ATEG Archives

October 1999

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"William J. McCleary" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 29 Oct 1999 14:11:17 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
Could this be a case showing the inadequacies of traditional grammar and
the strengths of generative? If we accept Emily's explanation, we would
have to assume that every compound has an elipsis--or, rather, is formed
through the process of elipsis.

We could instead say that the sentence is generated from two kernels,
something like this:

People are blaming Terry's parents for Terry's actions.
People are not blaming Terry for his actions.

Bill

>I agree completely with Emily.
>
>>>> emily wilson-orzechowski <[log in to unmask]> 10/29 1:10 PM >>>
>Michael,
>    I would read the sentence you ask about as "People are blaming
>Terry's parents and (are) not (blaming) Terry for his actions."  The
>negative version of the verb is shortened through elipsis and "parents"
>is the object of the positive version, and "Terry" is the object of the
>negative one.  "Not" is an adverb with the second verb (implied).
>
>Emily Wilson-Orzechowski


William J. McCleary
3247 Bronson Hill Road
Livonia, NY 14487
716-346-6859

ATOM RSS1 RSS2