*subscribe to the myth On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Robert Yates <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Off is not a "modifier" of send: It is a particle of the phrasal verb > "send off." > > Consider the following sentences: > > 1a) We sent off the message. > b We sent the message off. > c) *We sent off it. > d) We sent it off. > > (In fact, for this particular type of phrasal verb, when its object is a > pronoun, the movement of the particle is obligatory.) > > Consider immediately, which is an adverb. > > 2a) *We sent immediately the message. > b) We sent the message immediately. > c) *We sent immediately it > d) We sent it immediately. > > In English, it is ungrammatical to put an adverb between the main verb and > its object. > > The purpose of sentences 1 and 2 is to show that "off" is a different > category of word from immediately. > > As native speakers of English, we never notice phrasal verbs like "send > off" but they are one of the difficulties non-native speakers of English > have in learning English. > > There are those who claim there is no important distinction between > surface structure and some underlying deeper structure. If that is the > case, then obviously these two sentences have to have the same structure > and the distinction is useless. > > 3) John is easy to please. > 4) John is eager to please. > > Notice in (3) John is the one receiving pleasure (the object of please), > but in (5) John is giving pleasure (the subject of please). > > So, we have the following: : > > 5) It is easy to please John. > 6) *It is eager to please John. > > If there is no distinction between surface and some deeper structure, if > also follows that the following sentence has no ambiguity. > > 7) Flying planes can be dangerous. > > 8a) Flying them can be dangerous. > b) They can be dangerous. > > It is possible for sentence diagramming to capture what I have noted > above, but that requires the ability to show some kind of "movement" to > account for the surface order of words. > > Bob Yates > University of Central Missouri > > On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 12:27 PM, > > > Richard Grant <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Craig, >> >> I like the idea of distinguishing a conjunction (in this case two >> conjunctions: 'and so') whose adverbial function works beyond the sentence >> level. Perhaps they could be called *metaconjunctions *or* transitional >> conjunctions*. >> >> I've worked with undergraduate students for the past 16 years, and I've >> yet to meet one who doesn't ascribe to the myth that coordinating >> conjunctions "can't" start sentences, I'm assuming school grammars still >> ignore the fact that professional writers regularly use them in that >> position. And if secondary instructors deny the appropriateness of >> coordinating conjunctions at the beginning of sentences, they likely >> dismiss the conjunctions' other functions (such as being larger discourse >> markers or acting as markers of parenthetical comments). >> >> Your hunch that the "And so" is functioning as a larger discourse marker >> is correct. Here's the context that sets up the sentence I asked about. >> (I'm including a fairly large chunk to show that this particular >> sentence--which shows the consequence of an idea--is nested in a paragraph >> that is marked off by another 'transitional conjunction'--but. >> >> *Some Private Causes of Unclear Writing* >> >> Unclear writing is a social problem, but it often has private causes. >> Michael Crichton mentioned one: some writers plump up their prose, hoping >> that complicated sentences indicate deep thought. And when we want to hide >> the fact that we don't know what we're talking about, we typically throw up >> a tangle of abstract words in long, complex sentences. >> >> Others write graceless prose not deliberately but because they are >> seized by the idea that good writing must be free of the kind of errors >> that only a grammarian can explain. They approach a blank page not as a >> space to explore ideas, but as a minefield of potential errors. They creep >> from word to word, concerned less with their readers' understanding than >> with their own survival. I address that issue in Lesson 2. >> >> Others write unclearly because they freeze up, especially when they >> are learning to think and write in new academic or professional setting. As >> we struggle to master new ideas, most of us write worse than we do when we >> write about things we understand better. If that sounds like you, take >> heart: you will write more clearly when you more clearly understand what >> you are writing about. >> >> But the biggest reason most of us write unclearly is that we don't >> know when readers will think we are unclear, much less why. Our own writing >> always seems clearer to us than to our readers because we read into it what >> we want them to get out of it. And so instead of revising our writing to >> meet their needs, we sent it off the moment it meets ours. >> >> Williams, Joseph M. and Joseph Bizup. *Style - Lessons in Clarity and >> Grace*. 12th ed. pp. 6-7. Pearson. Boston. 2017. >> >> Richard >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Hancock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]> >> wrote: >> >>> Richard, >>> >>> Bruce would be in a better position to say what the placement of >>> "and so" in that way means within the diagramming system. >>> >>> Sentence adverbials are usually intonationally marked--"as a result, >>> instead of"--and are usually movable. A coordinating conjunction is pretty >>> much locked into place at sentence opening. It has no role within the >>> sentence. If you think of "and so" as a paraphrase of "as a result," you >>> can make that case. >>> >>> Why start a sentence with a coordinating conjunction? The school >>> book grammars don't seem to account for it. Often, it's because the shift >>> is a larger shift in the discourse. I would be interested in the sentences >>> before it, whether "and so" refers back to a single clause or to a series >>> of clauses. Maybe we should