional marker
wor= thy of considerably more research. Maybe, after comparing a number
of dial= ects you might come up with a historical internal reconstruction
that relat= ed the form to "am going to," but that would have about as
much bearing on = your synchronic grammatical description as the equally
historical discovery=
that the -t of "height" and the -th of "width" are the same thing.
I fear sometimes that the extent to which our descriptions look like our
or= thography or our grammatical traditions, they are not evidence-based.
The = fact is that the results of grammaticalization are frequently not
recoverab= le except by diligent study by trained grammarians; they remain
opaque to n= ormal native speakers.
Herb
Herbert F. W. Stahlke, Ph.D.
Emeritus Professor of English
Ball State University
Muncie, IN 47306
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]
________________________________
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask] DU> on
behalf of Hancock, Craig G < <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 10:13 AM
To: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some
musi= c about"
Bob,
Phonetic reduction is a dynamic process directly related to frequency.
= Since =93going to=94 can now combine in auxiliary like ways with main
verbs= , its use has dramatically expanded. Frequency of use correlates
well with = phonetic reduction. It=92s an observation about how language
shifts in form=
as it takes on new (expanded) function. Want to has expanded range of use
= in the same way. The same patterns are at work in its reduction.The
consens= us seems to be that it has modal like qualities.
Biologists make observations about form all the time without thinking
o= f life itself as a formal system. What we need, I think, is the
equivalent = of an anatomy and physiology. In the world of biology, the
two are dynamica= lly connected. No one would argue (scientifically) that
biological forms ar= e independent of function and no one would propose
that forms are unimporta= nt.
In the biological world, it=92s hard to draw strict clear lines
between=
categories in part because adaptation is constant.
Bybee=92s point=97and s=
he=92s not the only one making it=97is that language is more like biology
t= han it is like physics and chemistry. In some ways, this is a renewed
inter= est in empirical observation. This is certainly not a retreat from
form.
Craig
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> mailto:[log in to unmask]
AMIOH.EDU] On Behalf Of Bob Yates
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 6:16 PM
To: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna write me some
musi= c about"
I=92m confused by the following observation from Craig.
Sent from Windows Mail
From: Hancock, Craig G< <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Sent: =FDThursday=FD, =FDJuly=FD =FD10=FD, =FD2014 =FD2=FD:=FD06=FD =FDPM
To: <mailto:[log in to unmask]:[log in to unmask]>
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
As Bybee points out, the kind of phonetic reduction we get with 'gonna'
and=
oughtta' is typical of grammaticalization. We don't say "I'm gonna New
Yor= k" for "I'm going to New York," but we do say "I'm gonna take the
train to = New York" or "It's gonna rain." We only use it for expressions
of intention=
and prediction, which are modal in function. This would be a good formal
a= rgument for "going to" functioning as a constituent group when modal
functi= ons are carried out, but not for physical movement: going plus to
New York.
Now, if I understand Craig correctly, language is not a formal system, yet
= he just made a formal distinction between =93going to=94 verb vs.=94
going =
to=94 location. It seems to me that we are dealing with two different to=
=92s. The to in =93going to=94 marks a verb and the to in making a
locatio= n is a preposition.
By the way, gonna reduction is also reflected in wanna.
