This chapter is work in progress, but is about three-quarters... it does contain useful material (which others have used already).

Transcription

This chapter is work in progress, but is about three-quarters done, so
it does contain useful material (which others have used already).
7
How to analyze nominal groups:
the basic grammar of ‘things’
XXX Treat this, not Ch 21, as the definitive description (6.12.02) but check by that for possible changes!
Plan for writing: (1) Print out the fuller descriptions that occur
below.
(2) Rewrite the above sections on specific functions,
pinching the essential syntactic concepts - e.g.what fills them - for
the six illustrated here. (3) Since (a) what fills them and (b) their
sequence are both matters of form, so belong in this book, we need
to distinguish them ALL in Ch 15. But delay anything other than the
syntactic till Ch 15, which can repeat and amplifiy what is said in Ch
15. e.g. role of affective for text analysis, holiday brochures, etc. :
1 Overview
2
Types of head
2.1 Intro: the three main types (simple system? (introduce the others and point
to the chapter where they are described). Why the order that follows? Note
typical length and potential complexity.
2.2 Pronoun as head
2.2.1 Overview
2.2.2 Interactants (possibility for modification and qualification. NB
There'll never be another you/ewe' and you at the back there! (filling
a Vocative)
2.2.3 etc
2.2.x-1
here / there and now / then as pronoun heads, since places and
times are types of 'thing'. fn on trad grammar's analysis of
them as 'adverb', and why.
2.4.x Summary
2.3 Name as head
2.3.1 The range of types
2.3.2 The human proper name cluster: a foretaste
2.3.3 Aside: a note on the unit of the 'cluster'
2.4 Cultural classification as head
2.4.1 Overview
2.4.2 Simple cc as head
2.4.3 Compound nouns as head - a foretaste
2.4.4 Recoverable cultural classification as head
1
2.4.5 Other ph?
2.4.x Summary
3
Some frequent types of modifier
3.1 The limited use of strands of meaning - look forward to Chs 15 and Vol 2.
3.2 Six frequent types of specific functions
3.2.1 Overview
3.2.2 Dimension?
3.2.x etc
( move 'classifying' vs 'depicting' to Ch 15)
3.3 the subclassification principle (as prep for determiners) - refer to
'classifying' vs 'depicting' in Ch 15
(Move the full list of specific functions from there to Ch 13 of Vol 2.)
4 Some frequent types of determiner
[ GENERAL; the material from ngp talk at Toronto, etc, so basic ‘selection’ stuff]
4.1 Overview
4.2 dd on own, (a) expounded by item or (b) filled by unit
4.3 qd on own, selected from the class of things, (a) expounded by item or (b)
filled by unit
4.4 qd and dd, with qd selected from the particularized referent
- the principle,
- the diagram, adapted from roof of the house
4.5 versions of ngps with selection:
(Give me) five of those ripe-looking pears / five of them / five,
3
Three types of qualifier
3.1 clause
3.2 prepositional group, noting types that can't be ellipted clauses, e.g. with
long hair
3.3 that tree over there (internal analysis possible)
3.4 my friend the headmaster, my friend Anna Adams, Tom JOnes the singer,
Bob the builder. Evans the bread in Welsh English.
4.7 test for a det: omisability of det + following v in prototypical cases, but not all
[BETTER IN Ch 15, because only really applies to the earlier ones?]
4.6 sd - position between qd and dd (no internal analysis - unit of qlgp later)
6 the elements common to all groups: &, i, n, etc (see key)
Ch 15: the rest of selection, embedding at dd, qd, m, h, etc
classifying vs depicting general functions
qualifiers
2
mention nominalizations (brief, reference to Ch 17 on congruence)
Use Toronto sd stuff in ngp pt 2 (oh? check! surely pt 1, if sd is introduced
there? Or is it too internal?
Volume 2 Chapter 13 The meanings of things
Main treatment of general describing functions of m and q
Main treatment of semantics of types of specific modifiers, full treatment of those
that were.
Main treatment of variation within dets, e.g. overt and covert typic determiner
XXX At some point: Do a global change of ‘Section 6’ to ‘Chapter 8’ (for
qualities), etc.
XXXXXXX
The three main alternative types of nominal group
So far, in looking at clauses, we have not distinguished between the three major
different types of nominal group. - generally going for the shortest form. But now
we shall.
We shall call the first type ‘full nominal groups’ and, following the names given in
traditional grammar, we’ll call the second type a ‘proper name’ (more specifically,
in these examples ‘human individual proper name’), and the third ‘pronoun’.
The three typical elements for nominal groups to fill are S, C and A (often as the cv
of a pgp in this last case), and both pronouns and proper nouns regularly appear at
all three elements (see Q et al for figures on p. 1361
Cl
S
O
M
C
A
His girlfriend will visit her new sister-in-law (on) the following day ‘full nps’
Ivy
will visit
Ivy
(on) Sunday
‘proper names’
She
will visit
her
then
‘pro-forms’
Notes
1. The items he, she, they and it - are traditionally (but misleadingly) called
‘pronouns’ º(more specifically ‘third person personal pronouns’.
2 The other main types of ‘pronoun’ include (a) the ‘demostrative pronouns’this,
that, these and those, and(b) the ‘possessive prononuns’ mine, yours, hers,
etc.
3 All of these types of prononun are used to refer to most types of ordinary
3
objects.
But times and places are each, in their different ways, two special types of
object - and each has its own small set of pronouns. In other words, then and
now are used for times in the same way as the other pronouns are used for
ordinary objects, and there and here are similarly used for places.
The
contrasts in their meanings correspond to the conrast in the meanings between
(a) this and these [relatively near the performer], and (b) that and those
[relatively far from the performer].
XXXXXXX
4
Preliminary: two notes relevant to ALL groups
(a) The main problem in learning to analyse clauses is that almost all of their
elements may occur in several different places in the structure. But IN ALL GROUPS
THE SEQUENCE OF ELEMENTS IS RELATIVELY FIXED (with only very minor variations).
This makes analysis much easier.
(b) The elements starter and ender occur, potentially, in all groups. Two other
elements - the linker and the inferer - occur in all groups except, it appears, the
quantity group (see the discussion in that chapter). They are covered most fully in
the present chapter, and there are notes in the chapters on the other groups that
remind you to allow for these elements too.
How important is the nominal group?
We have just spent three chapter learning about the structure of the clause.
Clearly, we can’t understand the structure of a text unless we understand the
structure of the clause, if only for the simple reason that most texts consists entirely
- or almost entirely - of clauses. In other words - if we take the present text as an
example - there are no pieces of the text, except for a few names of section
headings, that do not consist of clauses. But what if we try to make an equivalent
statement about the nominal group? What if we ask: 'How important is the nominal
group to understanding a text?'
Surprisingly, this is not a question to which standard grammars give an answer.
A simple way towards finding an answer is to quantify the question by changing it
into:
'What proportion of a text consists of nominal groups?'
That question is at the level of form - and its equivalent at the level of meaning
would be:
'What proportion of a text consists of expressions that refer overtly to objects ?'a
Before I tell you, you might like to make your own estimate. Do you think it would
be around 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60% or 70%? There are so far as I know no
4
published studies on this matter, and any reasonable answer must in any case
include the important point that we should expect the figure to vary from one type of
text to another. In order to get a first approximation to an answer, I recently
analyzed the next two pages of my current bed-time reading book (A fence round
the cuckoo by Ruth Park, Penguin 1992) - a fascinating account of growing up in
New Zealand in the 1930s. The pages that I counted occur in a narrative section, of
which about half is direct speech (with a few associated reporting clauses and some
brief comments by the author). The result of this mini-survey - which you could
easily replicate for yourself in ten minutes work - was that 320 out of 550 of the
words are used as parts of nominal groups - i.e. 58.2%. So you can see that,
whatever the variation between texts, it is likely that WELL OVER HALF OF THE WORDS
OF MOST TEXTS ARE LIKELY TO BE PART OF A NOMINAL GROUP.
Very clearly, the ability to analyse nominal groups is vital to the successful text
analyst.
********
On the other hand - easier than the Cl ....
Make the general point from Ch 20 about there being very little variation in
sequence in groups (Keep what there is to Ch 14.)
No internal analysis of what expounds the elements; using triangle ('exponence'
symbol) to mean 'no further analysis', as for clause in Ch 3) Specification of
internal structures in Chs 10 and, for the full ngp, Ch 13.
Quote from Q et al, as in Proposals?
Exemplfy (without analysis):
at dq: item, qtgp, ngp
at dd: item, genclr
at ds: qlgp
at m: qlgp, ngp, Cl
at q: pgp, Cl, ngp
section on now/then here/there as things
over
here by me
Include this somewhere, and refer forward to Ch 14 for the incongruent realization
at the end.
XXX Concluding section?
Referring to persons and non-persons
5
There are some interesting differences in the options that are available,
depending on whether you are referring to a human - specifically as a person, and
not as an object (e.g. a corpse - and an object that is not being treated as a person
(e.g. an animal that is not a favourite pet).
If you wish to refer to a human as a person you have the following three
ways, all of which use the ngp:
1
a pronoun (differentiated by both number and gender (i.e. he and him,
she and her, they and them - so quite a powerful tool for classifying subtypes of persons),
2 a wide range of types of proper name, and
3
a nominal group with a noun or occasionally one at the head.
But if you wish to refer to a non-human (other than a place with a name and a
small number of other objects that are ‘nameable’ because they have been granted
‘personhood’) you have only two of these (the first being more limited than the
equivalent for human persons):
1
a pronoun (i.e it, they and them, differentiated by number only - so a
less powerful classifying tool than that available for humans*), and
2
a nominal group with a noun or one at the head.
* with mass objects being referred to by the same label as singular objects, i.e. it.
However, there is a way of referring to non-human objects that is not available for
referring to human objects:
3
the referent-as-role-in-event construction - which is described in Chapter
16.
(This goes some way to make up for the fact that proper names are hardly ever
available for identifying non-human objects (other than place names) by adding a
third way of identifying objects:
XXXXXXX
1
The nominal group (ngp) is a unit whose structure has developed to enable
it to express a large number of types of meaning that are related to a thing. The
concept of 'thing' is a broad one, and it extends beyond physical objects and
persons to abstract things - including ones that are effectively 'quality-things'
such as happiness and beauty, ‘quantity-things’, such as number and amount,
and 'event-things' such as a hit, a football match and their successful ascent of
the peak.
Let’s expand on this a little. The 'thing-oriented' structure of the ngp can
be borrowed without too much difficulty to express meanings that are
QUALITIES. Thus, in a nominal group such as great kindness, the meanings that
might have been expressed in a quality group as extremely kind (i.e. with a
6
‘temperer + apex’ structure; see Chapter 8) are expressed as ‘modifier + head’.
(Indeed, it is the function of suffixes such as -ness to make this possible.) And
the meanings that would be expressed through a ‘scope’ in a quality group are
here expresed as a qualifier - compare skillful at chess (apex + scope) with skill
at chess (head plus qualifier).b Similarly, the meanings associated with
QUANTITIES can often be expressed in a ngp. Compare the ‘adjuster + amount’
structure of the quantity group very many in very many of them with the
‘modifer + head’ structure of large numbers in large numbers of them. (See the
chapters on these two units for further examples.)However, an interesting set of
problems arise when the nominal group is borrowed to express EVENTS - these,
of course, being typically expressed in clauses. This is because there is a poor
match between the structure of the clause and the structure of the nominal
group. The clause has more elements than the ngp, and they occur in a variety
of sequences, while the elements of the ngp are relatively fixed in sequence.
See Section 15 for a summary, andChapter 16 for a full account of the
ingenious ways in which the language handles the discrepancies caused by
‘nominalization’.
(a)
In a ngp the head (h) element is virtually
exceptions (e.g. as in Note 1.1 (b) below).
OBLIGATORY,
with rare
(b)
All other elements are optional - and the probability of their being present
depends on what fills the head. There are THREE other major types of
element: determiners, modifiers and qualifiers. The modifiers
(which immediately precede the head) and the qualifiers (which
immediately follow it) both stand in a relationship to the head of
description. But each of the many types of determiner stands in a
relationship to the head that is DIFFERENT FROM THE THE RELATIONSHIP OF
‘DESCRIPTION’ AND DIFFERENT FROM THE RELATIONSHIP WITH ANY OTHER
DETERMINER. However, at a high level of generality we can say that each
is a type of selection (see Note 3.1 of Section 3 below). For modifiers
see Section 2, for determiners see Section 3, and for qualifiers see Section
4.
(c)
The h of a ngp is EITHER expounded directly by one or other of several
broad classes of word (as specified in Note 1.1 below), OR - much less
frequently - it is filled by a unit. This may be EITHER (i) one of two types
of unit termed a cluster (as specified in Notes 1.4 and 1.5 below) OR (ii)
a quality group (as specified in Notes 1.6 and 1.7 below) OR (iii) two or
more closely related co-ordinated nominal groups (as specified in
Note 1.8 below).
1.1 We begin with the head of the ngp. In most types of text, the type of item
that most frequently expounds it is one of several types of pronoun. Of
these, the 'outsider' type of 'personal pronoun' is the most frequent.
Pronouns answer the question "Which one?" by saying, in effect, "You
will know which, if you inspect the meaning of this item in this context".
(a) It is useful to recognize SEVEN types of pronoun:
7
(i)
the 'interactant' type of 'personal pronoun', i.e. I, me; we, us,
myself, ourselves, you, yourself, yourselves, each other;
(ii) the 'outsider' type of 'personal pronoun', i.e. he, him she, her,
one, himself, herself, itself, themselves, each other;
(iii) a 'possessive pronoun', i.e. mine, ours, yours, his, hers, its (very
rare), theirs (each of which CONTAINS the meaning of a 'personal
pronoun'),
(iv) a 'demonstrative pronoun', i.e.this, that, these or those;
(v) an 'interrogative pronoun', i.e. who, what, which, when, where,
why, how, how many, etc, e.g. as in Who said that? Also
whoever, whatever, etc.
(vi) a 'relative pronoun', i.e. who, that, which, when, where, why,
e.g. as in the man who/that said that.
(vii) an 'indefinite pronoun', e.g. somebody, no one or anywhere.
So the 'first' and 'second' person pronouns of traditional grammar are
brought together here as 'interactant' pronouns, and the traditional 'third
person' is here described as an 'outsider' pronoun - the reason being
that such pronouns refer to things that are 'outsiders' to the current
interaction. Note too that 'reflexive' and 'reciprocal pronouns' are
treated as types of 'interactant' and 'outsider' pronoun.
(b) 'Quantifying' items such as five, some and any in examples such as
Give me five / some and I don't want any, are NOT heads, but
quantifying determiners (see Note 7 below). The quantifying word
serves the same function as in five / some / any of them, with of and the
following head (them) being unrealized.
(c) When the head is a pronoun it is USUALLY THE ONLY ELEMENT in the ngp unless the ngp has a linker (&) that co-ordinates it with a preceding ngp,
as in my husband and I. But occasionally we find a ngp with:
(i) one or more modifiers, as in poor (m) old (m)you (h); or
(ii) a qualifier (q) as in you (h) who know him well (q), anyone (h) who
wants to leave now (q), those (h) who voted for him (q) and, rather
rarely, he (h)who dares (q) (wins). (See Note 12 below for the
qualifier).
Problem to watch out for: 'quantifying' items such as five, some and any in
examples such as Give me five / some and I don't want any, are NOT heads, but
quantifying determiners (see Note 7 below). The quantifying word serves the same
function as in five / some / any of them, with the meanings that could have been
expressed in of and the following head (usually them or it) left unexpressed.
1.2 The next most frequent type of h is a noun (or 'common noun'), as in a tall
boy. A large part of the lexicogrammar of English, as with all languages, is
a classification of noun senses. The function of a noun at the head of a ngp
is to answer the question "What class of thing?" in terms of the
cultural classification of things that every language makes available to
its users. Nouns typically occur with one or more other elements, i.e. one
of the various types of determiner (the most frequent), modifier and
qualifier. Singular nouns virtually always have at least a determiner
8
(99.9% reliable) but plural and mass nouns may not (e.g. Give him air and
Ants are fascinating creatures).
(a) Most nouns are simple nouns, i.e. they are spoken with only one
strong syllable and written as one word. In terms of the written
language, they have no spaces between the letters within them and they
have spaces before and after them (unless there is adjacent punctuation,
such as opening quotation marks or a following 's or an Ender or ender,
i.e. a comma, full stop, etc.).
(b) But nouns may also be compound nouns, and these are found
regularly in most kinds of text. These can cause problems for the
analyst, and the following notes give you a short introduction to how to
recognize them. There is a complete guide to analyzing compound
nouns in Chapter 15.
(i) Compound nouns typically consist of two (and occasionally three)
nouns in a sequence.
(ii) A compound noun functions as a single noun, but it is one that is not
fully accepted as a single semantic and formal item. In written texts,
compound nouns often remind us of their origin as a 'modifier +
head' construction through the use of a hyphen, as in pen-friend.
(iii)It would make the syntax analyst's task easier if ALL compound
nouns were written with a hyphen - and so treated as simple nouns.
Unfortunately for the analyst, there are frequent cases where the
process of integrating the two elements into one has not yet reached
this stage - as in ice cream (alongside ice-cream and icecream) and
and fountain pen. When a writer uses hyphens it is very helpful to
the syntax analyst, because it is clear that the two elements are being
presented as one wo.
(iv)The problem for the analyst, therefore, is that IT IS SOMETIMES HARD
TO DECIDE WHETHER A SUCCESSION OF TWO ( OR MORE) NOUNS IS A CASE
OF (a) A COMPOUND NOUN AS THE HEAD OF A NGP OR (b) A FULL
'MODIFIER + HEAD' RELATIONSHIP - i.e. one in which the first noun
functions as a modifier of the second.1
(v) Chapter 15 gives full guidelines for analyzing compound nouns.
But here is one test that you can use right away.
Ask: Can you replace the last word of the possible
compound noun by one? For example, in replying to Which of
them caused the problem? try saying It was the --------- one. So to
test alarm clock try saying It was the alarm one. Is this unacceptable?
If No, the example is probably a compound noun.
If Yes, the example is probably a modifier and the head of a
nominal group.
Unfortunately, this test cannot be used when the 'thing' is a 'mass
thing', e.g. with social security andcorrugated iron, because one can
only be used to replace a 'count' noun. If your answer is No or
1.
Strictly speaking, it functions as the head of a ngp that fills the modifier; see Section 2.4 below.
9
Not sure, use the full set of tests introduced in Chapter 14 - and
summarized in Chapter 20.
(vi)SOmetimes an item that began its life as acompound nouns gets
shortened to a simple noun. The terms radio set ,televison set,
jumbo jet and mobile phone have all come into English in the last
century, but in most usages these have been shortened to radio,
television (or telly), jumbo and mobile. The same phenomenon
occurs when we refer to an oak tree or an apple tree simply as an oak
or an apple.
1.3 Occasionally the h may be the item one or ones, as in as in He's the tall
one. This is a 'pro-form' that stands for a noun, and it is used when the
Performer considers that the Addressee can provide the noun for him/herself
- typically but not necessarily from the preceding text.
(a) Since such forms stand for a noun, they too usually occur with a
determiner.
