ATEG Archives

October 2001

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:
Bruce Despain <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 19 Oct 2001 08:34:32 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (38 lines)
I'm wondering about the "co-ordinating" function of "for" in the phrase cited.  I guess it's hard to say that all it is doing is co-ordinating.  I thought maybe co-ordinating conjunctions might be limited to the conjunctive (AND), disjunctive (OR), adversative (BUT), and illative (THEREFORE), with their relatives.  When we use "for" at the sentence level, it seems to me the statement is being used to justify the author's previous statement.  In other words, he is giving the reason for making the statement.  Is this just another kind of co-ordination? 

"I'm sleepy.  For that is the way I feel just now."

I think it would be counted as subordination (clause of reason/cause) if written in full. 

"I say, 'I'm sleepy,' for that is the way I feel just now."

The subjective use of the modals is also of interest.  Do we understand that the meaning of "hadn't ought to have been" is MUST+NOT+SHOULD+HAVE+BEEN ?  In both cases the modal is in its periphrastic form: MUST -> HAVE TO; SHOULD -> OUGHT TO.  Periphrasis seems to be the normal way to accumulate modals.  It is rather more common with CAN -> BE ABLE TO in "He must have been able to run" or "He had ro have been able to run" for MUST + COULD.  Here again the need to accumulate modals seems to come from a so-called subjective use of the first one, where MUST is referring to the opinion of the speaker to the rest of the predicate -- the "should have been" must not be.  

Bruce

>>> [log in to unmask] 10/18/01 08:53PM >>>
Good gosh! Of course you're right. How could I have said that (I might blame the late night and my average 4 hours of sleep ... ). See my reddened face! Fortunately, my students don't subscribe to this list!!!!! 

Thanks,

Paul
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Craig Hancock 
  To: [log in to unmask] 
  Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 12:18 PM
  Subject: Re: "It might have been."


    
  Paul, 
       In For of all the words..., I think for is a conjunction rather than a preposition.  ( coordinating conjunction ) 

  Craig Hancock 
    

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/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2