Bob Yates, University of Central Missouri
--_000_140509342553356225bsuedu_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1256"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html;
charset=3Dwindows-1= 256"> <style type=3D"text/css"
style=3D"display:none"><!-- p { margin-top: 0px; m=
argin-bottom: 0px; } @font-face { font-family: Calibri; } @font-face {
font=
-family: Tahoma; } p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0in
0= in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; }
a:li= nk, span.MsoHyperlink { color: blue; text-decoration:
underline; } a:visite=
d, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed { color: purple;
text-decoration: underline; }=
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;
fo=
nt-size: 8pt; font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif; } p.MsoListParagraph,
li.Mso= ListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt
0.5in; font-=
size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; }
p.msolistparagraphcxsp= first, li.msolistparagraphcxspfirst,
div.msolistparagraphcxspfirst { margin=
: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; line-height: 115%; font-size:
12pt; font-family: =
'Times New Roman', serif; } p.msolistparagraphcxspmiddle,
li.msolistparagra= phcxspmiddle, div.msolistparagraphcxspmiddle { margin:
0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5= in; line-height: 115%; font-size: 12pt; font-family:
'Times New Roman', ser= if; } p.msolistparagraphcxsplast,
li.msolistparagraphcxsplast, div.msolistp= aragraphcxsplast { margin: 0in
0in 0.0001pt 0.5in;
line-height: 115%; font-=
size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; } span.BalloonTextChar
{=
font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif; } span.EmailStyle25 {
font-family: Calibr=
i, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); } .MsoChpDefault {
font-size: 10pt;=
} @page WordSection1 { margin: 1in; }--></style> </head> <body
dir=3D"ltr"> <div id=3D"OWAFontStyleDivID"
style=3D"font-size:12pt;color:#000000;backgro=
und-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<p>I'd like to take Craig's thoughts a step further.
As one who began=
his linguistic life doing field work on languages he knew little about,
I'= m sensitive to the influence a standard orthography has on our
analyses. &n= bsp;Suppose you were doing field work on English
with no orthography and little other information to rely on--or be misled
= by. When you hear /aimn@go/ you would by no stretch of the
imaginatio= n connect that to "I am going to go." Rather,
you'd identif= y the first person singular subject pronoun, the /m/
perhaps marking progressive aspect (although you'd properly have
doub= ts about that conclusion), and the /n@/ as some sort of future or
intention= al marker worthy of considerably more research.
Maybe, after comparin=
g a number of dialects you might come up with
a historical internal reconstruction that related the form to "am
goi= ng to," but that would have about as much bearing on your
synchronic g= rammatical description as the equally historical discovery
that the -t of &= quot;height" and the -th of "width" are
the same
thing. </p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I fear sometimes that the extent to which our descriptions look like
our=
orthography or our grammatical traditions, they are not evidence-based.
&n= bsp;The fact is that the results of grammaticalization are frequently
not r= ecoverable except by diligent study by
trained grammarians; they remain opaque to normal native speakers.<br>
</p> <p><br> </p> <p>Herb <br> </p> <div> <p><br> </p> <p><br>
</p> <div class=3D"BodyFragment"><font size=3D"2"> <div
class=3D"PlainText">Herbert F. W. Stahlke, Ph.D.<br> Emeritus Professor of
English<br> Ball State University<br> Muncie, IN 47306<br>
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]</div> </font></div>
</div> <div style=3D"color: rgb(33, 33, 33);"> <hr tabindex=3D"-1"
style=3D"display:inline-block; width:98%"> <div id=3D"divRplyFwdMsg"
dir=3D"ltr"><font face=3D"Calibri, sans-serif" co= lor=3D"#000000"
style=3D"font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b>
Assembly for the Teac=
hing of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of
Hanc= ock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]><br> <b>Sent:</b> Friday,
July 11, 2014 10:13 AM<br> <b>To:</b>
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna
wr= ite me some music about"</font> <div> </div> </div> <div>
<div class=3D"WordSection1"> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C=
alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D">Bob,</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C=
alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D"> Phon= etic reduction is a dynamic process
directly related to frequency. Since = =93going to=94 can now combine in
auxiliary like ways with main verbs, its = use
has dramatically expanded. Frequency of use correlates well with phonetic
= reduction. It=92s an observation about how language shifts in form as it
ta= kes on new (expanded) function.
<i>Want to</i> has expanded range of use in the same way. The same
patterns=
are at work in its reduction.The consensus seems to be that it has modal
l= ike qualities.</span></p> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C=
alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D"> Biol= ogists make observations about form
all the time without thinking of life i= tself as a formal system. What we
need, I think, is the equivalent of an
anatomy and physiology. In the world of biology, the two are dynamically
c= onnected. No one would argue (scientifically) that biological forms are
ind= ependent of function and no one would propose that forms are
unimportant.