(b) But because the item one or ones - unlike a noun - does NOT classify
the referent, a ngp with this type of head practically always has one or
more modifiers or qualifiers.
(c) An example of an apparent exception to this generalization would be
He's the one. But notice that this would be spoken in reply to a
question such as Who broke the window?, so that the reply He's the one
is in fact an ellipted form of He's the one who did it.
1.4 The h is also frequently filled by a proper name. A proper name typically
answers the question "Who?" (or "Where?" for Iceland or "When?" for
January 1989) by saying, in effect, "You will know who (or where or
when), if I tell you the person/place/time's name, and it is ----."
(a) In a simplified analysis proper names can be treated as single item. But
in a full analysis they must be analyzed in terms of their internal
structures. THE UNITS USED FOR NAMES VARY ACCORDING TO THE TYPE OF
THING BEING NAMED. Thus:
(i) Individual human persons (and honourary human persons such
as family pets), such as Ivy, Dr Ian Jones and Fido, use the human
proper name cluster (hpnclr) (see Section 8).
(ii) Social groups of humans such as companies, e.g. A.C. & D.J.
Barker & Co. Ltd, are analyzed firstly in terms of ngps, often with
ellipsis (as in this example), and then with hpnclrs at the heads of
some of the ngps.
(iii)Most other human social groups simply use the ngp, e.g. the
South Glamorgan County Council, The British Broadcasting
Corporation.
(iv)If a name has been reduced to an acronym - and this happens mot
frequently with human social groups - the part of the name other
than the determiner simply becomes the head, e.g. the (dd) BBC (h)
and, simply ICI (h).
(v) However, the names of places, such as 19, Patterson Road,
Springdale, Manchester M62 5QT, should not be analyzed in terms
10
of the ngp, but as part of an address group (see Section 9).
(vi)Other types of 'name' include the names of works of art (in a
broad sense of the term), i.e. books, newspapers, magazines, pieces
of music, statues, and pictures, etc. These are typically ngps and
co-ordinated ngps, such as Treasure Island, Pride and Prejudice,
The Pastoral Symphony, The Kiss, and The New York Times.
They may consist simply of a simple proper name at the head of a
ngp, such as Robinson Crusoe and Anna Karenina, or two coordinated ngps, such as Oscar and Lucinda, All these can be readily
handled as aspects of the existing lexicogrammar. Less frequently,
other bits of lexicogrammar are used as book titles, etc, as in From
Here to Eternity and Gone with the Wind. Buildings - often within
addresses - also use the ngp, e.g. The Aberconway Building, G
Block, and Cell Block H, etc. The analysis of Cell Block H is Cell
Block (h) H (q).
(vii) The names of sections of artefacts such as books and
newspapers also use the ngp, e.g. Chapter Seven and Page Three,
where the analysis is h q.
(viii) dates, such as Monday, the seventh of February, nineteen ninetynine, where the analysis is in terms of the date group (see
Section 9).
(ix)clock times, where the unit used is an adaptation of the ngp, as in
ten [qd] (minutes [h]) to three [q] and four [qd] o'clock [q].
(b) The last two types - dates and clock times - are not normally thought of
as 'names'. Yet they are like the other types of referring expression for
‘things’ in that they refer to particular entities. In the case of dates,
there is also the use of an initial capital letter for the 'names' of the days
of the week, months, seasons and feast days, etc, just as in the more
typical types of name.
(c) When the head is a proper name it is usually the only element in the ngp
- unless the ngp has a linker (&) co-ordinating it with a preceding ngp,
as in my husband and Dr Jones. But occasionally we find a ngp with
either:
(i) one or more modifiers (e.g. poor old Dr Jones; or
(ii) a deictic determiner (dd) (for which see Note 4 below), as in the
(Peter) Smiths; or
(iii)a dd and a qualifier, as in the Dr Jones who I knew in 1990.
1.5 Occasionally, the head is filled by a genitive cluster, e.g. Ivy's, my mother's
or my own (see Section 8). Semantically, this is similar to having a 'personal
pronoun' as the head, the difference being that in a case such as hers or theirs
the person who is the 'possessor' is expressed in a form that is integrated with
the 'genitive' meaning. Compare This is my mother's and This is hers. The
same principle applies to This is her own, where own is an element of the
genitive cluster (again, see Section 8).
1.6 Very occasionally, the head is filled by a quality group, e.g. very poor in The
very poor (deserve our support), and, even more rarely, the ‘superlative’ type
11
of qlgp, e.g. most privileged in The most privileged (have a lifelong debt to the
rest of society). (For the quality group, see Chapter 8.) In cases such as these
the ngp refers to a social group that is identified by this quality. The quality is
always one that can be applied to people, and there is a core of expressions that
have become relatively fixed expressions. These identify a social group that is
frequently referred to (or was when the expression came into use, such as the
poor). Some examples in current or recent use are: the rich, the great and the
good, the very poor, and the followed by any of privileged, underprivileged,
unprivileged; good, bad; beautiful, ugly; just, unjust; brave, cowardly;
(mentally / physically) handicapped / disadvantaged; wise, foolish; living,
dying, dead; old, elderly, middle-aged, young. 2 XXX explian why not the
ª(dd)poor (m) (people (h)) i.e. because the poor is equivalent to poor people,
not the poor people (where poor must either serve to 'classify' or to 'depict',
and it does neither in the poor. cp COBUILD Nouns and Verbs p. 43)+ 42, the
impossible, etc) But it is not a closed set, and any adjective that can be used to
describe a person can, in principle, occur in this construction. The head is
almost always preceded by a dd expounded by the - but is occasionally a
possessive expression, as when a politician talks of our poor. In the case of a
‘superlative’ quality group at h, as in (2) in Figure 1, we treat the initial dd as an
element of the ngp, not of the qlgp, since it gets generated as part of the
meaning of ‘social group’. See Examples (1) and (2) in Figure 1. Most
frequently there is no temperer, but the analysis should allow for it. Sometimes
co-ordination occurs at h, as in the dead and dying, and the very rich and very
powerful, and this too demonstrates the need to introduce a group to fill the
head in these cases.
ngp
ngp
dd
h
qlgp
t
dd
a
ngp
h
qlgp
t
dd
a
m
ngp
h
h
(1) the extremely rich (2) the most privileged (3) the Boston Irish
Figure 1: two quality groups and an adjective at the head of a nominal group
1.7 Another type of adjective which may sometimes expound the head is one that
expresses nationality, e.g.the French and the Irish. Here too the ngp refers to
a social group that is identified by this quality, and it almost always has the as
its dd. But in this case the adjective always expounds the head, and if another
word intervenes between the dd and the adjective, it is always a modifier. See
Example (3) in Figure 1, and note that the modifier wealthy could be replaced
by Boston - just as in cases with a noun as head, such as the New York Italians.
2.
For example, the title of the film The good, the bad and the ugly.
12
1.8 If I go into a fish and chip shop and say I want two portions of fish and chips, I
expect to be given two packages, each of which contains both fish and chips not two portions of fish and a separate portion of chips. Indeed, such shops
sometimes state that they sell fish-and-chips, fish 'n chips or even fish-'n-chips
- showing clearly that 'fish and chips' is regarded as a single unit. Similarly, in
cases such as There were fifteen boys and girls at her party, the number fifteen
specifies the combined number of boys AND girls - and not just the number of
boys. In other words, the grammar of English allows two (and very
occasionally more) nominal groups that are in a semantically close relationship
of co-ordination to function at the head of a nominal group AS IF THEY WERE A
SINGLE ENTITY, and Examples (4) and (5) in Figure 2 below show how to
represent this in a syntactic analysis. This structure can be called, in honour of
what is still Britain's most popular late evening meal, the fish and chips
construction. (The words two portions in (4) need further anaysis, and this
will be provided in Section 7 below.) Incidentally, this construction provides an
appropriate way to handle a long-standing problem for grammarians - that of
how to show the ambiguity in examples such as old men and women. In the
first sense there are simply two co-ordinated nominal groups (old men and
women) where the referents are (1) 'old men' and (2) 'women of any age'. But
in the second sense they are 'old people of either sex, i.e. men and women' - as
in Example (6) in Figure 2.
ngp
qd
ngp
v
h
ngp
h
qd
ngp
&
h
ngp
h
ngp
h
m
ngp
&
h
ngp
h
h
ngp
&
h
(4) two portions of fish and chips (5) fifteen boys and girls (6) old men and women
Figure 1: three examples of co-ordinated nominal groups at h
1.9 The nominal group is also used for the expression of deictic time and deictic
place. These are explained more fully in Section 19.2 below and Section XXX
of Chapter 14. All we need to note here is that, just as week in this week is the
head of a nominal group, so too are (a) today, yesterday and tomorrow, and (b)
now, then and when - and (c), the equivalents of these three in the dimension of
space, i.e. here, there and where.
2
Modifiers
When the head of a ngp is either (a) a noun that specifies the cultural classification
or (b) one(s), (and very occasionally when it is not) there may be one or more of a
large number of DIFFERENT TYPES OF modifier (m). Each expresses A DIFFERENT
SPECIFIC TYPE OF MEANING. But all modifiers - each in a different way - answer the
13
question:
What sort of thing?
Sometimes - in under 25% (XXX CHECK) of cases - the Performer may
introduce a modifier (m) to a nominal group. (We will come to her reasons for
doing so shortly.) She is most likely to introduce a modifier - and sometimes more
than one - when the head of the nominal group is either
(a) a common noun (e.g. lovely long hair), or, much less often,
(b) the word one or ones (e.g. nice slim ones).
She may occasionally use one when the head is
(c) a proper name (e.g. dear old Peter), or
(d) a pronoun, as in Poor old you / him, or even
(e) absent - in a score or so of well-established cases, such as the poor, the
great and the good, the very young, etc.
There are about TWENTY DIFFERENT TYPES of modifier altogether, and each type
expresses a different SPECIFIC TYPE OF MEANING. c But normally no more than three
or at most four occur in any one ngp.
2.2 The functional meaning of ‘modifier’: a clarification
In traditional grammar, it is assumed without question that the function of a
‘modifier’ in a unit is to ‘modify’ the head. But when you ask yourself what this
actually means, it is hard to provide a clear answer.3 Here we shall take a different
position - one that is explicitly functional. As we have seen, the function of the
head of a typical nominal group, such as cat in the black cat, is to classify the object
to which the nominal group refers in terms of the cultural classification that the
language makes available to its users through the noun senses of the language. The
function of a modifier complements this by providing an ad hoc description,
such as the word black. This is a description of the referent that supplements its
cultural classification as a cat by providing a subclassification of cats in terms of the
cat's colour. The choice of this type of subclassification rather than another is
intended by the Performer to suit the needs of the current Addressee in the current
situation - but not necessarily some other Addressee in some other situations. It is
in this sense that it is an ‘ad hoc’ description.
Thus the Performer selects each of (a) the meaning expressed in the head and
(b) the meaning expressed in the modifier, in order to perform a specific function IN
RELATION TO THE REFERENT.
Specifically, what the modifier ‘describes’ is the
referent - so NOT THE HEAD (nor even the ‘meaning’ of the head). In other words,
in a genuinely functional grammar the function of the modifier is NOT to modify the
head (whatever that means) but to provide a description of the referent, on an ad hoc
3. In terms of the ‘agreement’ between a noun and an accompanying adjective at the level of form, the
‘modification’ in fact works in the other direction. Thus in une belle robe (French) or ein grosses Haus
(German) it is the HEAD (i.e the class of the noun) that ‘modifies’ the supposed MODIFIER (the preceding
adjective), in terms of its effect on the adjective’s ending.
14
basis, that supplements usefuilly the cultural classification of the referent provided
in the head.4
2.2 The strands of meaning served by modifiers
In analyzing the clause, we found it useful to think in terms of the eight major
strands of meaning that contribute to its structure. Given the value of this
framework for understanding the clause, we might expect that it would provide a
helpful framework for thinking about the nominal group - and in particular for
distinguishing between the different types of modifier. But in fact it does not. It is
not that the concept of ‘strands of meaning’ is irrelevant, because we can certainly
classify most of the more frequent types of modifier in these terms. But we will
find that it would be grossly inadequate on its own, and that we need to consider
other dimensions of variation too.
So what strands of meaning ARE directly expressed in the modifiers? Most of
the twenty or so different types realize an experiential meaning of one sort or
another, but there is one important type that realizes an explicitly affective
meaning, e.g. the modifier in a nice man. Indeed, the single most frequent way of
expressing affective meaning in a text is by the use of the affective modifier. We
will return to it below, in Section 2.XXX. Another type, which is far less frequent,
carries what is clearly a validity meaning (as in a possible future Prime Minister).
But one of the most frequently used types of modifier of all - the ‘epithet’ modifier,
which we will discuss in Section 2.XXX below - realizes an experiential meaning
that is always also coloured by affective meaning, as in a pretty child and an
intelligent answer. So it would give a misleading picture of the true situation if we
were to allow ourselves to be forced by the ‘strands of meaning’ framework to
assign each modifier to one strand of meaning rather than another. And there are
other modifiers, such as different, similar, and other, which describe the referent in
terms that refer out to another referent - and these don’t correspond clearly to ANY of
the strands of meaning that are regularly found in the clause. (However, there are
Adjuncts that realize fairly similar meanings, such as differently and again.) One
could make a case, if it was helpful to do so, for analyzing them as partly
‘informational’ and partly ‘experiential’ - and the same is perhaps true of the word
certain, as in a certain person.d But the fact is that the distinctions between the
strands of meaning recognized for the clause does not provide an adequate
framework for identifying the various functions of the modifiers.
Nonetheless, we will use that framework to some extent, in that we shall begin
by focussing on variation within the many types of modifier that are clearly
experiential in their meaning.
The framework that we in fact need in order to understand the functions served
by the modifiers has TWO dimensions of variation. We shall say that all modifiers
describe the referent in one way or another, but that there is (a) the set of specific
functions that they serve, and (b) two general types of describing function that all
4. Thus the term ‘modifier’ does not provide a clear description of the function of this element, but if we
interpret ‘modifier’ as ‘describer’ we will not go far wrong. The same goes for the term ‘qualifier’, which we
shall come to in Section XXX. But both terms are so firmly established in SFL that it seems more helpful to
re-define them, as I do here, than to replace them. A ‘qualifier’ then, is a type of ‘post-head modifier’, i.e.an
element that provides a different type of ‘description’.
15
but a few specific types may serve. Naturally, as so often in language, there is a
strong tendency for some types of modifier to serve one of the two general
functions more frequently that they serve the other, but each one can be ‘coerced’,
as it were, into serving its untypical general function.
2.3 The specific describing functions of modifiers: an introductory overview
In a broad sense of the term ‘describe’, we can say that each of the many types
of modifier describes the referent in one way or another - and this is most clearly
true of the specific modifiers that express an experiential meaning. Each serves
one of the many different types of specific functions, such as ‘dimension’, ‘age’
or ‘colour’, and it is these specific functions that determine the structural relations
between the various modifiers - i.e. their sequence in relation to each other.
What are the more frequent types of specific modifier function? Three of them
are those that I have just mentioned. In other words, one frequent type of modifier
describes an object in terms of a dimension, e.g. large vs small, tall vs short and
wide vs narrow. Another describes it in terms of its age, e.g. old vs young and
also old vs new. And another describes it in terms of its colour, e.g. green(ish) /
golden. A fourth important type describes things in terms of a general epithet but this type of modifier, as mentioned above, also includes, as well as its
'experiential' meaning, a clear element of 'affective' meaning, e.g. kind vs cruel,
beautiful vs ugly, intelligent vs stupid, rich vs poor. As the examples show, the
main item in a modifier often has a clear opposite - but not all modifiers are like this,
as both the colour modifiers and the next type shows. A fifth frequent type of
modifier describes things in terms of the material of which the thing consists, e.g.
iron / gold / wooden. Several other types of modifier that express an experiential
meaning will be mentioned in the notes below.
By selecting from the wide range of types of modifier available in English, a
Performer can provide a description of the 'thing' that is tailored to the specific
communicative situation.
At this stage in the development of your text analysis skills we shall label all
purely experiential modifiers, whatever their sub-type, simply as m. (However,
in later notes I shall introduce two special types of experiential modifier that are
identified by a more detailed name.)
The one frequent type of modifier that is NOT experiential is the affective
modifier, as in a nice man and an excellent film. As we have already noted, there
is one other modifier that also typically expresses affective meaning, i.e. the
epithet modifier - but there the affective meaning is always blended with an
experiential meaning. For example, the modifier handsome in a handsome man does
not simply convey ‘aesthetic approval’, because we can also infer certain physical and so experiential - characteristics of a person who is described as ‘handsome’ whether a man or a woman, or even a horse. And there are several modifiers other
than the ‘epithet’ modifier which occasionally have at least a smidgeon of affective
meaning, as we will see shortly.
2.4 The sequence of the modifiers (a preliminary approach)
When
TWO OR MORE
modifiers occur in the same ngp, they occur in
16
A
in relation to each other. For the few types of modifier
that we have just noted, the typical sequence is:
RELATIVELY FIXED SEQUENCE
affective + dimension + epithet + age + colour + material.
In other words, it would be very odd to say He is an old tall fine man, rather than
He is a fine tall old man. Similarly, it would be very odd to say He used a wooden
long spoon rather than He used a long wooden spoon. However, the sequence of
the modifiers in the English nominal group is a good example of a part of the
grammar where it would be wrong to rule out unusual patterns as 'ungrammatical'.
Many such cases are a better described in terms of their relative probability.
XXX The following section goes to Ch 15
2.5 The two ‘general’ describing functions in experiential modifiers
As we have seen, most (though not all) modifiers express some type of
experiential meaning, and we have said that each of these is the specific
describing function of that modifier - e.g. a dimension, epithet, age, colour or
material modifier. It will now be helpful to look at the general describing
function that each modifier also serves. The three key points are:
1 Each experiential modifier in a nominal group serves one of TWO general
describing functions.
2 These two general functions are the classifying and depicting functions.
3 Most of the many different types of experiential modifier can be used to serve
either of these two - though with greatly varying probabilities.e
Let me now describe the two general describing functions of the
modifiers. The more widely acknowledged of the two is the classifying function.
Here the Performer's purpose is to add further ‘ad hoc’ classifying information to
the 'cultural classification' of the ‘thing’ that is given in the noun at the head of the
nominal group. The main way of doing this is to sub-classify the 'class of thing' IN
TERMS OF THE MEANINGS EXPRESSED IN THE MODIFIERS - for example, the two
modifiers in the ngp in Have you seen a large grey cat?. Notice that both modifiers
provide an ‘ad hoc’ classification of the cat; the cat is large and the cat is grey. Thus
it is NOT the case that there is a single 'classifying modifier' (as some grammars
suggest). Instead, there is a general describing function of 'classifying', and this
general function can be served by MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF MODIFIER, each of which
serves at the same time its own specific describing function.
