I'm going to venture some terms with definitions:

Clause: A subject/predicate pair.

Finite clause: A subject/predicate pair with a tense-marked (simple 
present or simple past) verb.

Independent clause: A single, finite clause that can "stand alone" 
(i.e., pass sentencehood tests).

Dependent clause:  A clause which performs a constituent role such as 
adverbial, direct object, subject, etc. in a complex sentence or in a 
constituent phrase.

Sentence: A construction of minimum one finite clause which can "stand 
alone" (i.e., pass sentencehood tests).

Simple sentence: Same as independent clause.

Complex sentence: A construction of minimum two finite clauses, at 
least one of which performs a constituent role such as adverbial, 
direct object, subject, etc., in the other, or in a constituent phrase 
of the other.

Compound sentence:  A construction of minimum two finite clauses, none 
of which performs a constituent role in any of the others (i.e., a 
string of independent clauses connected by coordinating conjunctions).

Clearly, "construction" and "constituent" need definitions, as well as 
simpler versions for lower-level grades.  Don't have time for these 
now.

"Main clause" is dumped as a grammatical term. It is problematic 
because it is only part of a complex sentence -- the subject and verbal 
part. We have the round-and-round question: is the dependent clause 
part of the main clause, or not? Is the main clause a self-contained 
part of anything?  I may be wrong, but I believe that the part usually 
called "main clause" is not, in fact, a constituent: it will fail 
constituent tests like replacement with a pro-form.

Part of the "main clause" problem is that main clauses can often stand 
alone: "[I went to the party] because I was lonely." Main clause in 
brackets.

"I went to the party" can be a sentence, but what is its status in the 
whole sentence above? If I'm right about consituency, it has no status 
at all as a coherent unit including both subject and predicate. One of 
the points I have a lot of trouble getting across to students is that, 
when they analyze a sentence, they are analyzing THAT SENTENCE, not a 
part of the sentence that has the potential to be anything else either 
on its own or as part of another sentence. "I went to the party because 
I was lonely" has only one analysis: a complex sentence with a subject 
("I") and a predicate (the rest); the dependent clause with "because" 
is a constituent of the predicate.

Noticed that I do not include shortened or "reduced clauses" such as 
participials ("Having paid my parking fine ...") under "clause". I 
believe this serves isolating sentences from non-sentences better than 
including them. To account for such things, I would teach a category of 
constructions we could call "abbreviators" or "short versions". These 
would include participials and other elliptical constructions, such as 
answers in question/answer pairs like "Who can help me?" "I can."

Dr. Johanna Rubba, Associate Professor, Linguistics
Linguistics Minor Advisor
English Department
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Tel.: 805.756.2184
Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596
Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374
URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba

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/