</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C=
alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D">  =
;In the biological world, it=92s hard to draw strict clear lines between
ca= tegories in part because adaptation is constant. Bybee=92s point=97and
she= =92s not the
only one making it=97is that language is more like biology than it is
like=
physics and chemistry. In some ways, this is a renewed interest in
empiric= al observation. This is certainly not a retreat from form.
</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C=
alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C=
alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D">Craig</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"C=
alibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<div>
<div style=3D"border:none; border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt; padding:3.0pt
0i= n 0in 0in"> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><b><span
style=3D"font-size:10.0pt; font-family:&quo=
t;Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span
style=3D"font-=
size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
Assemb=
ly for the Teaching of English Grammar [ <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
mailto:[log in to unmask]]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Bob Yates<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, July 10, 2014 6:16 PM<br> <b>To:</b>
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Relevance of Syntax & Semantics: "I'm gonna
wr= ite me some music about"</span></p> </div> </div> <p
class=3D"MsoNormal"> </p> <div> <div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif"">I=92m confused by the following observation from
Craig.<= /span></p> </div> <div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif""> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif""> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif""> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif"">Sent from Windows
Mail</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif""> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div style=3D"border:none; border-top:solid #E5E5E5 1.0pt; padding:4.0pt
0i= n 0in 0in"> <div> <p class=3D"MsoNormal"><b><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri",&q=
uot;sans-serif";
letter-spacing:.25pt">From:</span></b><span
style=3D"=
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
letter-spacing:.25p=
t"> <a href=3D" <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
mailto:[log in to unmask]"
target=3D"_parent">Hancock,=
Craig G</a><br>
<b>Sent:</b> =FDThursday=FD, =FDJuly=FD =FD10=FD, =FD2014
=FD2=FD:=FD0= 6=FD =FDPM<br> <b>To:</b> <a href=3D"
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> mailto:[log in to unmask]"
target=3D"_par=
ent"> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
[log in to unmask]</a></span><span
style=3D"font-family:"C=
alibri","sans-serif""></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","=
;sans-serif""> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div id=3D"OWAFontStyleDivID">
<p style=3D"background:white"><em><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri&=
quot;,"sans-serif"; color:black">As Bybee points out,
t</span></e= m><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
co=
lor:black">he kind of phonetic reduction we get with 'gonna' and oughtta'
i= s typical
of grammaticalization. We don't say "I'm gonna New York" for
&qu= ot;I'm going to New York," but we do say "I'm gonna take
the trai= n to New York" or "It's gonna rain." We only use
it for expr= essions of intention and prediction, which are modal in
function. This woul= d
be a good formal argument for "going to" functioning as a
consti= tuent group when modal functions are carried out, but not for
physical move=
ment:
<em><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">=
going</span></em> plus <em><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri",&=
quot;sans-serif"">to New
York</span></em>. </span></p>
<p style=3D"background:white"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri"=
;,"sans-serif";
color:black"> </span></p>
<p style=3D"background:white"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri"=
;,"sans-serif"; color:black">Now, if I understand Craig
correctly= , language is not a formal system, yet he just made a formal
distinction be= tween =93going to=94 verb vs.=94 going to=94
location. It seems
to me that we are dealing with two different to=92s. The to
in = =93going to=94 marks a verb and the to in making a
location is a&= nbsp;preposition. </span></p> <p
style=3D"background:white"><span style=3D"font-family:"Calibri"=
;,"sans-serif";
color:black"> </span></p>
<p style=3D"background:white"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri"=
;,"sans-serif"; color:black">By the way, gonna reduction is
= also reflected in wanna. </span></p> <p
style=3D"background:white"><span style=3D"font-family:"Calibri"=
;,"sans-serif";
color:black"> </span></p>
<p style=3D"background:white"><span
style=3D"font-family:"Calibri"=
;,"sans-serif"; color:black">Bob Yates, University of Central
Mis= souri </span></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div>
</div> </div> </body> </html>
--_000_140509342553356225bsuedu_--
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
<http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html>
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at <http://ateg.org/> 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>
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at <http://ateg.org/> 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>
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at <http://ateg.org/> http://ateg.org/
_____
This email has been scanned by WAU 3-Tier Anti-Virus/Anti-Spam System.
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/