The second general describing function is the depicting function. Here the
Performer's primary purpose is to give the Addressee a fuller 'background' picture
of the referent, as in the case of elderly in Fred's gone to visit his elderly father. In
an example such as this the Performer has clearly NOT introduced the modifier for
the purpose of classifying the referent (or, to use words that are really only
appropriate if the referent is also ‘particularized’, to ‘identify’ or ‘define’ the
referent).f In other words, the referent in the last example - i.e. Fred’s father would have been fully identified even if the Performer had not used the word
elderly, i.e. if the wording had simply been Fred's gone to visit his father. So
what is the function of elderly? The answer is that such modifiers are introduced in
17
order to give a slightly fuller picture of the referent - perhaps to make it easier for
the Addressee to understand 'the full picture', perhaps to make it more interesting.
Typically the addition of a depicting meaning adds to the visual 'picture' of a
physical object, as in this case, but such a modifier may also be used to ‘depict’
an abstract object, as in Then Baldrick told Blackadder his cunning plan.
To summarize so far, then, we can say that experiential description by modifiers
- which is most description by modifiers - can be either classifying or depicting.
Moreover, this is true for both the many types of modifier, which we have been
considering till now, and the various types of qualifier (or 'post head modifiers',
as they are sometimes called), to which we will come in Section XXX.
So far I have been writing about these two general describing functions as if
they were mutually exclusive. While we will continue to use the two terms in this
way, there is a sense in which they are not alternatives. Let's look again at the case
of a modifier that serves the classifying function, such as tall in That tall girl
should be able to reach it. The fact is that any such modifier necessarily also adds
to the ‘picture’ of the referent that is being presented, and so also serves - but only
incidentally - the function of depicting.
On the other hand, a modifier whose primary function is depicting can rightly be
said to be ‘non-classifying’. So why don’t we simply call it ‘non-classifying’?
The reason is that it is more helpful, in a functional approach to understanding
language, to use a label which tells us what the phenomenon is rather than what it is
not. From this viewpoint, the term ‘depicting’ is more insightful than ‘nonclassifying’.5,g
It is often hard for the analyst to be sure whether a given modifier in a text is
classifying or depicting. The reason is that there are NO OVERT MARKERS to tell you
which of the two general describing functions a particular modifier serves.6 On the
other hand, there is a very clear general tendency: the modifiers that are nearest to
the head tend to serve the classifying function, and those that are further from the
head (especially the 'epithet modifier', to which we shall return shortly) tend to
serve the depicting function - or, alternatively, the THIRD general function which
lies outside the 'classifying' vs. 'depicting' opposition i.e. the affective function,
(as described in the next paragraph). But this tendency is ONLY A TENDENCY. So it
is even possible for a 'material' modifier that is expounded by a noun and that is
typically used for classifying objects to be used for the depicting function, as in
They sat for a while with their backs to the low granite cliff (where the intended
meaning is not 'the granite cliff as distinct from the sandstone cliff').7 And it is
even possible to press-gang an affective modifier into serving the function of
classifying things - i.e. when shared affective attitudes can be assumed, as in Could
you pour me another glass of the nice wine? - not that nasty stuff we were drinking
earlier!
5. This is why we prefer the terms classifying and depicting rather than either of the pairs of the terms
commonly used in traditional grammar, i.e. 'restrictive' vs 'nonrestrictive' modifiers, or 'defining' vs
'nondefining' modifiers.
6. This is in contrast with the qualifiers, which come after the head and which also serve one or other of
these two general describing functions. See Section 3 for these.
7. More accurately, as we shall see in Chapter 15, this is a case of embedding, in which the modifier in a
nominal group is filled by another nominal group - but in this case one that has only a head.
18
In summary, we can say that, just as most types of specific modifier can serve
the general classifying function, many different specific types of modifier can
serve the general depicting function. And the final point to note is that it is often
hard to know, from the text, whether the primary function of an experiential
modifier is to be classifying or depicting. So here we will simply note the two
types - but WE WILL NOT TRY TO ANALYZE EACH MODIFIER THAT WE MEET AS ONE OR THE
OTHER TYPE. When we come to the semantic analysis of the different specific types
of modifier - in Chapter XXX of The Functional Semantics Handbook - we will
analyze them in terms of their specific functions.
2.6 Affective meaning in the modifiers
So far, we have mainly been considering types modifier that express an
experiential meaning. We come now to the modifiers that express affective
meaning. This type of meaning is not ‘general’, because it does not occur
throughout the range of modifiers. It is primarily associated with JUST TWO
MODIFIERS. But it does also occur occasionally in several others, as we shall see. It
typically occurs:
(a)
in the affective modifier (afm), whose sole (or very strongly
dominant) meaning is 'affective', as in (1) below,
(b) OR in a blend of experiential and affective meaning in the epithet
modifier (epm), as in (2).
EITHER
(1) That was a brilliant / terrific / terrible / lousy film.
(2) That beautiful / charming / intelligent / witty woman is Maria.
2.7 Relations between different types of modifier
From the viewpoint of the contribution of modifiers to the different strands of
meaning, therefore, there are three types of modifier: affective, affectiveexperiential (i.e. epithets) and experiential. But normally it is only the last two
types that serve the two general describing functions of classifying and
depicting. We can summarize this as follows:
type of
modifier
modifier
strand of
meaning
general
describing
function
affective
affective
affective
epithet
affective + experiential
classifying
all others
experiential
depicting
However, because the epithet modifier includes experiential meaning, it can be
used to serve either the classifying or the depicting function. So in (2) the general
describing function could be either of the two: the meaning could either be that
'Maria' belongs to the sub-class of 'women' who are 'brave', 'kind', ‘intelligent’
or ‘beautiful', or it could be spoken while showing someone a photo of Maria, that
19
the ‘picture’ of Maria that is being presented is one of a woman who is also,
incidentally, 'brave' or 'kind', ‘intelligent’ or ‘beautiful'. But at the same time as
whichever of these it is, the quality is presented as one towards which the
Performer feels warmly.
Affective meanings are either favourable or unfavourable. ‘Favourable’
modifiers express the performer’s warm feelings towards the referent, and,
obviously enough, ‘unfavourable’ modifiers express the opposite. And within each
of these there are variations in strength. For example, compare That was a good
meal and That was a superb meal (where good and superb are affective modifiers.
Note that the strength of an affective quality can be changed or supplemented by
the use of a temperer, as in That was a terrifically good meal. (For temperers, see
Section XXX of Chapter XXX.)
XXX Supplemnt examples from Poynton 1996:220f., and mention the possibility
of recursion (by asyndetic co-ordination).
2.7 What units fill modifiers?
Most modifiers (including the affective modifier) describe the thing in terms of a
quality, and they are therefore filled by a quality group. (However, Notes 2.4
and 2.5 below will introduce other types of modifier that describe the thing in
relation to another class of thing - using a truncated version of the ngp - or in
relation to a situation - using a 'truncated' version of the clause.)
(a) Each 'quality' modifier answers the question "What sort of thing?" in
terms of a 'quality' that the 'thing' has. The quality is typically
inherent to the thing, e.g. its dimensions, shape, age, colour, etc. But
sometimes the quality is not an inherent quality but an ascribed quality
- and if so it may be ascribed either by a social group (e.g. He's a
famous / effective lawyer) or by the Performer. (Indeed, affective
modifiers can be interpreted as 'ascribed qualities' - and this is probably
what is happening on the quite rare occasions when they are used to
serve the general classifying function, as described at the end of Note
2.1 above.)
(b) A 'quality' modifier is always filled by a quality group (qlgp), e.g.
the two underlined examples in a very tall, rather elderly woman.
(c) It therefore follows that, when an adjective occurs at m, it is NOT tO be
analyzed as directly expounding the modifier, but as an element of a
quality group that fills it. This is because it can almost always be
'tempered' by adding a 'tempering' word, as in very tall and rather
elderly. So in a tall elderly woman each of the two words tall and
elderly is to be analyzed as an element of a quality group that fills a
modifier. The fact that each quality group could be expanded by the
addition of a preceding such as very or rather demonstrates the need to
recognize the existence of the two quality groups. (The two elements
used here are the degree temperer and the apex; for the internal structure
of this type of group, see Chapter 9.)
XXX CHECK all uses of 'temperer' in this chapter and add 'degree'
20
(d) Notice that, in examples such as these that have no context, we cannot
tell whether the general describing function of the last two modifiers is
to be classifying or depicting. But in a case such as Mary's elderly
father we can be fairly sure that the modifier elderly is a depicting
description (unless Mary has two fathers, one elderly and one young, in
which case the general describing function might well be 'classifying').
The fact is, therefore, that if you wanted to analyse the 'classifying' vs.
'depicting' aspect of the meaning of the modifiers in English, you could
only do it on a 'common sense' basis, by drawing on the context and
your beliefs about the world.
(e) I said in Note (c) that ‘almost all’ adjectives can be tempered. However,
many grammars divide adjectives into 'gradable' and 'ungradable'
adjectives, and they then claim that the 'ungradable' ones don't co-occur
with the special class of words whose function is to express a 'grading'
on a scale - such as very, too and more. However, while it may be
ILLOGICAL to say It was a very / rather unique experience, many people
do regularly say such things. And if we substitute pretty for rather and
add the Adjunct really, as in That really was a pretty unique experience,
the use of a temperer seems even more acceptable. Similarly, while
logically a person must be either 'married' or 'single', the meaning is
clear if someone says He really does behave like a very married man. So
here we take the position that, from the linguistic viewpoint, the
'gradability' of qualities is a matter of probability.
Problem to watch out for: Several items, including pretty and bloody, are
functionally ambiguous. Such items occur either as the apex of a quality group filling a
modifier, as in She is very pretty and Her hands were bloody - in which case they denote a
quality - or as a degree temperer in a quality group (which may fill a modifier or a
Complement), as in a pretty / bloody clever woman and She is pretty / bloody clever - in
which case the denote a 'quantity' of a quality. (See Chapter 9 for the elements of the
quality group.) Compare She is a pretty tall girl and She is a tall pretty girl. The item
bloody is also ambiguous as between an experiential and an affective modifier; compare a
bloody nose and a bloody fool.
XXX From here on two sorts of changes are needed
(1) Consider the examples in the light of the treatment in this chapter
of material modifier and in Chapter 15 of the others.
(2) Since we have replaced the 'submodification 'modifier by the
'associated with referent' modifier, we need to move or change some
of the sections below.
2.4 Several types of modifier answer the question "What sort of thing?" by
associating the thing that is the referent with ANOTHER thing. So a granite
cliff is 'a cliff (consisting) of granite', a Birmingham newsagent is 'a
newsagent who lives in (or possibly 'comes from') Birmingham', and the
conference report is 'the report of the conference'. The most frequently
used type is the 'sub-classifier' modifier, which is the last modifier before
the head.
21
(a) These types of modifier are typically (but not inevitably) filled by a
nominal group. However, they are always truncated ngps, in that
they normally have neither determiners nor qualifiers. But they
occasionally have modifiers, e.g. the modifier early morning in We all
went for an early morning swim, and the modifier economics workshop
in Have you read the economics workshop report yet? In the last
example the head of the matrix ngp is report, and the modifier is
economics workshop. This modifier is filled by a ngp with a m + h
structure, and its m is in turn filled by a third ngp. But this one has only
a head, i.e. economics.
(b) This potential to have a ngp at m is one source of recursive
embedding in the grammar. In the economics workshop report, for
example, we have just noted that there are three ngps, two being
embedded at the m of the one above.
(c) Moreover, because this type of m occurs just before the head, it is a
regular source of syntactic ambiguity. XXX To Ch 14. For
example, in the recent economics workshop report, is it 'the economics
workshop' that is 'recent', or 'the report'?
(d) Now consider the cases of car park security officers and airport car park
security officers, as introduced in the discussion of compound nouns (in
Note (m) of Section 1.2 above). These two examples bring together TWO
potential sources of difficulty for the analyst: (1) the recursive
embedding of ngps at m and (2) compound nouns. The analysis
of the two examples is as follows:
ngp
m
ngp
ngp
m
ngp
h
m
ngp
h
h
h
h
car park security officers
airport car park security officers
In other words, a car park security officer is just one of many kinds of
security officer. Similarly, an airport car park is simply just one of
many kinds of car park (in parallel with supermarket car parks, town
centre car parks, shopping mall car parks, etc). And an airport car park
security officer is just one of many kinds of security officer. In
contrast, the compound nouns security officer, shopping mall, town
centre, car park and airport designate classes of 'thing' that are
recognized in the culture - as shown by applying the test given in Note
(f) of Section 1.2. (Most of the examples also meet most of the other
tests.)
22
(i) Note also that if such examples were preceded by chief, head,
deputy, or assistant, etc., those items would add another modifier,
e.g. He's the [dd] chief [m] car park [m] security officer [h]. In
other words, chief clearly modifies security officer, and not car
park.
(ii) However, if the relevant items are written with AN INITIAL CAPITAL
LETTER, as in He's the Chief Car Park Security Officer, the capital
letter signifies that this is the name of a post that is recognized in the
culture (even if it is only the culture of a relatively small social
group]) and the analysis should therefore be He's the [dd] Chief
Car Park Security Officer [h].
Problem to watch out for: In spoken texts examples such as these are
ambiguous. You can try the writing test, i.e. "Would I, in making a written
transcription of this text, write these items with initial capital letters?". If so, the
items are part of the head of the ngp. the analysis will be in the terms outlined above.
In making such judgements the analyst must rely on knowledge of, or guesses about,
the social and cultural context.
(e) (XXX to Ch 15?)
We should note that there is a special tolerance in newspaper headlines
for strings of nouns, such as the following, each of which has three:
Meat hygiene fiasco and Tory defection shock. But there can be more,
as in Honeymoon couple murder verdict.and London poll result shock
and even the possible headline of London poll result shock claim, etc. In
analyzing such examples, we should first apply the semantic test
referred to above to discover whether the example contains any
compound nouns. In these cases there are none, because no pair of
items designates a culturally recognized class of thing. The second
possible complication to check for is embedding. Consider the case of
London poll result shock. Here London is a modifier and poll a head,
because London tells us what sort of a poll it is - and London poll
similarly modifies result, because London poll tells us what sort of
result it is. And finally London poll result modifies shock because
London poll result tells us what sort of a shock it is. Here, then, there
are three layers of structure, each consisting of m + h, with two of them
embedded at m in another. Notice, however, that an example such as
Tory defection shock can be pronounced EITHER as Tory defection
SHOCK OR as Tory deFECtion shock - i.e. with the tonic syllable
on defection rather than shock. But this doesn't mean that a 'defection
shock' is a culturally recognized item. The placing of the Tonic on
defection can be explained as a product of the particular context of the
concepts that we expect to find in a newspaper headline, where items
such as fiasco, shock, claim, blow and revelation are fairly predictable so that they may be presented as recoverable, and so part of the 'tail' of
the tonic syllable. But notice that the final item is still given a strong
syllable, unlike cases such as QQQQ.)
23
(f) Occasionally, when the thing with which the referent is being associated
is to be identified by its name, we use a derived adjective - or
sometimes the name itself - whose sole function is to mean 'associated
with X'), such as Victorian. However, there are two different specific
functional types. The first associates the referent with a period of time,
typically by using a pre-eminent name that identifies it, such as Victorian
in Do you like Victorian architecture?(where Victorian refers to the
Queen of Britain and its then enormous empire). The second specific
functional type associates the referent with a place by using that place's
name, such as Victorian in Do you like Victorian wine? (where Victorian
refers to the state of Victoria in Australia). The reason why we need to
treat the two as separate modifiers is that they can both occur in the same
nominal group. As evidence for this, consider examples such as an
early twentieth century [time name] London [place name] taxi, a Ming
dynasty [time name] Chinese [place name] vase. Moreover, as these
examples and those of Victorian architecture and Victorian wine
illustrate, the name is in some cases used directly while in others it takes
the form of a derived adjective. So we need to provide for two types of
such modifiers: place name modifiers and time name modifiers,
and for each type to be filled by either a quality group or a nominal
group. 8 The rest of this section will concern the place name
modifier.
(i) In such cases we typically have a quality group with an adjective at
its apex. (For the quality group, see Chapter 9.) Often, however,
no derived adjective is formed, and the name is used as it stands, i.e.
as a nominal group or part of one. (See Chapter 18 for the internal
structure of various types of name.) Contrast the quality groups
in A very English marriage and the British road system with the
nominal groups in a New England marriage and the London
underground system.
(ii) One frequent type of place name modifier refers to the nation state
with which the referent is associated, e.g. hundreds of British /
French / German / Danish / Spanish / Swedish football fans; the
European / Chinese / Japanese / South Korean economy; two South
African / Irish / American / South American tourists. Expressions
such as South American and West Indian count as one word, since
they are derived from the names South America and (the) West
Indies.
Problem to watch out for: Note that there is often a similarity of form
between these adjectives (at a in a qlgp at m) and the nouns (at h) used to
denote a person who comes from the place (e.g. two Germans / Europeans /
Europeans, /Africans / Asians / Americans / South Americans). (In cases ending
8. In many grammars the two are treated as sub-types of what is often called a 'provenance' modifier. But the
fact that the two can occur together in the same nominal group (as we have just seen) shows that we need to
recognize two different specific types of modifier. The fact that both use - or invoke - names of places or times
is not sufficient to overcome this basic fact.
24
in -ese we are less sure about using such forms as the head of a ngp: compare
He's a Spaniard with He's a Chinese.) However in many other cases there is no
such ambiguity (e.g. two Britons (or, informally, two Brits), two Frenchmen /
Danes / Spaniards / Swedes.
(g) The second type of modifier that invokes a name is the time name
modifier, as in a Georgian terrace and an Elizabethan house.
(i) In these examples the association is with the monarch who was
reigning at the time, but in other cases it is with a prominent person
who is associated with the concept - often the creator or originator of
the referent, as in a Shakespearean style, Darwinian theory, etc., but
also allowing for other types of relationship, e.g. describing the
referent for the first time, as in . Dickensian conditions.
(ii) The other way in which a referent may be described in terms of the
name of a time is that many 'times' have names, e.g. 1960s music, a
fourteenth century view of the world, or a Sunday lunch. Such
names of times typically have, as their internal structure, a truncated
version of the nominal group. Consider the case of a fairly complex
-but in no way unusual - example such as this very early fourteenth
century composition. Here the head is composition, and there is a
time name modifier consisting of four words between it and the
opening deictic determiner these. Within this, we need to recognize
that the name of the period of time is the fourteenth century -though
here it has lost its initial the. Interestingly, the status of expressions
that name periods of time as the names of referents was, till
relatively recently, marked in written text by being written with
initial capital letters - as with most other types of name. (Compare
Tom Jones, New York, Australia, Sunday, January, etc.) Thus the
written form would have been the Fourteenth Century. In the
present case, therefore, the weak item the is removed and the name
fourteenth century operates as the head of the nominal group.9
Having recognized this, it is easy to see that the meaning of 'the
fourteenth century' is modified by very early, and that very early
itself consists of a quality group that is made up of a temperer (very)
and an apex (early). Thus the analysis is as follows:
XXX Add diagram?
(iii)In cases where there is no derived adjective, the name alone is
sometimes used to indicate a similar meaning; compare, on the one
hand, a Georgian teaspoon and an Elizabethan barn and, on the other
hand, two Stuart candlesticks and a Tudor mansion. In these cases
it is not a single ruling monarch whose name identifies a period of
time, but a ruling 'house', such as 'the house of Stuart'. In such
9. In an analysis that includes the internal structure of names - which is part of any complete analysis of a
text - the internal structure of fourteenth century would also be analyzed. The item fourteenth is the remains of
the ordinative determiner (od) the fourteenth. For the analysis of quality groups of the special sort that fill
ordinative determiners, see Chapter 9.