have a term for that kind of conjunction. I use >>> the sentence "So we have come here today to dramatize an appalling >>> condition" from King's *I Have a Dream *speech as a good example. It >>> follows an opening paragraph talking about the hundred year old promise of >>> emancipation and another denouncing the the fact that "one hundred years >>> later" the promise hasn't been fulfilled, The march on Washington is >>> positioned as a response (result) of all of that. Conjunctions often >>> function to make connections at a higher level of the discourse. >>> >>> I don't think deep structure versus surface structure is all that >>> useful as a distinction. To say something differently is to say something >>> different. A good question might be why the sentence is organized to put so >>> much stress on "ours." "We send it off the moment it meets our needs >>> instead of revising to meet theirs" would be a more straightforward >>> version. I like their version much better, perhaps because it puts the two >>> choices in a more balanced opposition. "Ours" feels very selfish when it >>> comes. "The moment" makes it lazy. We are selfish and lazy. The structure >>> of the sentence (I am reading it out of context) seems to make that >>> judgment clear. Those are good choices if they fit the overall purposes of >>> the text. >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar < >>> [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Richard Grant <[log in to unmask]> >>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 28, 2017 10:20 AM >>> >>> *To:* [log in to unmask] >>> *Subject:* Re: Request for Help with Diagramming a Sentence >>> >>> Craig, he has indeed! I was stunned that Bruce replied so quickly and >>> that he was willing to go to such lengths to help a brother out. I >>> appreciate your taking the time to check it as well. >>> >>> Does the fact that "The introductory "and so" would be placed above and >>> to the left on its own horizontal line" mean the phrase is working as a >>> sentence adverb--the way 'Consequently' or 'Therefore' would? That's the >>> conclusion I came to when I was thinking about it, but my strengths lie >>> more with writing on the surface level rather than analyzing the deep >>> structure--or whatever folks are calling it these days. >>> >>> Richard >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Hancock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Bruce, >>>> >>>> You have done some heavy lifting. >>>> >>>> I would see "to meet their needs" as adverbial, probably modifying >>>> "revising" rather than "writing." It passes the "in order to" test. >>>> (Revising...in order to meet their needs) as paraphrase. I'm not sure how >>>> you handle adverbial infinitives in Reed/Kellog. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Craig >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> *From:* Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar < >>>> [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Bruce Despain < >>>> [log in to unmask]> >>>> *Sent:* Friday, January 27, 2017 8:26:39 PM >>>> *To:* [log in to unmask] >>>> *Subject:* Re: Request for Help with Diagramming a Sentence >>>> >>>> Richard, >>>> >>>> The fact that ATEG doesn't accept attachments seems to require a >>>> description of the Reed-Kellogg diagram in words. >>>> Here is how I would be inclined to do it: >>>> >>>> The introductory "and so" would be placed above and to the left on its >>>> own horizontal line. >>>> The phrasal preposition "instead of" would be on a diagonal line >>>> sloping away from the main verb "send" as and adverbial modification. >>>> The object of the said phrasal preposition, "writing." would extend >>>> above its base on stilts being a gerund object on a jagged line separated >>>> from its object by a short vertical stroke. >>>> The "our" is an adjective modifier of "writing" diagonally and >>>> extending from the jagged gerund line. >>>> The noun object of "writing" is an infinitive phrase and belongs on >>>> stilts with the "to" on a diagonal line down to the horizontal base of the >>>> verb "meet." >>>> The noun object "needs" of "meet" is separated from this verb with a >>>> short horizontal stroke and has it adjective modifier "their" on a diagonal >>>> line projecting downward. >>>> The main horizontal base line is for the subject "we" separated from >>>> its verb "send" with a perpendicular vertical line. >>>> The adverbial particle "off" is considered a modifier of the verb >>>> "send." It's direct object "it" is separated with a short vertical stroke. >>>> >>>> The time noun "moment" is taken as object of an understood preposition >>>> "x" also extending from "send" as an time modifier of the verb. >>>> The phrase "it meets ours" is taken as an adjective (relative) clause >>>> with an understood pronoun connective "x" meaning "at which." >>>> The "which" is a modifier of "moment." and joined with that noun by a >>>> dotted line. (If the understood nature is retained in the "x," that is >>>> where the dotted line ends.) >>>> The subject of the adjective clause "it" is on a base line separated >>>> from its verb "meets" with the perpendicular line crossing the line. >>>> The direct object of "meets" is represented by the pronoun "ours." >>>> >>>> Phew! >>>> I'll send a R&K diagram to your personal e-mail, if you'd like. >>>> Bruce >>>> >>>> --- [log in to unmask] wrote: >>>> >>>> From: Richard Grant <[log in to unmask]> >>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>> Subject: Request for Help with Diagramming a Sentence >>>> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 18:18:59 -0500 >>>> >>>> Could someone with more practice/experiencing with sentence diagramming >>>> please help me out with this? >>>> >>>> And so instead of revising our writing to meet their needs, we send it >>>> off the moment it meets ours. (from Joseph Williams and Joseph Bizup's *Style, >>>> Lessons in Clarity and Grace). * >>>> >>>> >>>> Many thanks, >>>> >>>> >>>> Richard >>>> 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/ >>> 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/