25
cases the word should be treated as the head of a nominal group,
because such items can always be modified, as in
(iii)As we saw at the start of the last section, the item Victorian is
interestingly ambiguous (especially in Australia) as between being
associated with a time, as in a typical use of Victorian architecture
(even in Australia) or with a place, as in a typical use of Victorian
wine.
(h) Another frequent type of modifier that is also filled by either a nominal
group or a quality group is the material modifier. It serves the function
of describing the referent in terms of the material of which it is
composed - whether natural or man-made. As with the two previous
types, they may be filled by either a nominal group or a quality group.
So, in parallel with an iron handle, we find a wooden handle, and in
parallel with a gold crucifix we find a golden crucifix.
(i) But in fact the parallel is only partial, because the words gold and
golden are frequently used as a colour modifier, as in e.g. the field
was full of gold(en) buttercups. Indeed, the word golden is only
occasionally used in the material sense. It is far more common as
either a colour modifier, as in She had wonderful golden hair and
It was one of those golden sunsets, or an affective modifier, as
in It was a golden opportunity (which has no more experiential
meaning than It was a very good opportunity). It is also found as
part of a compound noun, as in When he left them he received a
golden handshake. (See Section XXX for an introduction to
compound nouns, and see Section XXX of Chapter 15 for a full
framework for describing this important - but often ignored - aspect
of English syntax.)
(ii) We should also note that gold often occurs in fixed expressions,
such The children were as good as gold and It's as rare as gold dust,
when the word gold would be analyzed as a nominal group
consisting only of a head - filling the completive of a prepositional
group in the first case, and part of a noun at the head of a nominal
group in the second.10
Problems to watch out for:
1
Words denoting metals such as gold, silver, iron, steel and copper are of course
also frequently used as the heads of nominal groups.
2
Words denoting metals such as gold and golden, copper and coppery and silver
and silvery are frequently used as colour modifiers.
2.5 Very occasionally the unit at m is a genitive cluster, and in such cases the
thing with which the referent is associated is an 'intendee'. For example, in
that rusty old girl's bike therefore, the use of girl's signals 'a bike that is
10. In other words, fixed expressions have syntax as much as freely combined words, and they can usually be
modified in way that show this, e.g. It's as rare as the red gold dust of the Klondyke.
26
suitable for a girl', rather than 'a bike belonging to that rusty old girl').
Here too the ngp is truncated.
Minor problem to watch out for: In ambiguous cases such as an older girl's bike,
the meaning could be (1) 'a bike suitable for an older girl' (in which case the structure
would be an [qd] older girl's [m] bike [h], or (2) 'a bike belonging to an older girl', which
would be an older girl's [dd] bike [h] - or even (3) 'an older bike that is suitable for a girl',
which would be an [qd] older [m] girl's [dd] bike (h].
2.6 Occasionally there is a m that specifies an association with a situation.
Typically only the Process is mentioned, as in a leaking pipe and his
shattered hopes, so the m is filled by a clause with only a M. But
sometimes other elements such as the Manner are present also (e.g. the
slowly moving crowd, a steadily dripping tap and some badly cracked
plates. In all these cases the m is filled by a heavily truncated clause.
Occasionally this has the structure A M, as in the last three examples, but
typically there is only M. Interestingly, the A M structure has something of
the feel of the t a structure of a qlgp - qlgp being the unit that occurs most
frequently at m; note the similarity of the forms (though not the functions)
in an extremely boring man with a quietly flowing river.
(a) In cases such as his by now seriously depleted resources, the embedded
clause has TWO Adjuncts, by now and seriously.
(b) Sometimes a Complement may occur in a clause at m, e.g. telephone in
the underlined modifier in the new telephone answering service from
British Telecom. A particularly interesting case is meat in the underlined
modifier in Their main enemies are meat-eating bears. The use of the
hyphen makes the Complement meat appear to have been subsumed
into the M, and in most cases a hyphen does indeed signal that what
might otherwise be thought to be two elements are in fact functioning as
one. However in the present case the use of the hyphen is misleading,
because in functional terms eating is M and meat is the C. This view is
supported by the existence of examples such as red meat-eating rugby
players, where red meat (and not just red) is clearly the C of the M
eating. Similarly, in state-sponsored violence the referent is 'violence
that is sponsored by the state', and state is C to the M sponsored.
(c) Occasionally a C and A occur in a clause at m without a M, as in the
now somewhat older artist - and other possible combinations of clause
elements may occur from time to time.
When any of the three types of modifier described in Notes 2.4 to 2.6 occur
with other modifiers, they all occur nearer the head of the ngp. They therefore
typically - but not necessarily - serve the general describing function of
classifying. We turn now to some types of modifier which, when they occur
with other modifiers, occur before them.
27
2.7 The affective modifier (afm) expresses the Performer's affective
attitude towards the referent, as in a really nice man and a truly wonderful
woman. Modifiers expressing affective meanings are among the most
frequent types in many kinds of casual speech. They may be favourable
or unfavourable, and their strength of feeling may vary from mild to
extreme.
2.8 But affective meaning is one of the general descriptive functions of the
modifiers, in the sense that affective meaning also occurs in other
modifiers. It is especially frequent in the 'epithet' modifier. In such
experiential-affective blends there is always a 'base' of experiential
meaning as well - and the result is that the modifier also serves one of the
other two general describing functions, i.e. it is also either 'classifying' or
'depicting'.
(a) In an epithet modifier, the affective attitude is typically not simply the
expression of the Performer's feelings as an INDIVIDUAL. It is often the
type that is sanctioned by a SOCIAL GROUP which sets social, moral and
aesthetic standards, as in She was a kind / brave / beautiful / mean
woman, and They have a luxurious / untidy bedroom.
(b) Such 'blends' of affective and experiential meaning also sometimes
occur with other types of modifier. Compare the 'dimension' modifiers
in A little boy took it and A small boy took it, and note the affective
effect of little. And consider the affective content in the ngp luxury in
She has a small luxury flat in Fitzrovia.
XXX Add other examples from Poynton 1996:220f.
The use of ngps that have epithet modifiers is an effective means of
PERSUASION (e.g. in holiday travel advertisements). The reason why such
modifiers are an effective means of persuasion may lie precisely in the fact
that they serve TWO general describing functions. In other words, while the
Addressee is attending to the task of interpreting the classifying or
depicting function, the Performer's affective attitudes are also being
absorbed, possibly quite uncritically. And in the long run successfully
communicated affective attitudes are often more influential on the Addressee
than logical reasons resting on experiential meaning.
2.9 There is a regular but relatively infrequent frequent type of meaning
expressed in a modifier that specifies a limited range of types of quantity
of the thing. This is the quantifying modifier (qtm). It must be
emphasized that this is NOT the typical way of expressing the quantity of a
thing (which is the 'selection by quantity' meaning to which we will come in
Note 7). Moreover, it can only be used when the referent is particularized
(for 'particularization' see Note 4 below). The meaning is always
28
depicting (rather than classifying), and it contributes to the picture by
stating the number of the particularized things (e.g. his few / many / five
friends). Thus in Mr Smith's few friends were notified of his death, Mr
Smith is presented as having 'few friends', but in Few of his friends were
notified of his death there is no implication that he did not have many friends
- only that not many of them were notified. The proof that the two types of
'quantity' meaning are not the same is that both can co-occur in the same
ngp, as in the two underlined words in three (qd) of (v) his (dd) many (qtm)
friends (h). An example from a political article in the Observer (August
1997) is (following a reference to the 33 years since the establishment of the
Welsh Office): for 18 of the 33 years. The analysis is 18 (qd) of (v) the
(dd) 33 (qtm) years (h).
2.10
Another highly distinctive type of modifier is the relative modifier
(rm). It describes the thing by relating it to some other thing from which it
is similar or different, as in her other friends and a different / similar girl.
Although it typically occurs as the first of any modifiers in the group, it
serves the general descriptive function of classifying. In this it goes
against the general trend, which is that modifiers which serve the general
function of classifying tend to come later in the clause, and so to be nearer to
the head.
Problem to watch out for: Note the special case of another, as in Another woman (came
into the room). In such cases the qd an and the rm other have become fused - at least in the
writing system - into a single item. Yet the meaning is precisely parallel to that of its plural
equivalent some other women. The analysis should therefore show that both meanings are
present, and you can do this by conflating qd and rm.
2.11 The final modifier before the head is the association with referent
modifier. h It is almost always used to classify the referent by an association with
another object or, occasionally, with a event. It is because the referent may be
being associated with either that we use the term 'referent' in the label for this
specific function. Its general describing function is 'classifying'.
A source of variation in sequence among modifiers
It seems that, if there is no 'association with referent' modifier, any one of a
large number of other types of modifier can be 'promoted' to the place in the
structure of the nominal group that is most strongly associated with the classifying
function - i.e. the last modifier before the head - to mark it explicitly as serving the
general classifying function. Thus we may find cases such as the following, often
spoken with contrastive intonation, as in the following example. The Performer is
the director of a funeral parlour who wishes to buy another vehicle, and the
Addressee is a car salesman.. i
I want to see your secondhand black cars, not your secondhand grey cars
29
Excerpt from notes to be refashioned as parts of Chapters 4 and 15 of
Fawcett, R., forthcoming a. The Functional Syntax Handbook:
Analyzing English at the Level of Form. London: Equinox.
3
We come now to the determiners. In the approach to the nominal group
presented here there are many more types of determiner than in other grammars.
The result is a way of explaining the rich variety of the functional structures of
ngps that is both more complete and more principled than other approaches.
The following framework covers most of the very considerable complexity in
these areas of meaning and structure that is found in real texts.
3.1 We have seen that one of the key concepts in explaining the relationship of the
modifiers to each other and to the head is that of classifying. So Persian cats
are a sub-class of cats, and grey Persian cats are a sub-class of Persian cats, and
so on. Among the determiners we find a partially similar general principle at
work - though it encompasses a set of relationships that are in fact rather
different from 'sub-classification'. This general principle is the concept of
selection.
A note on the concept of ‘selection’
A referent may be a singular, plural or mass entity. So we can say that a
book, books, and grass all refer to SINGLE referents - in a sense of ‘single’
which is clearly NOT the same as ‘singular’. In other words, a ‘plural’ thing
such as these books is a ‘single’ entity’.
The starting point for understanding the concept of selection is that, just as
books in I love books has a single referent, so too has these books in I love
these books. The difference is that in the second case the Performer is referring
to a particular referent that is being presented as something that the Addressee
should be able to identify. We shall say that in such cases the referent is
particularized. 11 Similarly, the word them in I love them is to be treated as
having a single referent - and it too is particularized. So the referent of books is
all members of the class ‘book’, and the referent of the books and them is some
11. The term ‘particularized’ is roughly equivalent to the general term ‘definite’, as it is used in traditional
grammar and the philosopgy of language, but since it is not precisely equivalent it will be safer to stick to the
term ‘particularized’. This brings the advantage that it enables us to use the verb ‘particularize’, and so to
indicate that ‘particularizing’ a referent is typically a procedure that the Performer carries out on a referent, rather
than being an inherent characteristic of it. In other words, a ‘particularized’ referent is one that the Performer has
chosen to present as something that the Addressee should be able to identify, given the evidence available from
the rest of the nominal group.
30
particular sub-set of the class ‘book’ that the Performer is presenting as
particularized - and so as identifiable by the Addressee.
But what about five books? Although it may at first seem surprising, we
shall treat this expression as having TWO referents. The reasoning behind this is
as follows.
We have just seen that the expressions the books and them are alternative
ways of referring to the same referent. Now consider the cases of five of them
and five of the books. Clearly, the referent of five of them and five of the
books is different from the referent of them and the books. We shall say that in
each case the referent of five is selected from the referent of them or the
books, because it is a sub-set of the larger referent. This type of ‘selection’
does not tell us which particular books are included in the sub-set, but it does
tell us the quantity of the sub-set - and it is just this aspect of the meaning that
the Performer wishes to convey to the Addressee. So in both five of them and
five of the books there are TWO referents, one being selected from the other.12
Now let’s go back to five books. The logic of the relationship between five
and books is the same as the logic of the relationship between five and five of
them or five and five of the books. In other words, since in five of the books
the word five specifies a referent that is selected from the ‘wider’ referent of the
books, the referent of five in five books can similarly be seen as being selected
from the ‘wider’ referent of books. It therefore follows that five books has two
referents - the class of ‘books’ in general and the subset of ‘five books’ that is
specified by the use of the term five.
The case of five books illustrates the important fact that, while the word of
is frequently a marker of ‘selection’, the relationship of ‘selection’ can occur
without its being made overt in the word of. The fact that ‘selection’ is not
always made explicit can be illustrated by pairs of expressions which are clearly
very similar in meaning to each other, but in which the word of is present in one
but not the other. For example, just as several thousands of books expresses
‘selection by quantity’, so too does several thousand books. And there is a
similarly close relationship between plenty of books and many books, and
between lots of grass and much grass. In functional terms, these are all cases of
‘selection by quantity’, whether or not the concept of ‘selection’ is made overt
by the presence of the word of. Indeed, there are a few cases in which the word
of is optional, even with the same item, as in all of my friends and all my
friends, both of my parents and both my parents, and half of my supper and
half my supper.
12. Strictly speaking, it is the referent of five of them that is selected from them (and not just five) and it is the
referent of five of the books (again, not just five) that is selected from the books.
31
The final step in this line of reasoning will almost certainly be difficult to
accept at first, because of the everyday meaning of ‘select’. This last step is to
recognize that, just as five books and two books contain two referents (the
referent of five or two and the referent of books), so too does one book (the
referent of one and the referent of book (the meaning of which is ‘the class of
book(s)’). In other words, we are using the term ‘select’ in a sense that allows
us, in the limiting case, to ‘select’ from a set of one.
The logical consequence of this last step is that, just as one book involves
‘selection’, so too does a book. The fact is that the word an is simply a weak
form of one - both in terms of its historical origins and in terms of its meaning
in current English. Indeed, in very many other languages the same word is
used for both, e.g. in French, where the English a would typically be translated
as un or une, and German, where it would be ein or eine. j
(a) The selection principle states that:
1
Each determiner, pronoun and proper name has an associated
referent.
2
The RIGHTMOST REFERRING EXPRESSION is defined as EITHER (a) the deictic
determiner (if there is one) plus the rest of the nominal group (i.e. any
following modifiers, head and qualifiers) OR (b) the pronoun or proper
name that is the head (plus any modifiers or qualifiers).
3
The REFERENT OF THE SECOND RIGHTMOST DETERMINER is selected from the
referent of the rest of the nominal group to its right (in a 'selecting
relationship' whose type of 'selection' is defined for each type of determiner
in the relevant notes below).
4
The relationship of selection is typically realized by the selector of.
However, the concept of selection is often not expressed overtly, especially
when a quantifying, superlative or ordinative determiner is the rightmost
determiner in the nominal group. (Note too that when the selector follows
all, both or half and precedes a deictic determiner it can be omitted, as in all
of her friends.)
5
This relationship of selection is repeated for
DETERMINER (if any), THE FOURTH (if any), etc.
THE THIRD RIGHTMOST
To summarize: each determiner other than the deictic determiner introduces a
referent that is ‘selected from’ the referent of the part of the nominal group that
follows.
32
For example, consider the underlined ngp in the following sentence (spoken
by someone in a greengrocer's): I'll take six of those small bananas. Here
the quantity six can be said to be 'selected from' the larger set of bananas
that the Performer has identified by both pointing and saying those small
bananas. So in this nominal group there are TWO referents: (1) the referent
of those small bananas, and (2) the referent of the much smaller number of
objects designated by six. Similarly, in I'll take five of them, the referent of
five is selected from the referent of them.
(b) At this point I must admit to having slightly oversimplified in that last
paragraph. The oversimplification occurred when I said that five has a
referent. Strictly speaking, this referent is not specified by the word five,
but by five of those small bananas. So the full statement should really be
that the referent of five of those small bananas is selected from the referent
of those small bananas. But it is often helpful to shorten our statements
about 'selection' by saying that five is selected from those small bananas.
3.2 Note that, for each type of selection to be described below (except for the
qualifier-introducing determiner) there are three ways of expressing the
rightmost referent. Consider the following example:
1
either in full as in
I'll take five of those small bananas,
2
or more briefly as in I'll take five of them,
3
or even just
I'll take five.
Note that even in the last case the word five expounds the quantifying
determiner. In terms of its meaning, we know that the referent of five is
selected from a particularized referent - i.e. the Performer is assuming that the
Addressee knows WHICH things the five are selected from. In terms of its form
we can demonstrate that it is indeed a qd, because we can always test such
cases by adding of them.
3.3 The nominal group allows for many other types of selection, all of which we
shall illustrate below. One of these is the superlative determiner, which occurs
between the qualtifying and deictic determiners when these are both in the
nominal group as well - as in the underlined portion of five of the ripest of
those small bananas, five of the ripest bananas, and the ripest bananas. Each of
the different types of determiner will be described in detail in Section 6 and the
following sections.
3.4 Thus the relationship among the determiners is very different from that among
33
the modifiers (or the qualifiers) in their classifying function. The task of
modifiers and qualifiers is to subclassify the primary 'cultural
classification' of the thing in the head - i.e. the classification that the language
makes available to its users through its set of nouns. So you could use that boy,
that tall boy or that tall dark boy to refer to a particular boy, and the choice
would simply depend on how much subclassification you thought the
Addressee needed in order to identify the boy. But two of the best-looking of
those boys has a different referent from the best-looking of those boys, and the
referent of the best-looking of those boys is different again from the referent of
the simple nominal group those boys. Thus the task of the determiners EXCEPT THE RIGHTMOST ONE - is to introduce to the nominal group A NEW REFERENT
that will select from the referent designated in the rest of the ngp to the right of
it.
3.5 One corollary of this to note is that, where selection is introduced, it is the
referent of the LEFTMOST determiner that specifies whether the referent of the
whole nominal group is singular or plural or mass. And it is this which has
a bearing, if the nominal group is the Subject, on the question of whether the
Operator or Main Verb is ‘singular’ (for singular and mass referents’ or ‘plural’.
So we say One of my friends is coming, but All (of) my friends are coming and friends is 'plural' in both cases. In other words, it is the function of the
head of the nominal group to express the cultural classification of the thing
that the group expresses - and it is NOT its function to express what is termed in
traditional grammar its 'number' - i.e. ‘non-plural' (‘singular' or 'mass') or
'plural'. This is expressed in the leftmost referent, i.e. in Referent 1 in Figure
YY.13 (The reasons for this structure are given in Note 3.7. below.)
13. So, contrary to what many grammarians appear to believe, I am asserting here that it is NOT the case that
there is ‘agreement’ between the head of the nominal group that is the Subject and the Operator or Main Verb even though this very frequently appears to be the case. Let me demonstrate this point. Suppose, for example,
that two ‘singular’ nominal groups are co-ordinated to constitute the Subject, e.g. my best friend and his sister.
Neither of these has a singular head and yet, taken together, they constitute a plural referent. Thus it is THE
SUBJECT AS A WHOLE that may be said to be either ‘non-plural’ (i.e. ‘singular’ or ‘mass’) or ‘plural’. Indeed,
it is only (a) when the internal semantics of ALL of the ngps that fill the Subject are known, and (b) when the
semantic relations between them are also known (i.e. whether it is an ‘and’ or an ‘or’ or ‘and not’ relationship)
that we can state start matching these up for ‘agreement’. When there is any such agreement, it is between the
Subject taken as a whole and the Operator or Main verb - and not the head of any one nominal group.
(However, the possibility of both The team has played well (considering them as a unity) and The team have
played badly (considering them as a set of individuals) suggests strongly that the agreement should not be
handled ‘sideways’, at the level of either semantics or form, but in the logical form that provides the input to the
lexicogrammar.)
34
ngp
qd
ngp
qd
v
dd
h
h
Two jars of her marmalade [were put in the sale.]
Referent 1
Referent 2
Figure YY: The two referents of a nominal group that includes a selection
3.6 One fact that demonstrates that there are two referents in this nominal group is
the possibility (in many but not all cases) that EITHER referent can be taken up by
a following pronoun, e.g.:
How much did you get for it / them?
Here the pronoun it picks up her marmalade, while them picks up two
jars. Similarly, but with a different type of selection:
This is a recent photo of Josie. She’s my sister.
This is a recent photo of Josie. But it isn’t very good.
Here, the pronoun she picks up Josie, while it picks up a photo of Josie.
3.7 The problem remains of where to attach the selector element, i.e. the item of.
The question is: In an example such as a very large number of her friends, does
the item of belong with the preceding ngp or with the following ngp, or with
neither?
The answer is that the reason why the selector of is introduced is the
decision to present a nominal group that selects from her friends. In other
words, if the determiner that does the selecting is not introduced, the following
selector is not there, and on these grounds it can be argued that of belongs with
a very large number. On the other hand, there is the fact that, if the Performer
35
decides to leave out her friends as redundant information - for instance in a reply
to the question How many of her friends visited her when she was in hospital? then the item of is also left out. Perhaps this should be taken as evidence that of
belongs with what follows? Indeed, this would, in some measure, reflect the
analysis of traditional grammar, which would see of as a preposition that
introduces a prepositional group. But we saw in Note XX that this is not an
insightful analysis from a functional viewpoint.
The answer, then, in the present framework, is to show the selector as being
independent of both the preceding and the following portions of the nominal
group - i.e. to make it a direct element, in its own right, of the higher ngp. This
analysis is illustrated in Figure YY. This analysis highlights the importance of
the selector in the structure of the nominal group. It is unusual - and perhaps
unique - in that it is an element whose introduction to the structure depends on
the choice of a meaning realized in another element (i.e. the determiner that
precedes it ), but there seems to be no other solution to this problem that
adequately reflects the syntax and semantics of such constructions. This
analysis has the further advantage of avoiding the addition of another layer of
structure in the overall structure of such cases.
3.8 The selector element is almost always expounded by of. The question arises
of what letter to use to represent it. Since 's' is required for a major element of
the quality group (the 'scope'), we take over the phonetic representation of the
item of and represent it by the symbol v. And, as a rough guide, we can say
that EACH DETERMINER TYPICALLY INTRODUCES AN ASSOCIATED SELECTOR - unless it
is the last determiner in the ngp. The most frequent type of determiner - the
deictic determiner - is always last, so it is the one type that is never followed by
a selector. (In examples such as those of you who saw it, the item those is a
different type of determiner; see Note 12.) Typically, then, any determiner that
is not the last determiner in the nominal group is separated from what follows
by a selector (v). This statement is 99.5% reliable. An exception occurs
when of is omitted following all, both and half, as in all (of) the girls (see
Sections 7 and 8 below).
3.9 Among the many different types of determiner, the most frequent by far are
(1) the deictic determiner (especially when expounded by the) and (2) the
quantifying determiner. The rest all occur regularly, but are much less
frequent.
In analysing a ngp, you should begin with the determiner NEAREST TO THE HEAD.
The determiners occur in an almost completely fixed sequence in relation to each
other, and the following notes introduce the determiners in this sequence (with
the exception of two special cases, which are dealt with in Notes 11 and 12).
36
4
Look for a deictic determiner (dd) - which is by far the most frequent type
of determiner in a ngp. It answers the question: 'Which (or whose)
thing?' It is EITHER
(a) expounded by the item the OR
(b) expounded by a 'demonstrative' item (this, that, these, those, or the
'interrogative' forms which or whicherver and occasionally what or
whatever), OR
(c) (i) expounded by a 'possessive' item (my, your, his, her, our, their or the
'interrogative' form whose or whosever), OR
(ii) filled by a genitive cluster expressing a 'possessive' meaning, e.g.
Fred's, the new doctor's, my very own, etc. (For the genitive cluster,
see Section 8.)
5
Look for a superlative determiner (sd) - an OCCASIONAL determiner in a
ngp. It answers the question: "Which thing (or things) is/are being identified in
terms of a unique quality?" More precisely, it is being identified as UNIQUE IN
BEING AT THE TOP OR BOTTOM OF A SCALE OF THINGS OF THE SAME TYPE, WHERE THE
THINGS ARE ARRANGED ON A SCALE IN TERMS OF THE QUANTITY OF A COMMON
QUALITY THAT THEY SHARE.
(e.g. the tallest girl, the most important people, the
biggest boys, the five biggest of the boys, the biggest five of the boys, the
biggest boys in the class). (For discontinuity in a unit, as in this last
example, see Section 12.)
5.1 The sd is practically always filled by a quality group (qlgp). This is a special
type of qlgp that includes certain elements that are only used when it expresses a
'superlative' meaning - typically filling a sd (or a od; see Note 6.2 immediately
below and especially Note 8 of Section 6 below.)
5.2 Very occasionally the sd is filled by a clause, as in examples such as the most
widely used of his many textbooks. Here the most widely used is a sd that is
filled by a truncated clause, consisting only of an Adjunct and a Main Verb. It
is the Adjunct that is then filled by a qlgp with the typical ‘superlative’ structure,
beginning with the most.
5.3 If the sd is followed by a dd (or, as happens very occasionally, an od), there
will typically be an intervening v. The exception is when the rest of the ngp is
unrealized, as with the fastest in the fastest (of them) will arrive at 5 a.m.
6
Look for an ordinative determiner (od) - an OCCASIONAL element. It
answers the question: "Which thing (or things) is being referred to in terms of
ITS POSITION IN A SEQUENCE OF THINGS?" (e.g. the first person the next moment,
37
my fifth icecream, the very last drop, the first five of the boys to arrive).
6.1 It is rare to have both a sd and a od. If both do occur in the same ngp, it is
possible for the sd to precede the od.
6.2 Like the sd, the od is filled by a quality group (qlgp), and as with the sd, the
qlgp at od has additional elements. (See Note 8 of Section 6 below.)
6.3 If the od is followed by a dd (or, as happens very occasionally, a sd), there will
typically be an intervening v. The exception is when the rest of the ngp is
unrealized, as with the first in the first (of them) will arrive at 5 a.m.
7
Look for a quantifying determiner (qd) - THE SECOND MOST FREQUENT type
of determiner. It answers the question "How much?" or "How many?" of
whatever is specified to the right of it. Usually this is simply a head, possibly
preceded by one or more modifiers, but it can be any of the determiners
identified so far - and is regularly the dd, as in five of my friends.
7.1 A qd may be either:
(a) expounded directly by an item (such as one, a/an, five, some, many,
all, every, etc, (as in the first example in Figure XX below)14 , or
(b) filled by a quantity group, or
(c) filled by a nominal group.
The probabilities are as follows:
92% are expounded by an item
- for five horses, etc
5% are filled by a quantity group
- for very many people, etc
3% are filled by a nominal group
- for a large crowd of people, etc
14. For those who have been taught traditional grammar, this may be even more difficult to accept than the
concept that there is ‘selection’ from a set of one as well as from a set of two or more. The reason is that we
have learned to think of the two most frequent determiners, a and the, as two sub-types of a grammatical
category, the so-called ‘article’. Traditional grammar calls a and an the ‘indefinite article’ and the the ‘definite
article’. Yet they are very different, in that the can be used with all types of ‘thing’, i.e. with ‘singular’, ‘plural’
or ‘mass’ things, and a can only be used with singular’ things. The fact that a is simply a weak form of one (as
the use of an before a following vowel indicate) means that it is a quantifying determiner, while the is a
deictic dterminer.
38
(i) The nominal group in a qd may have as its head EITHER
a 'measure' meaning, e.g., two glasses of water, a cup(ful) of sugar, a kilo
of nails, a dollar's worth of icecream, etc, OR
a 'collective noun', e.g. several flocks of birds, a library of books; an
impressive collection of medals, OR
an ‘approximate’ quantity’ as in a very large number of sheep / a smaller
amount of liquid than we had expected, OR
a 'cardinal number', as in four thousand sheep - or, in a structure that is
unusual outside the cardinal numbers in that (1) it contains two (or more)
co-ordinated ngps and (2) the last ngp has no head, five hundred and fifty
sheep (see Note 19.1 below for the analysis of a complex example) OR
a cardinal number plus a fraction (where again two co-ordinated ngps are
used), e.g. five and a quarter years ago. (NB if a fraction occurs on its
own, it should be analyzed as a fractionative determiner - because it is, in
principle, a fraction of whatever occurs after it, and a qd could follow (as in
Two thirds of all of his friends were there) OR
a ngp with a highly restricted range of possible elements and items, as in
every single one of the cats. For the analysis, see the third example in
Figure XX below (except that in every single one the word every directly
expounds the qd, since there is no temperer such as practically).
(ii) The quantity group (qtgp) will typically have an item such as very, over
or virtually as its adjustor (ad), and EITHER
the amount (am) is directly expounded by an item, as in very many of
us, quite a few people, and virtually every cat (as in the second example
in Figure XX) OR
it is filled by a ngp, as in over four thousand people (which has the ngp
four thousand as its am) or
(iii)The second type may occur within the first, as in practically every single one
of the cats (analyzed in the third example in Figure XX below).
39
ngp
qd
ngp
ngp
qd
qtgp
ngp
qd
h
every cat
ad
h
am
virtually every cat
qd
qtgp
ad
(m)
v
dd
h
h
am
practically every (single) one of those cats
Figure XX: Three structures in which every occurs
7.2 If the qd is followed by another determiner (which is most often a dd), there
will typically be an intervening v. The exception is when the rest of the ngp is
unrealized, as with about ten in About ten (of them) will arrive at 5 p.m. If the
item at qd is all or both and a dd follows, the expected v is often omitted,
especially in casual usage (e.g. all (of) the children will be here by 5 p.m.).
7.3 Occasionally, when the quantifying determiner is all, both or each, it may occur
AFTER the head, as in He ate them all and The boys both saw it. Indeed, when
a qd follows the head in a ngp WHICH FILLS THE S UBJECT of a clause, as in that
last example, the qd may be discontinuous with the rest of the ngp. The
position that it occupies in the overall structure is in fact the PLACE FOLLOWING
THE OPERATOR in the clause (if there is one), as in The boys have both seen it
(where the meaning is close to that of Both (of) the boys have seen it). In such
cases the items all, both and each might at first seem, on positional criteria, to be
functioning as Adjuncts. Yet their primary SEMANTIC function is clearly that of a
quantifying determiner. Note that in cases such as He ate them all there is no
possibility of separating them and all (e.g. by an Adjunct), and this fact
provides strong support for the analysis proposed here, i.e. that all is an element
of the same unit as them in all of these cases. (See Section 12 for discontinuous
units.)
XXX Problem of: one of several possible solutions to this problem ...
seven (out) of ten cats prefer ...
But NB for 18 of the 33 years (which follows the 33 years since the establishment
of the Welsh Office) is simply 18 (qd) of (v) the (dd) 33 (qtm) years (h)
40
8
Look for a fractionative determiner (fd) - an OCCASIONAL element. The fd
answers the question "What fraction?" of whatever is specified to the right of it.
8.1 It is rare to have both a fd and a qd, but the two can co-occur (as in Two fifths
of all of the men over fifty are unemployed), and 'sums' such as Three quarters
(fd) of seven thousand (qd) is five thousand two hundred and fifty. There are
four main ways of expressing the concept of a 'fraction', e.g. (a)two fifths, (b)
twenty per cent, (c) point five (h + q in ngp), and (d)two out of (every) five (of
the population of Wales).
8.2 (a) The fd is typically filled by an embedded ngp, with a noun denoting a
fraction at its head, as in two thirds of them. Note that the head can have
internal complexity of the same type as that found in cardinal numerals, as in
seven three hundred and sixtieths (see Note 19.1).
(b) However, if the 'fraction' is preceded by about, etc, fd is filled by a qtgp,
with the ngp as its am (see Section 7).
(c) The most frequent 'fractionative' item is half, and it directly expounds fd unless it is preceded by about, etc, when it is the am in a qtgp, as in (b)
above.
(d) In the case of percentages, such as ninety per cent of them, we borrow the
ngp and treat ninety as a qd and per cent as the head. The item per cent ma
at first seem an unusual head for a nominal group, but note the usage What
per cent (of them) will be away from school today?, alongside What
percentage...? and What proportion ...?, etc.
(e) With fractions expressed as decimals, such as point seven nought nine five
four one of all men in Britain, we again borrow the ngp, but here we treat
point as h (since it and each following digit as the qd of a series of coordinated 'cardinal' ngps at q. (This analysis neatly exploits the one
existing provision in the grammar for repeating something without adding
the additional complexity of embedding - which is not appropriate here - i.e.
the simple co-ordination of units. The reason for using the qd in each of the
string of co-ordinated ngps is simply that this is the element that cardinal
numbers most frequently fill. See Note 19.1 for their structure.)
(f) With expressions such as Seven out of every ten cats prefer dog food), the
ngp is borrowed again, but again, as in (d) above, without a head. The
analysis of the fd is seven (qd) out of every ten (q) cats, with every ten
being a qtgp (see Section 7).
8.3
The fd is typically followed by a selector, i.e. by of. The exception is
when the rest of the ngp is unrealized. An example is as with two fifths in
Two fifths (of them) will arrive by 5 a.m. and (b) the optionality of of after
half, as in half (of) my time.
41
9
Look for a partitive determiner (pd) - an OCCASIONAL determiner. It usually
contains more than one word, and it answers the question: "What part or parts
of the thing or things specified to the right of it in the ngp?"15
15. Quirk et al (1985:249f.) define a ‘partitive construction’ as one that ‘denotes a part of the whole’. This
corresponds closely to the definition of a partitive determiner given here, except that here we interpret ‘part’ in a
narrower sense that Quirk et al. Here a ‘partitive determiner’ is one that is filled by a nominal group whose head
denotes a part - in the sense of a component - of something. Quirk et al, however, use the term ‘partitive
construction’ in a much wider sense that includes the meanings expressed in all of the determiners recognized
here WHEN THE DETERMINER IS FILLED BY A NOMINAL GROUP AND FOLLOWED BY of. So for Quirk et
al a new kind of computer, a loaf of bread, a quarter of the cake, and a mile of cable are all ‘partitive
constructions’. Here, however, these are distinguished as separate elements that are filled by nominal groups
that contain, respectively, typic, quantifying, fractionative and, again, quantifying determiners. (The reasons are
explained in the main text.) Thus Quirk et al’s notion of ‘partition’ can be seen as a more limited version of our
concept of ‘selection’.
Within SFG, both Halliday and Matthiessen have taken up my concept of selection (which was originally
presented, in a less fully worked out form than is done here, in Fawcett 1976-8). Halliday’s treatment is very
brief. He calls what is here termed the ‘partitive’ type of meaning the 'facet' (Halliday 1995:196), but does not
mention the concept of ‘selection’ itself. However, he shows a similar ‘box analysis’ for a pack of cards and
another two cups of that good strong tea He labels the first a ‘numerative’ and the second a ‘pre-numerative’
(without explaining why). (Neither seems particularly appropriate, since his ‘numerative’ corresponds to out
‘quantifying modifier’, which is inherently ‘depicting’ rather than classifying’. For these terms, see Note XX.)
Matthiessen goes considerably further than Halliday in his acceptance of the concept of selection. His Table
7-10 (p. 657), shows that he recognizes FIVE types of ‘facet’ - and so five types of selection. (He also briefly
recognizes two more of our types of selection later on, when he describes the longest / first in the longest / first
of these three chapters as a ‘Facet’ (p. 704). However two of his types of ‘facet’ (‘aggregates’ such as set,
collection, herd, etc) and ‘measures’ such as cup, glass, etc) are in my view related paradigmatically rather than
syntagmatically, both being sub-types of our ‘quantifying’ determiner. Thus he presents as a single element six
types of determiner which we shall here distinguish as functional elements that are, I shall argue, distinct from
each other BECAUSE THEY CAN CO- OCCUR (the ‘representational’, ‘partitive’, ‘quantifying’, ordinative’,
‘superlative’ and ‘typic’ determiners).
I welcome this extension of the use of concept of selection - but I hope that I have shown in the present work
why it should be extended considerably further than Matthiessen takes it. The framework described here is both
an extension and a refinement of my earlier proposals in Fawcett (1976-8).
The problem with Matthiessen’s limited use of the concept of selection are as follows. Essentially, it appears
that he adopts the concept of selection only for cases in which the form of expression is a nominal group - while
presumably following Halliday’s earlier approach for cases where the determiner is directly expounded by an item
(e.g. treating all in all (of) his friends as a ‘predeterminer’). However, he does not cover such cases, so we
cannot be sure. Yet ALL GRAMMARIANS WHO BASE THEIR APPROACH TO LANGUAGE ON FUNCTIONAL
PRINCIPLES SHOULD SURELY APPLY THE PRINCIPLE OF SELECTION TO ALL CASES - IRRESPECTIVE OF
WHETHER THE ‘SELECTING’ ELEMENT IS EXPOUNDED BY A SINGLE WORD OR FILLED BY A GROUP.
A further problem with the Sydney Grammar’s approach is that neither Halliday or Matthiessen appears to
provide for more than one such ‘facet’ to occur in a single nominal group - and yet cases with more than one
‘facet-like’ determiner - at least in Matthiessen’s interpretation of the term - occur quite regularly. As an
example consider:
a photo of the fronts of a row of Georgian houses
Matthiessen’s diagram (p. 657) implies that one chooses just ONE of the five types that he recognizes there.
He makes no mention of the possibility of the recursive selection of other ‘facet’ meanings - and even if he did
he would still need to find a way to build the structure in such a way as to specify the sequence in which the
various types of ‘facet’ come. Indeed, it is not clear from either his account or those of Halliday and Quirk et al
just what the syntax of these constructions is. The present work is intended to fill this gap.
In summary, we can say that some advantages of the approach described here over those of Quirk et al,
42
9.1 The pd is always filled by an embedded ngp whose head refers to a part
of the thing or things specified to the right of it in the ngp, e.g. the back of
the lorry, the fronts of the shops, the head of the company, the edge of the
road, the roof of the house.
(a) Occasionally the only element is the head, i.e. part of the field, part of
me.
(b) This is also where the whole fits into ngp structure. This may at first
seem surprising, since the meaning of 'whole' is the opposite of 'part'.
But this is precisely the reason why it belongs here: the meaning of
'whole' involves the concept of 'part', in that it means 'not just part of
the thing, but the whole of it'. (e.g. the whole (pd) of the/his (dd)time
in London).
(1) In The whole room was covered in dust, the item whole is a modifier.
(2) A problem arises in cases such as She showed me the structure of the molecule /
sentence. At first the idea that the structure of something is a 'part’ of it may be
surprising, but this is, in an abstract sense, just what the structure of something is. In
some cases the sense may be 'a representation of the structure of the molecule / sentence'
(see Note 10 below), but this does not affect the analysis. The alternative analysis is to
treat structure as the head of the whole nominal group - and we have to do in any case for
examples such as function / role / purpose of this component (of xxx). Here the analyst
must decide in the light of the context.
9.2 The pd is typically followed by a selector, i.e. by of. The exception is when
the rest of the ngp is unrealized. An example is the peaks in The view of the
mountains is splendid, and the peaks are usually in clear view till about midday,
when the clouds begin to form
10 Look for a representational determiner (rd) - an OCCASIONAL determiner.
It is always filled by a ngp, and it answers the question ‘Is the referent a
“representation” of the thing (or things) specified to the right in the ngp?’ with
‘Yes’. The representation is typically a visual representation which is itself a
physical object, as in the underlined portions of some recent photos of her
children and a new map of China, but it may also be a mental representation as
in the concept of liberty or your impression of Ivan’s abilities - or one of a
number of other types which we shall meet below.
10.1
The rd is always filled by an embedded ngp whose head expresses a
meaning of ‘representation’ - where this term is interpreted in a broad sense
Halliday and Matthiessen are that (1) the Cardiff Grammar’s approach is more comprehensive in the data covered,
(2) it is a fully integrated part of an explicit theory of syntax and semantics that has been implemented and tested
in a computer model, (3) it makes strong, clear predictions about the sequence of the determiners, and (4) it
shows clearly what the structural analysis should be like. Above all, it extends the principle of selection to
cover all cases of this phenomenon - and not just those in which an embedded ngp is introduced - thus providing
a unified explanation of this area of the grammar.
43
to include the various types described below. Some nouns that typically
denote a physical and specifically visual representation include picture,
photo(graph), diagram, and map. These typically refer to ‘things’, but since
the advent of film as a supplement to the ‘strip’ representation of events (in
‘cartoon strips, etc) visual representations of events, with Some that denote
a verbal Words that typically denote a mental representation include
concept, idea and impression - though the words for visual representation
are often also used for mental representations. Some words, such as the
word representation itself, can be used for either a physical or a mental
representation of an object. But there are other types of ‘representation’ in
the broad sense of the term that we need to use here, such as the
exemplificatory type, as in a good example of a mammal and two more
cases of typhoid and the copy type, as in a copy of my letter and a
reproduction of the Mona Lisa.
10.2
The representational determiner is typically followed by a selector, i.e.
by of - and then by any other elements of the nominal group. See Section
10.5 below for the exception.
10.3
Let us call the words that we are considering analysing as a representational
determiner the ‘candidate rd’. As with the other determiners, the candidate
rd is not a rd, unless (a) the following item is the selector of - or (b) the
example is a clear case of the omission of the selector of and the rest of a
nominal group. So in He showed me a plan of his new house, a plan is a
rd. But in She has a plan for what we should do tomorrow, a plan for what
we should do tomorrow is a ngp with the structure a (qd) plan (h) for what
we should do tomorrow (q).
10.4
There are more difficulties about recognizing this type of determiner than
with most others. In many cases we have to think carefully about whether
the nominal group that we are considering is a possible representational
determiner - i.e. whether ‘the candidate rd’ - is or is not a rd. In other
words, we often need to ask:
Is the referent of the candidate representational determiner a type
of 'abstract selection' from the referent whose cultural
classification as a noun (typically) is shown in the head of
the main ngp? Or does provide the main cultural classification of
the referent, with the following words functioning as a qualifier
to it?
To help with this problem I will first remind you in Section 10.5 of a
type of problem that we have encountered with many other types types
of determiner. Then in Section 10.6 I will provide fairly full lists of the
various types of noun that can occur as the head of the ngp that fills a
representational determiner, and in 10.7 I will introduce some tests to
help resolve problem cases.
10.5
In Section 10.2, we saw that the representational determiner is typically
followed by a selector and the rest of a nominal group - but we noted that
there are exceptions. This section deals with the problem of identifying these
44
cases. They occur when the rest of the ngp is unrealized, as in cases such as
a pretty good photo in
If you want to see what the twins look like these days, this is a pretty
good photo.
In this case the Performer could have added the words of them, but
since they are fully recoverable from the previous discourse she omits
them as redundant. If the words are fully recoverable, we have a case of
ellipsis. (Notice that it is not necessary that the words should have
actually occurred in the preceding discourse; the criterion for recognizing
cases of ellipsis is not their occurrence in the text, but their full
recoverability; see Chapter 20.) So the test is to ask
Are the words that would expound the rest of the elements in the
nominal group fully recoverable?
Since they are in the present case, the analysis of a pretty good photo in
this context would therefore be as shown in Figure XXX5:
ngp
rd
ngp
qd
m
qlgp
et
(v)
(h)
h
a
a pretty good photo (of) (them)
Figure XXX5: A nominal group
with all elements ellipted except the representational determiner
However, in an example such as He has piles of photos all over the
floor, the referent is almost certainly the physical objects rather than their
function as a representation of some object, and there is no ellipsis. (lf
we could see the full context, of course, we could probably make a more
confident decision.)
10.6
Nouns that occur in representational determiners - i.e. as the head
of the ngp that fills a rd include the following types.
45
(a) Nouns that typically denote a visual representation. Some frequent
examples include: picture, painting, drawing, photo(graph), sculpture,
model, map and diagram. More specialized and/or more infrequent nouns
of this type include: portrait, still life, landscape etc; water colour, oil
painting, sketch, etc; etching, print, lithograph etc, and study, vignette,
snapshot etc.
Nouns which denote a moving visual representation - and so typically an
event or set of events rather than a single object - include film, motion
picture movie and video(recording).
Occasionally the representation is through the medium of sound, so that it is
an auditory representation. Typical nouns are tape, tape recording, or
(sound) recording.
Nouns which can have either an ‘event’ meaning or a ‘product of event’
meaning - and which can occur in a representational determiner ONLY WHEN
THEY ARE BEING USED IN THEIR ‘ PRODUCT’ SENSE - include portrayal, depiction,
and illustration. This is sometimes referred to as the distinction between
‘process’ and ‘product’. For the tests to distinguish between them, see
Note 1 of Problems to watch out for (XXX no?) below.)
(b) Nouns that typically denote a mental representation: concept, idea, notion,
impression, vision, view and memory.
Some nouns of this type can have either a ‘product’ or a ‘process’ meaning and can therefore only occur in a rd when they are being used in their
‘product’ sense. These include conception, conceptualization, perception,
understanding and recollection.
(c) Nouns that can be used to denote EITHER visual OR mental representations:
image, likeness, embodiment and the word representation itself. Some of
these too can have either a ‘product’ or a ‘process’ meaning.
(d) Nouns that emphasize that the representation is partial, such as outline and
sketch in the mental world, and silhouette and shadow in the physical
world. The word draft denotes a partial representation that is also at an early
stage of development.
(e) Nouns that typically denote a verbal representation: account, description,
explanation, news, report, story, summary and survey. More specialized
and/or more infrequent nouns of this type include: text, transcript and
manuscript; anecdote, narrative, chronicle, tale and yarn; fable, allegory,
parable, legend, myth, explication.
A variant of this type occurs when the representation is though physical
action (or both words and action), such as enactment and some uses of
sketch and play.
Some of these, such as description, enactment, explanation and report have
both a ‘product’ and a ‘process’ interpretation and, as in the other cases that
have both meanings, they can only occur in a rd when the are being used in
their ‘product’ sense. So in many cases that you meet you are likely to
46
decide that it is a nominalization. (See the tests in XXX.)
[XXx Move to tests?] Nominalizations are typically followed by that ... or
about ..., as in his statement that he did it and his statement about the crash,
while representations are always followed by of - unless there is ellipsis; see
XXX. The problem arises when of is used, as in His report of the crash
appeared the next day. The test is:
Could of be replaced by about with only a minimal change in the
experiential meaning?
The distinction is that nominalizations refer to events, and nominal groups that
fill representational determiners refer to the products of such events. [XXX rep
of QQQ
(f) Nouns that typically denote the symbolic type: symbol, sign, token,
emblem, indication, manifestation, etc. These are often followed by a noun
that denotes some abstract concept or quality, as in a sign / token of her
affection, an indication / manifestation of his weakness. One type denotes a
symbol of future events, e.g. portent, omen, premonition, foreshadowing.
Problems to watch out for
1
The items meaning and sense may at first appear to belong here, but these should
normally be analyzed as partitive determiners. This is because, if there is
something wrong with the meaning of a sentence, there is something wrong with the
sentence itself, so that it passes the ‘damage test’. Notice, however, that this is not
true of the word significance. (Note that the noun significance, as in the significance
of his answer, is neither a pd or a rd; it is best treated as the type of ‘possession’
where the ‘possession’ is an abstract quality, i.e. ‘his answer’ can be said to ‘have
significance’ See Note 14 for ‘possession’ meanings.)
2
There is a set of words, some of which can on occasion be interpreted as denoting
‘very small signs’, as in a glimmer / gleam of hope. But such cases are better
analyzed as ‘very small quantities’ since they answer the question ‘How much?’, and
so as quantifying determiners. So they should be analyzed in this way in
examples such as a glimmer / gleam of light. Other words for which the same
analysis is needed include tinge, touch, trace and smidgeon; and, especially in the
register of extravagant descriptions of food and drink (e.g. chocolates, menu items in
trendy restaurants and cocktails), hint, suspicion, whisper and dash.
(f) Nouns that typically denote the exemplificatory type of representation:
example, case, instance and sample. More specialized terms include
specimen, prototype and archetype.
Problem to watch out for Some of the items that occur at the typic determiner
may at first look as if they could be analyzed as a rd. This is because they denote a ‘subclass’ of the general class, and if a rd of the exemplificatory type is used in the plural, as
in several examples of such problems, the small set of examples may appear to be a subclass. But the two concepts are in fact quite distinct, as is shown by examples that
include both of them. Consider for example Several examples (rd) of (v) this species (td)
47
of (v) dinosaur (h) have been found in this area. In the words of the COBUILD Dictionary
‘An example of a ... class of object, style, etc is something that has many of the typical
features of that object or style, and that you consider clearly represents it.’
(g) Nouns that typically denote the copy type of representation: copy,
duplicate, imitation, replica, clone, forgery, fake and facsimile. It is an
interesting fact that many of these are frequently used in the sense of ‘a
representation of a representation’, as in this copy of van Gogh’s picture of
the sunflowers. In such cases we find a rd embedded in a ngp that itself
fills an rd. (See the analyzed examples of such embeddings in Section
XXX.XX.)
10.7
There are simple tests that can be used in most cases to help us to decide
whether a candidate rd is or is not a rd.
(a) The visual representation test
1
Extract the ngp containing the candidate rd from its current clause,
and cut out the candidate rd and its following of.
2
Then make it a simple ngp, with the quantifying determiner a (or an) and
no modifier or qualifier, and put it in a new clause as the Complement of
This is ....
3
If the resulting clause permits essentially the same
interpretation as it would have if the candidate rd was
presented in its simplified form, you have a rd.
For example, consider They were looking at some recent photographs of
Ivy. First we must recognize some recent photographs of Ivy is a candidate
rd, then we must simplify it into a photograph of Ivy - and then we can
apply the test. The fact is that you can say either This is a photograph of Ivy
or This is Ivy (e.g. in a situation where you are showing a photo to a
friend) - and passing this test demonstrates that a photograph is a
representational determiner. Indeed, we very frequently leave out the rd in
everyday conversation in this way. when looking at a picture book with a
young child, we may say: Can you see a cow? and Show me a dog. But the
full, literal wording would be Can you see a picture of a cow? and Show
me a picture of a dog.16
(b) The mental representation test
When the referent of the representational determiner is a mental object
essentially the same test can be used, except that we need a different co-text
because there is no physical referent to point to. A test that works well in
such cases is:
1
Extract the ngp containing the candidate rd from its current clause, and
cut out the candidate rd and its following of.
2
Then make it a simple ngp with the quantifying determiner a (or an)
16. Indeed, it is likely to be important to use both forms when developing a child’s language skills.
48
and no modifier or qualifier, and put it in a new clause as the Subject
of .... is important.
3
If the resulting clause permits essentially the same interpretation as it
would have if the candidate rd was presented in its simplified form,
you have a rd.
For example, we can say either The concept of individual freedom is
important or Individual freedom is important - again with relatively little
difference in meaning, So this too is a case of a representational
determiner.
(c) The symbolic, verbal, exemplificatory and copy representation
tests cannot follow the pattern of the tests for the visual, auditory and
mental types, pattern, because in each case the rd cannot be removed
without greatly changing the meaning. It is important to note that these are
still cases of representational determiners, the reason being that they meet all
the other criteria for being a ‘representation’ of the rightmost referent. The
tests are simply that in each case the most general noun in the set - i.e. the
one listed first - can be used as a substitute. The test items are therefore
symbol, account, example and copy.
(d) This type of test can also be used, of course, for the visual, auditory and
mental types of representation, where the test items would be picture, moving
picture, and recording. Alternatively, -the word representation itself can be
used as a test item in all cases.
XXX borderline / special cases:
the appearance of the children roused everyone’s pity (poss?)
the story of the fall of Rome
the meaning of this sentence (part?)
the sense of this word (part?)
Problems to watch out for in representational determiners
1 We have seen that some nouns with the ‘representation’ meaning - including illustration,
conception and representation itself - only have this meaning in some cases. This is because
all such words have two basic senses: a 'product' sense and a 'process' sense. For example, in
Ivy showed him her analysis of the sentence, the sense of analysis is probably a 'product', in
that the referent is what has been produced by the 'process' of analyzing the sentence. It is
therefore a type of 'thing', and consequently it should be analyzed as a 'representation' of the
sentence. But in He watched her analysis of the sentence, her analysis would almost certainly
refer to the 'process' of ‘her analyzing the sentence’ (e.g. by working through it on a
blackboard). In such cases - which occur quite frequently - the nominal group Ivy’s analysis of
the sentence is to be analyzed quite differently. It is a nominalization of an event which
would, if it was expressed congruently, be a clause - e.g. She analyzed the sentence. (In
cases of a nominalization the word of is analyzed as a preposition, not a selector.) The
difference between the two senses of her analysis of the sentence is therefore an important one
49
- it is the difference between the referent being an object and the referent being an event (these
being typically expressed by a nominal group and a clause respectively). See Chapter 16 for
the concept of ‘congruence’, and for the method for analyzing the 'incongruent' realization of
events as nominal groups in this manner, i.e. as nominalizations.
2 A second fairly frequent case in which the word of functions as a preposition occurs where
it expresses the general concept of possession. The concept of ‘possession’ is a wide one,
and it includes ownership, as in the castles of the main challenger to the king (compare the
main challenger to the king’s castles), social relationship, as in the son of my second
cousin (compare my second cousin’s son), and quality, as in the generosity of Mr Pickwick
(compare Mr Pickwick’s generosity).
However, it also includes the part-whole
relationship, as in the hands of the clock (compare the clock’s hands) - but this is here
treated as a type of selection, as we have seen in Note XX above. The difference is that in this
latter case the referent of th partitive determiner is not a separate object from the object denoted
by the cultural classification in the head, but a part of it. In all of the other types of
‘possession’ there are two clearly separate objects - even if one is abstract, as in the case of the
possession of a ‘quality’. See the fuller treatment of this problem in Chapter 7.
3 There are other uses of of, e.g. following nouns such as way, manner and method and
preceding a lexical verb ending in -ing, as in a landmark speech by the British Labour
politician Ernest Bevan: What we have to seek are new ways of being great, new modes of
pioneering, new fashions of thought, new means of inspiring and igniting the minds of
mankind. The items habit, practice, and policy, etc. are somewhat similar, are and there are
many others that are regularly followed by of plus a lexical verb ending in -ing.
XXX Check by Q 85.
11 Look near the head of the ngp for a typic determiner (td) - an OCCASIONAL
determiner. I have left this type of determiner till now, because it involves a
type of selection that is like the representational determiner in being highly
abstract. But in terms of its place in the sequence of elements it occurs
immediately to the left of the dd - and, because it is unusual to have both a dd
and a td, when it occurs it usually is the 'rightmost' determiner. It answers the
question: "What type of thing?".
11.1
It is typically filled by an embedded ngp whose head is one of a small set
of items such as type, sort, kind, species, breed, make, brand, variety,
class, category, etc.
11.2
If there is a td, it is followed by v - unless the rest of the ngp is unrealized,
as in He's just bought a new type (of computer).
11.3
Sometimes the meaning of 'type' is not realized overtly.
(a) This is most obvious when the head is expounded by an inherently mass
noun such as oil. Then, in examples such as They are testing a new oil /
two new oils, the referent appears superficially to be 'singular' or 'plural'
(and so 'count'). Compare this with They are testing a new type of oil / two
new types of oil, where the 'typicity' of the referent is overt.
(b) Although it is less obvious, 'covert typicity' also occurs with count nouns,
as in the case, almost certainly, with They've just brought out a new stamp
and The Royal Air Force introduced two new fighter planes in 1941.
50
However, the structural analysis does not show any difference between the
two potential interpretations that exist for each example - i.e. we will not say
that type of has been ellipted. (If it had, we would find examples such as
*They have just brought out two new stamp, because the version with
'overt typicity' is They have just brought out two new types of stamp.)
(c) It is interesting to note that, even when the typicity is covert, the sense of,
say, the 'newness' of the 'type' can still be expressed, i.e. in the modifier
new that is attached to the head stamp refers to a 'new type of stamp', not to
a 'single new stamp'.
(d) The question of whether the referent is (a) an object or (b) a type of object is
a fundamental choice in the network, and this fact is reflected by the position
of the td relatively close to the head in the structure of the ngp.
11.4
Very occasionally, in examples such as a fool of a boy and an absolute giant
of a man, the head of the nominal group that fills td is NOT one of the set of
items listed in Note 11.1 above, but an evaluative noun such as fool,
idiot, giant, hero, etc. In such cases the meaning is 'the type of boy who is
a fool' 'the type of man who is a giant', etc.
12 There is a type of determiner which looks exactly like a deictic determiner (dd),
but which is not one. This is the qualifier-introducing determiner (qid).
Its sole function is to signal that the head is about to be classified by
information that will be given in a qualifier (see Note 13), e.g. those
candidates who have gained First Class Honours, and those of you that are over
thirty.
12.1
It is practically always used with plural referents, and the determiner is
practically always expounded by those. (If it is these it is a dd.)
12.2
Notice that it cannot be treated as a deictic determiner, because it can cooccur with one, e.g. Those (qid) of (v) her (dd) friends (h) who wish to
remember her by making a contribution to a charity (q) should .... and
Those of the family who have not been remembered in her will ...
However, examples such as Those of these/those people who ... seem not
to occur, probably because of the apparent semantic anomaly of having two
'demonstratives' in one nominal group.
13 The embedding of nominal groups within determiners may result in
structures of considerable complexity. Some of the major types are illustrated in the
following example:
rd
v
pd
v
fd
v
qd
v
m
h
photocopies of the covers of a third of his collection of games magazines
The example shows several cases of a ngp embedded in the ngp at a depth of one
(as underlined). The following question arises: ‘Can such embedded ngps
themselves contain a further embedded ngp?’ The answer is that several types can and that they regularly do. The most frequent types are the representational,
partitive, quantifying and typic determiners. The rest of this note explains the
principles that should guide you in analyzing such cases.
51
(a) Consider the following two examples, each involving two determiners filled
by a ngp (a rd and a qd):
(1) a picture of a bowl of fruit
(2) a roomful of pictures of fruit
In any one ngp, the sequence of those determiners that are filled by a ngp is:
rd v pd v ... fd v qd v ...
(This excludes the typic determiner, which is discussed in the next note.)
When the determiners occur in the above sequence, as in Example (1)
above, there is NO FURTHER EMBEDDING. So in (1), where the thing that is
quantified is fruit, the structure is simply rd v qd v h, with a ngp at each
of rd and qd - as shown in Figure XX below. However, IF THE DETERMINERS
DO NOT APPEAR IN THIS SEQUENCE, ONE DETERMINER AND ITS NOMINAL GROUP IS
EMBEDDED IN ANOTHER. In this case the analysis is an in that of Example (2),
as shown in Figure XX:
ngp
rd
ngp
ngp
rd
ngp
qd
h
v
qd
ngp
v
h
qd
ngp
qd h
(1) a picture of a bowl of fruit
qd
v
v
h
h
h
(2) a roomful of pictures of fruit
Interestingly, it is very hard (though just possible, if you choose the lexical
items carefully) to have two examples which differ only in the sequence of
the words. One such example is I like looking at pictures of collections of
still-life objects and I like looking at collections of pictures of still-life
objects.
(b) However, the typic determiner is a special case. Since it takes the
referent into a new dimension of abstractness, the referents of the
determiners to its left are NOT selected from it. Instead, every determiner to
its left is to be analyzed as embedded in the ngp of which the item type, sort,
class, category, make, etc is the head. Consider (3) and (4):
(3) a new type of picture of a molecule
(4) a picture of a new type of molecule
In (3) the thing of which a 'new type' is being presented is a 'picture', so it
naturally has a similar pattern of embedding to that in (2) above (though
52
with different labels for the two determiners). But what about (4)? Here the
thing that the 'picture' is a picture of is ‘the new type of molecule' - so again
the pattern of embedding is essentially like that in (2).
(c) The embedding of GROUPS OTHER THAN A NOMINAL GROUP also occurs
regularly in the determiners - specifically the embedding of a quality
group at sd and od, and of a genitive cluster (which itself contains a
ngp) at dd or h. Since these do not involve ngps that directly fill the
determiners of another ngp, the problem of analysis is simpler.
(d) There is a type of discontinuity in the ngp which arises
SELECTION AMONG THE DETERMINERS. k It arises with:
1
AS A RESULT OF
relative clauses (which fill the qualifier, and are described in the
next section),
2 ‘new content’ information seekers and
3 marked theme constructions.
What these three types of clause have in common is that in each an element
that typically occurs later in the clause is made to occur initially (except that,
as usual, a Linker and - very rarely - a Binder can precede it).
(e) Here are some examples, using the representational determiner. After
these I shall illustrate the analysis of a number of key cases, using other
types of determiner to illustrate the range.
Relative clause
It was someone who I had already seen a picture of. (head as 'relating out' element, so initial)
It was someone of whom I had already seen a picture. (selector and head initial)
Compare the less likely It was someone a picture of whom I had already seen,
which has no discontinuity.
New content seeker
Who is this a picture of?
(head as 'sought new content' so thematized)
Of whom is this a picture?
(selector and head thematized)
Compare the very unlikely A picture of whom is this?, which has no discontinuity.
Marked theme
Dorian Gray I haven't seen a picture of.
(head thematized)
Of Dorian Gray I haven't seen a picture.
(selector and head thematized)
Compare the more probable A picture of Dorian Gray I haven't seen, which has no discontinuity.
This type of discontinuity probably occurs most frequently with relative
clauses, so we will illustrate it in that context. Typically, the discontinuity
results from the 'thematization' of the head of the whole ngp, while having
the rest of it in its unmarked place. But if the style is formal both the head
plus the preceding selector (of) are thematized, and this creates an unusual
situation in that two elements that do not form a unit are thematized as if they
are one. (Perhaps it is the regular thematization of prepositional groups,
together with the fact that of can be a preposition as well as a selector, that
allows us to do this.) Very occasionally, however, even more elements are
53
thematized. In what follows we shall consider a simple case with just one
selection in the ngp, and then we will look at a case in which more than two
elements are thematized.
(f) Our first examples will be of the type in which the referent of a simple
quantifying determiner 'selects' from a particularized referent. Our first
examples will have the relevant ngp filling the Complement of the relative
clause, since the pattern is easiest to see in such cases.
(5) He bought some peaches, two of which he ate immediately.
(no discontinuity)
(6) He bought some peaches, which he ate two of immediately.
(discontinuous; casual)
(7) He bought some peaches, of which he ate two immediately.
(discontinuous; formal)
The analysis of (6) is straightforward, with the 'relating out' element two of
which having the structure two [qd] of [v] which [h]. The problems arise
with (6) and (7). We can show the solutions to both (6) and (7) in the same
diagram, as follows:
Key:
<x> ... <x> =
either x or x,
but not both
ngp
qd
h
q
Cl
<v>
h
S M
C
ngp
A
qd <v>
(6) and (7) (He bought) some peaches, <of> which he ate two <of> immediately.
Figure XX:
Discontinuity in a nominal group, with elements occurring in the matrix clause
Notice that the thematized elements are thematized TO PLACES IN THE MATRIX
CLAUSE. These are which on its own if the style is casual but, if the style is
formal, both of and which. In other words, the elements v and h are shown
in the diagram as being placed IN THE SAME LAYER OF STRUCTURE AS THE
CLAUSE ELEMENTS. The reason for this is that thematization is essentially a
54
phenomenon that occurs in the clause.17
(g) We have considered the case where the relevant ngp is at C. Exactly the
same principles apply when the ngp fills the Subject in the embedded
clause. Consider (8) and (9).
(8) He bought some peaches, many of which were unripe. (no discontinuity)
(9) He bought some peaches, of which many were unripe. (discontinuous)
It may at first appear that there is no thematisation in (9) - but there is.
In (8) many of which occurs initially, because it is both the Subject and
the ‘relating out’ element. But in (9) the word many occurs as the qd of
the ngp at S, but of and which have been thematized to occur as the
relating out elements in the matrix clause. In complicated cases such as
this it is often the case that you only perceive the structure in its full
detail when you perform the analysis.
ngp
qd
h
q
Cl
v
h
S O/M
ngp
C
qd
(9) (He bought) some peaches, of which many were unripe.
Figure ZZZ:
Discontinuity in a nominal group with no intervening words
(h) The type of discontinuity described in Notes (f) and (g) is very occasionally
taken one step further. The result is examples in which, exceptionally,
MORE THAN TWO ELEMENTS MAY BE THEMATIZED. Compare (10), (11) and
(12):
17. Indeed, it is the fact that there are alternative places for many elements in the clause, and not in any other
units (with only minor exceptions) that makes clause analysis so much more complicated than the analysis of
groups and clusters.
55
(10) It was a house a photo of the inside of which I'd seen earlier.
(11) It was a house of which I'd seen a photo of the inside earlier.
(12) It was a house of the inside of which I'd seen a photo earlier.
In (10) the elements of the ngp are:
a photo [rd] of [v] the inside [pd] of [v] which [h]
so there is no discontinuity. In (11) the discontinuity is like that shown in
Figure XX, but in (12), which is extremely unlikely to occur but is
nonetheless just possible, two selectors and two determiners would have to
be shown as being thematized. (You can see what the analysis of (12)
would be by extending the principles demonstrated in Figure XX.) But the
great improbability of (12) - and indeed this section as a whole - illustrates a
much more general principle. This is the reluctance of the grammar - and so
the human mind - to thematize more than one element at a time. Where two
elements are thematized they are EITHER both elements of a single unit such
as a prepositional group that is thematized - so that in effect only the single
element which that unit fills is thematized - OR the thematized elements
include the selector of (which in other circumstances does function as a
preposition - see immediately below).
(i) Finally, there is a second type of discontinuity that occurs with certain
determiners that are filled by a nominal group. Consider the case of the side
of the house facing the sea. This expression is in fact ambiguous. In one
interpretation it is the whole house that faces the sea, and this sense
corresponds to the analysis of Example (22) in Figure ZZZ. In the other
sense, one of the sides of the house is being identified by the fact that it
faces the sea - and in this case the qualifier facing the sea follows the head of
the main nominal group, as in Example (23). This is a typical example of
one of the two main reasons why discontinuity occurs, i.e. a combination of
the ‘Get the pivotal element in soon’ principle and the ‘End Weight’’
principle. (These are explained in Chapter 21.) This type of ambiguity, then
- and so this type of discontinuity - occurs when there is a partitive
determiner, i.e. when the referent is a ‘part’ of something. But exactly the
same types of ambiguity and discontinuity can occur when there is a
representational determiner, i.e. when the referent is a ‘representation’
of something. As an example, consider the two meanings of Here’s the
picture of the house that we saw today. And occasionally there may also be
the same ambigity and discontinuity with a fractionative determiner, as
in the half of the studio that’s untidy. But in the case of the type of car that
I want - where there is a typic determiner - there seems to be only one
interpretation, and it is the discontinuous one. In other words, the meaning
is ‘the type that I want of car’.l
56
ngp
pd
ngp
dd
v dd
h
ngp
q
pd
ngp
h
v dd
h
dd h
q
(22) the side of the house facing the sea (23 ) the side of the house facing the sea
Figure ZZZ: Ambiguity and discontinuity with the partitive determiner
Further problems (from John Polias, via sysfling 24.5.04
Let's start with "The angle of elevation of the top of a tree from a point P on the
ground".
This quite a problem! Here the head is "tree", and it is preceded by a qd "a", a
selector "of" and a partitive determiner, which I think probably consists of all the
rest of the ngp. In other words, "the angle of elevation .... from a point P on the
ground" is all a discontinuous ngp that fills a determiner (either a partitive
determiner or a representational determiner or perhaps some new type that I need to
think about recognizing!). Let's assume that it's a representational determiner, by
analogy with "the view of the top of a tree", and in this case "the angle of elevation
of the top" would be a rd "the angle of elevation" (with "angle of elevation"
probably all the head of the ngp that fills it), + a selector "of" + a deictic determiner
"the" + a head "top". You should be able to draw in out, after reading the
attachment... And then you can see what you think of this analysis.
Now for "the square root of its length". This too presents a nice problem, and it
needs to be unpacked to "the square root of the length of it". We would normally
treat abstract measures such as "height" and "length" as the heads of gps that fill a
quantifying determiner. So "the square root of the length of it" would be:
the square root of the length [qd] of [v] it [h]",
with "the square root" seen as a ngp filling further qd embedded within the higher
one. But in the case of "the square root of its length", we would be left with just
the qd (quantifying determiner), with the head (it" expressed in the deictic
determiner "its".
And "the period of a pendulum" is simple - relatively! - after those, except in
deciding what type of determiner "the period" is. Probably a qd, wouldn't you
say?. Doesn't it mean something like "the period of a pendulum's movement"?
14 Two general problems with of to watch out for
There are several types of construction in which the item of is
57
NOT A SELECTOR
BUT A PREPOSITION.
This preposition occurs in a qualifier that follows the
head, as in the possession of heroin and the dangers of heroin. See Note 15.4
in the next section for a fuller account of the types of structure in which of
occurs in a qualifier, together with examples.
Qualifiers
15 A ngp may have a qualifier (q) - and occasionally more than one.
Sometimes called ‘post-modifiers’. We will use the term’qualifier’ as the general
label for the types of ‘modification’ of the referent that come after the head.
XXX We must first separate nominal groups into those that refer to objects
(including abstract ‘objects’ such as weeks, and ones that represent events, ideas,
and qualities. The first type is the prototypical type, and the others types ‘borrow’
as it were, the structure that was originally developed to express the range of
meanings that we find that we need to express about objects in order to express the
meanings associated with events when they are nominalized, and the other types of
entity that borrow the structure of the nominal group.
XXX Doesn’t the above distinction belong at the start of the chapter
on the nominal group? Perhaps leaving the non-prototypical types
till later? XXX
In explaining the use of qualifies in English e must begin with prototypical ngps.
The following points apply only to this basic type of nominal group.
Qualifiers are like modifiers in that they serve one or other of the two general
describing functions that we first met when we were considering the modifiers,
i.e. a qualifier is either classifying or depicting. Recall that the modifiers carry
no overt markers that might show the analyst which of these two general describing
functions is being served, so this aspect of their meaning cannot be analyzed except
on a 'common sense' basis. With a qualifier, however, you can practically always
tell what function it is serving. This because, if it serves the depicting function, it
will have a separate information unit - i.e. if it is a written text, the unit filling the
qualifier will begin with a comma and end with a comma (or full stop, etc). But if
it serves the classifying function it will not.m
Qualifiers are also like modifiers in that they serve many different specific
describing functions. You might expect them to be the same set of specific
describing functions that we find in the modifiers, but they are not. The approach
to classifying these distinctive describing functions that we will follow here is to
recognize that there is a close correspondence between a large sub-set of the
experiential Adjuncts that we find in the clause and the qualifiers that we find in the
nominal group. For example, in the clause There was a mattress on the floor for the
prisoner to sleep on, the qualifier on the floor tells us the Place where the mattress
was, and the qualifier for the prisoner to sleep on tells us the Purpose for which the
mattress was there.
XXX Check out the hypothesis expressed here more thoroughly.
58
XXX
15.1
Qualifiers are typically filled by either:
(a) a prepositional group (pgp), as in a girl with long hair (see
Section 5 below); or
(b) a clause (Cl) as in a girl who has long hair. This type of
embedded clause is called a relative clause, and it is usually
introduced by a relative pronoun such as who. (Relative
pronouns were listed in Section 2.2 above).
15.2
Less frequently a q may be filled by:
(c) a nominal group (ngp), which is usually but not invariably given
a separate information unit. It is therefore preceded and followed (in
the written form) by comma, dash or bracket (as in Peter Adams, a
sixty year old farmer from Dorset, ... ). (XXX Or as part of the
Ancillary Grammar?)
15.3
Quality groups that would occur at m in an ordinary ngp occur as the
first qualifier in the head of the ngp is an indefinite pronoun (e.g.
something different / nice / new / Persian, but examples such as
something iron /bronze are unusual and *something London doesn't
occur.
15.4
There are several semantic classes of nouns that typically occur with a
qualifier that is filled by a clause (and occasionally by a pgp with a
clause as its cv). They are nouns that denote either a type of discourse
act (1-5 below) or a type of belief (6 below).
1. ‘statement’ followed by EITHER
(a) a full clause at q with that as B,
OR (in
most cases)
(b) a pgp at q with of, about, concerning etc as p, and a partial
clause at cv with an -ing form,
i.e. statement, and also acknowledgement, affirmation,
agreement, announcement, answer, argument, assertion,
assurnace, boast, claim, complaint, confirmation, conviction,
declaration, denial, explanation, insistence, interpretation,
objection, prediction, proposition, protest, news, remark, reply,
report, response, rumour, statement, suggestion, story,
testimony, etc.N
2. ‘question’ followed by EITHER
(a) a full clause at q with whether as B OR
(b) a pgp at q with of or as to at p, and a full clause at cv with
whether as B;
i.e. question, and also query and inquiry.
59
3. ‘proposal for action’ followed by EITHER
(a) a full clause at q with that as B OR
(b) a partial clause at q with a covert Subject and to as I,
i.e. order, request, offer and suggestion, and also agreement,
arrangement, command, decision, directive, instruction(s),
invitation, permission, plea, promise, proposal, rule, ruling,
threat, undertaking, vow, warning, etc (NB also : call, which is
only followed by to ...).o
4. ‘response to proposal for action’ followed by EITHER
(a) a full clause at q with that as B OR
(b) a partial clause at q with a covert Subject and to as I,
i.e. agreement, refusal.
5. ‘reason’ followed by a full clause at q with EITHER
(a) that as B OR
(b) why as A
OR
a pgp at q with as to at p, and a full clause at cv with why as A;
i.e. reason, explanation and some of the nouns under ‘proof’ at
(v) below.
6. ‘belief’ followed by EITHER
(a) a full clause at q with that as B
FUTURE,
OR, IF THE BELIEF IS ABOUT THE
(b) a partial clause at q with a covert Subject and to as I, OR IN MANY
CASES
(c) a pgp at q with of at p and the cv filled by a partial clause with an
-ing form (or a nominalization or typical nominal group) i.e.
(i) ‘belief in general’: belief, doctrine, idea, issue, problem,
question;
(ii) ‘100% confident belief’: fact, case; awareness, discovery,
knowledge, realization; certainty, impossibility;
(iii) ‘less than 100% confident belief’: thought, expectation,
impression, intention, opinion, notion, sense, view;
(iv) ‘possibility’: possibility; chance, likelihood, probability, off
chance,
(v) ‘proof’:
implication;
proof; evidence, indication, demonstration,
(vi) ‘emotive belief’: feeling; belief, confidence, desire, doubt,
faith, fear, hope, inclination, suspicion, trust, wish; worry,p
60
(vii)’ belief necessarily about the future’: plan; agreement,
contract, deal.q
Problem to watch out for An example such as It is the case that he wasn’t
there is NOT an example of this construction. It is related to the improbable That he
loves her is the case - and consequently It is an empty Subject, the case is a
Complement and that he wasn’t there is another. See Chapter 22 for this type of
‘special construction’.
15.5
Qualifiers are frequently filled by a prepositional group whose
preposition is the word of. Two of the most frequent types are
nominalizations and relationships of possession.
1
A nominalization is a construction in which the meanings of
an event are compressed into the more restricted structural
resources of the nominal group. In a nominalization the
Process is expressed as the head of the ngp, and it is very
frequently followed by a qualifier that is filled by a
prepositional group. The preposition in that qualifier is
the item of, and the completive is a Participant Role usually the PR that would typically be a Complement if the
Performer had expressed the event as a clause. A typical
example is the destruction of the tombs. Here the meaning of the
item of is simply that what follows is a Participant in the
Process. Nominalizations occur in most types of text, but they
are especially common in texts which wish to imply that they
have a highly intellectual content. Chapter 16, which is on
incongruent constructions, describes more fully the various
types of nominalizations that occur.
2
The word of also occurs as the preposition in a pgp at q to
express some types of possession relationship. This is
‘possession’ in a broad sense, as we shall see. The use of the
word of occurs when the ‘possessor’ is either (1) non-human or
(2), if human, semantically ‘weighty’.18
Typical examples of non-human possessors include the
total area of India and the great beauty of the evening sky.
(There can be no doubt that these are types of ‘possession’,
because we can say India has a total area of 3.3 million square
kilometres, and The evening sky has great beauty.) Typical
examples of human possessors (including groups of humans)
are the castles of the main challenger to the king, the daughter of
18. What is semantically ‘weighty’ is typically also formally ‘long’, in terms of the number of words, so that
even though it is had to define ‘semantic weight’ in precise terms it is usually is easy to recognize. And because
something that is semantically weighty is likely to present information that is ‘new’, it is likely to occur at the
end of the clause, where it can receive the unmarked tonic.
61
the chief of the tribe and the generosity of the new government.
In the first of these last three the type of possession is
‘ownership’, in the second it is ‘social relationship’, and in the
third it is the ‘possession of a quality’ - as it was in the case of
the great beauty of the evening sky.
XXX But in He steppped into the invigorating sharpness of an ice cold shower (J
Collins), might we want to make shower the head?
It is the ‘possession of quality’ type that is most likely to
cause problems in distinguishing between ‘possession’ and
‘selection’. For example, one might at first be tempted to
analyse the significance of his answer as if it was the meaning of
his answer. Should it perhaps be seen as a ‘representation’ of
the answer, or as a ‘part’ of it? A moment’s thought will
establish that, even though meaning can seem close to being a
‘representation’, significance cannot be one. (See the tests in
Section 10.7.) But nor is it, as one might at first think, a ‘part’
of the answer, as the word meaning would be (because
significance does not pass the ‘damage’ test). Instead, it is one
of ‘possession’ because ‘his answer’ has the quality of
‘significance’.
In all five cases the item of is a preposition in a pgp filling a
qualifier in a ngp. And in all five the same meaning could have
been expressed in a genitive construction, e.g. the evening sky’s
great beauty, India’s total area, the castles of the main challenger
to the king etc. 19 But where the ‘possessor’ is not perceived as
human, it is less acceptable to use the genitive.20
There are other types of construction with of as a preposition
in a pgp at q, as in (a) the city of New York and the island of
Barbados (where of can be replaced by called) and (b) a person
19. Note that the ability to accept re-expression in a genitive construction cannot - unfortunately - be taken as a
proof that the construction expresses a ‘possession’ relationship. This is because some at least of the ‘selection’
relationships can also be re-expressed as genitive constructions.
Perhaps this has come about as a ‘play’ extension of cases where the relationship can arguably be perceived to be
one of possession.
20. It is also the case that where the ‘possessor’ is not ‘definite’ - i.e. either particularized or named - it cannot
use the genitive construction at all.
62
of great stature (where of can be replaced by having). In both
of these the analysis is a pgp at q. Note also a new way of
opening cans,which is a clause embedded at q, with of as the
Binder. The cases with a pgp at q are presented more fully in the
main chapter of the prepositional group (Chapter 7), and those
with a clause at q are covered in the second of the two chapters
dealing with units embedded in groups (Chapter 16). Many of
the other problem cases have been dealt with above, in
considering the quantifying, partitive and representational
determiners.
15.6
Occasionally a qualifier is discontinuous with the rest of the ngp. We
need to note two types.
(a) In the first type a 'semantically heavy' qualifier - i.e. one that is
relatively long in terms of the number and length of the words - is
delayed so that it can occur at the end of the clause. But this only
occurs when the rest of the clause is also 'semantically light', and so
relatively short (e.g. Then a man came in who I hadn't seen before.)
Here two general principles are operating: the first is the 'Get the
pivotal element in soon' principle, and the second is the 'end weight'
principle. (See Chapter 21 for these.)
(b) Occasionally in informal texts an intensifying pronoun such as
myself is detached from the ngp. Consider the case of myself in If
she can't find it, I'll go up to the loft to look for it myself. The
question is: Is myself (1) an unusual type of Adjunct (i.e. one that
consists of just a ngp with only a head)? Or is it (2) a qualifier that
is discontinuous with the rest of its ngp (and which consists of a
ngp with just h)?
The fact that we can also say, with a fairly similar meaning, I
myself will go up to the loft to look for it (where the ngp structure is
h q) suggests that the second analysis is the appropriate one.
One possible alternative line of thought to follow up is to test
whether myself is an reduced form of by myself - which we would
treat as an Adjunct in cases such as I did it by myself. The problem
with this idea is that myself has a very different meaning from by
myself, as is shown by considering examples such as He's planning
to live in the castle himself. The implication is that this is in contrast
with his letting or selling the castle, and it is NOT part of the meaning
that he will necessarily live there 'by himself'.
63
I therefore conclude that in such examples myself is not an
Adjunct but a qualifier - a qualifier in a discontinuous ngp. It is
placed at the end of the clause in order to receive, in speech, the
unmarked tonic, and so to be presented as New information. The
falling Tone comes on himself, not on castle. The effect of this
combination of syntax and intonation seems to be to emphasize that
the Subject - which is typically an Agent - is taking a personal
initiative in whatever the Process is.
1
Occasionally there is a post-head element that is not a q but a quantifying
determiner, e.g. as in We (h) all (qd) enjoyed it and We (h) have all (qd) seen it.
2
Occasionally an intensifying pronoun such as myself occurs as q in a discontinuous
ngp at S, right at the end of the clause, as in Peter (h) will announce the results himself
(q).
16 Quite frequently a ngp that is not the first of a string of two or more coordinated units is introduced by a linker (&). This element also occurs in all
the other classes of group, in the genitive cluster, and in the clause.
(a) It is typically expounded by and or or, but may occasionally be something
else, such as rather than, but not and, in a recently greatly increased usage
among under 30s, plus.
(b) When and and or are used to link three or more units, there is very often no
linker until the last unit, as in my father, my mother and two of my aunts.
(c) Occasionally an 'anticipatory' linker occurs at the start of the FIRST of two or
more co-ordinated units, as in both X and Y, either X or Y, neither X nor
Y, not X but Y, not only X but also Y, etc.
17 Occasionally a ngp has an inferer (i). This element is most common in the
ngp, but it also occurs in some other groups. The equivalent in the clause is the
Inferential Adjunct. The inferer occurs after the linker (if there is one).
17aIt is typically expounded by even, only or just (when just is used in the sense of
only), as in Only Peter arrived on time, and Ike enjoyed the play, Ivy really
loved it and even Fred quite liked it.
17b The problem of such (and one use of so)
64
XXX The following sections must go to Chapter 15.
The question is: ‘In examples such as (1a) and (1b), what element of structure is
such?’
(1a) He’s such an idiot.
(1b) He’s such an idiot that we can’t ask him to do it.
We can best characterize its function by saying that its meaning is that the Performer
is greatly impressed by the quantity of the quality of ‘idiocy’ in the referent. The
difference between (1a) and (1b) is that in (1a) the Performer has left implicit the
inference that some consequence follows from this very great quantity of idiocy,
while in (1b) the inference has been made explicit.
In (1a) and (1b) the ‘quality’ is expressed in the noun idiot. But qualities, as we
saw in Chapter 9, are typically expressed in adjectives, such as idiotic, and they
occur as the apex of quality groups. In such cases, then, the form of expression is
as in (2a) and (2b:
(2a) He’s so idiotic.
(2b) He’s so idiotic that we can’t ask him to do it.
And the structure of the quality group that fills the Complement is as in (3):
(3) .... so [t] idiotic [a] that we can’t ask him to do it [f].
Here we will be concerned with (1a) and (1b), and a number of related structures.
What gives words such as idiot and hero the special quality that invites the structure
with such a ... (and indeed also what . ...., as we will see shortly) is the fact that
they combine, within a single word, two strands of meaning: the experiential and
the affective. (We have already met this blend of experiential and affective
meaning in Chapter 7, (XXX CHECK) when we were considering the functions of
the epithet type of modifier in the nominal group.) So it is often open to the
Performer to present the quality of a thing in two ways: (1) simply as a quality, as
in an idiotic guy, or (2) as a characteristic of the thing itself, as in an idiot.
Compare the nouns and adjectives in the following pairs:
fool
idiot
bore
beast
hero
beauty
mess
problem
foolish
idiotic
boring
beastly
heroic
beautiful
messy
problematical, etc.
But the number of such close pairings is limited. On the other hand, there are (a)
quite a few nouns for which there is no directly equivalent adjective, as in She’s
such a star / cow, He’s such a bastard / rotter, etc., and (b) large numbers of
adjectives which express affective meaning but which have no equivalent noun,
such as brilliant, terrific, terrible, awful, etc. - as well as all of the many epithet
meanings such as pretty, wealthy, important, etc. So beside the nouns and
adjectives listed above above there are also:
65
genius
star
bastard
cow, etc
and
brilliant
nasty
pretty
great, etc.
For reasons that will become clear soon, it is helpful to begin the explanation of
such structures with nominal groups with such that have as their head nouns such
as idiot or genius - i.e. nouns that have an inherent affective meaning (often in
addition to an experiential meaning). We will then build on the analysis that these
examples require to develop an adequate way of representing the structure of ALL
nominal groups that include such and this type of adjective, as in examples such as
He’s such an idiotic guy that we can’t ask him to do it. Then we shall consider
cases such as He’s so idiotic a guy that we can’t ask him to do it.21 Here I will
show that, in order to provide for such cases in a principled manner, we need to
allow the inferer element of a nominal group to be filled by a quantity group in
the case of such, which is its amount, and by a quality group in the cases of so,
which is its apex.
Please look again at (1a) and (1b). At first you might be tempted to analyze the
item such as a modifier in the nominal group whose head is fool. But the problem
with treating such as a modifier is that the word such would then precede the
quantifying determiner a - and this runs counter to the important generalization
stated in Chapter 7 that all determiners precede modifiers. The solution suggested
here is to recognize that the word such carries an inferential meaning, so that it
natural to treat it as filling the inferer element in the nominal group - and the inferer
always comes before the determiners. So if we handle the structure in this way the
generalization holds.
Let’s now ask whether this analysis can be justified in functional terms. The
answer is that it can, because the word such clearly expresses an inference. In (1a)
the inference is left implicit - the inference being that the extent to which the referent
of he is an idiot is so great that some serious consequence follows from it. But in
(1b) the inference is made explicit. The use of the inferer element is therefore
motivated by the meaning that is expresses, as well as by the way that this analysis
avoids our having to treat such as renegade modifier that precedes the quantifying
determiner a. This approach enables us to show the syntactic analysis of both (1a)
and (1b) in the same diagram, as is done in the analysis of (1b) in Figure XX.
21. In the next section we will consider the similar - but simpler - structures involved in analyzing examples
such as What an idiot he is!, What an idiotic guy he is!, He’s quite / rather a rich man.
66
ngp
ngp
i qd h
qtgp
am
i qd m
qtgp
qlgp
(qtf)
am
h
a
(qtf)
(1b) (He's) such an idiot (that .. do it). (4b) (He's) such an idiotic guy (that ... do it).
Figure XX:
Two examples with such in a quantity group as the inferer in a nominal group
The brackets around the quantity group finisher element (qtf) show that
if this element is removed we have the analysis for (1a). More specifically: the
words such ... that we can’t ask him to do it constitute a discontinuous quantity
group that fills the inferer element (i). The amount element (am) of the quantity
group - i.e. the item such - occurs at the start of the nominal group, but the
quantity group finisher element (qtf) comes after the head. This conforms to
the general pattern that all finishers in such units within nominal groups do this,
following a combination of the 'Get the Pivotal Element in Soon' and the
‘Endweight’ principles. (See Chapter 22 for these).
The ‘plural’ equivalents of (1a) and (1b), i.e. (3a) and (3b), are analyzed in
exactly the same way as (1a) and (1b) in Figure XX - the only difference being that
in these cases there is no qd.
(3a) They’re such fools.
(3b) They’re such fools that we can’t appoint them.
There may be an initial temptation to treat such in such fools in (3a) as directly
expounding a modifier. This would be a mistake, however - as is shown by the
existence of (3b) - and clearly (1a) is to (3a) as (1b) is to (3b). The present analysis
captures all four cases in a single structure that provides neatly for all four cases.
There are other uses of such that involve essentially the same structure.
Consider (4a) and (4b):
(4a) He’s such an idiotic guy.
(4b) He’s such an idiotic guy that we can’t ask him to do it.
Clearly, the role of an idiot in (1a) and (1b) is functionally very similar to the role of
an idiotic guy in (4a) and (4b). The close similarity of the two analyses in Figure
XX illustrates the fact that the only difference between the two pairs od examples is
that (4a) and (4b) require the addition of a modifier to handle the word idiotic. In
other words, in both (1b) and (4b) the ‘scope’ of the inferer is the rest of the
67
nominal group, so that the analysis is essentially the same in both cases.22
We should now broaden the picture of the contexts in which such is used in this
way. While the quality whose quantity impresses the Performer typically has at
least some affective meaning (as in all the examples so far), it may in principle be
ANY quality - e.g. size or colour, as in It was such a small object that the tweezers
couldn’t grasp it. And there are even occasional examples in which the quality is
clearly a type of ‘size’ but in which it is left implicit, as in We encountered such
(great) resistance that we gave up, and They had to wait such a (long) time.
Next, we turn to a semantically similar case - but one which involves the item
so. What should the analysis be of (5a) and (5b)?
(5a) He’s so (very) idiotic a guy.
(5b) He’s so (very) idiotic a guy that we can’t ask him to do it.
The first point to note is that (5a) is to (5b) as (1a) is to (1b). In other words, (5b)
is simply the version of (5a) in which the inference of the item so is made explicit.
But there is an important difference from (1a) and (1b). Here we will analyze the
nominal group so idiotic a guy (that we can’t ask him to do it) in such a way as to
show that both so and the adjective idiotic precede the qd a. Figure XXY shows
how, by an extension of the principle established for Examples (1a) to (4b), we can
provide an elegant solution to this problem too. In this case the fact that the
adjective idiotic precedes the qualifying determiner a suggests that we should treat it
as a part of the unit that fills the inferer - and this in turn means that the unit that fills
it must be a quality group. It is in fact the emphasizing temperer so that in
this case it is this element that triggers the finisher that we can’t ask him to do it.
I have added the item very to the example as an optional additional temperer, in
order to bring out the fact that it is the emphasizing temperer rather than the degree
temperer that predicts the finisher in this case.23 (For the structure of the quality
group, see Chapter 9.)
ngp
i
qlgp
et
(dt)
qd h
a
(f)
(5a) (He's) so (very) idiotic a guy (that .. do it)
Figure XXY: The word so in a quality group as the inferer in a nominal group
22. Notice that, if we had begun the discussion with Examples (4a) and (4b), we might have been tempted into
thinking that the meaning of the inferer applied only to the modifier. It is the existence of examples such as
(1a) and (1b) that demonstrates clearly that the word such does NOT function within a quality group but as a
direct element of the nominal group.
23. In a quality group, it is usually a degree temperer such as more, less or too that predicts a finisher.
68
Finally, we should return to the word such in order to note two other uses. In
the first it has another meaning, as in (6a) and (6b):
(6a) If you find such an offer acceptable, you should proceed with the sale.
(6b) If you find such an offer as this (one is) acceptable, you should proceed
with the sale.
Here the meaning is ‘an offer of a type that is specified in the text’ (not necessarily
by the current Performer). Even though here there is no clear meaning of
‘quantity’, as there is in the apparently similar He’s such an idiot that we can’t ask
him to do it (1a), there is no clearly desirable alternative structure, so we will
borrow the structure used for (1a) for this structurally similar case. Consider too
the similarity between (6b) and (7), which clearly shares the same structure as (4b) which is repeated here to facilitate the comparison.
(7) It was such a good offer that we couldn’t turn it down.
(4b) He’s such an idiotic guy that we can’t ask him to do it.
As with earlier cases, it is only when the inference is made explicit that the finisher
is introduced to the structure; the analysis of (6a) is therefore the same as that for
(6b), but without the finisher.
ngp
i qd
qtgp
h
am
qtf
(6b) such an offer as this (one is)
Figure XXYY: The structure for the ‘specified in the text’ meaning of such
The word such also occurs - with a similar meaning - in examples such as (8):
(8) Such a man as Martin Luther King would have spoken up on this matter.
Here the meaning of such does not ask the Addressee to look backwards in the text,
but FORWARDS - to the finisher as Martin Luther King. The meaning is ‘a man of the
type that Martin Luther King was’. A less formal equivalent would be A man such
as Martin Luther King (where such as Martin Luther King is a qualifier to man, and
where such as is a preposition in the prepositional group that fills the qualifier).
Even more informally, (8) is equivalent to A man like Martin Luther King.
17c quite, rather and what preceding the quantifying determiner
There are a few, relatively infrequent cases where other items behave like such
69
in preceding the quantifying determiner when it is expounded by a(n). For these
too we use the element of the inferer, as shown in the examples below.24 So in
(9a) to (11b) the structure of the nominal groups in each case is like those in in (1a)
and (4a) in Figure XX. In other words, here the meaning is, once again, a
‘quantity of a quality’.
(9a)
(9b)
10a)
(10b)
(11a)
(11b)
What [i] an [qd] idiot [h] (he is)!
What [i] an [qd] idiotic [m] guy [h] (he is)!
(He’s) quite [i] a [qd] guy [h].
(He’s) quite [i] a [qd] brave [m] guy [h].
(She made) rather [i] a [qd] mess [h].
(She made) rather [i] an [qd] awful [m] mess [h].
In these examples the items what, quite and rather are all amounts in a
quantity group that fills an inferer in the nominal group. In other words, their
analysis is exactly like the analyses in Figure XX, but without the qtf. In these
simpler cases there is no discontinuity of the type that may occur following such.
18 A ngp may also occasionally have an initial starter (st) and, more frequently,
a final ender (e). Starters and enders are introduced when the ngp is presented
as a separate information unit. In written texts, the starter is typically a
preceding comma, dash or opening bracket, and the ender is typically a final
comma, dash or closing bracket. But the ender of the current unit is sometimes
absent, when THE ENDER OF A HIGHER UNIT, such as a ngp or clause (e or E)
occurs at the same point in the text.
Sub-grammars that use the nominal group
There are certain areas of meaning in the language whose constructions can
best be analyzed by using some of the elements of the nominal group. These 'subgrammars' have only a restricted range of choices open to them, compared to the
range expressed in full nominal groups, but their items and structures echo many
aspects of the ngp. So, rather than setting up special syntactic units for these, with
a new set of labels, we simply use the relevant parts of the ngp. Here is guidance
on analysing three of the most frequent types:
The cardinal numbers
These use just the &, qd and h of the ngp. Consider the case of forty-two
thousand, three hundred and ninety-seven people. Here the qd forty-two thousand,
three hundred and ninety-seven consists of three co-ordinated ngps. The first is
forty-two (qd) thousand (h); the second is three (qd) hundred (h), and the third is
and (&) ninety-seven (qd). The hyphenated items forty-two and ninety-seven are
treated as single items. (Their internal morphology is a base (forty or ninety) plus
24. The only viable alternative would be to add new elements to the model of syntax to accommodate such
cases, but since there is a realtively small number of types and since they are fairly infrequent it is not worth
complicating the model of syntax b further additions - especially when they behave so similarly to existing
structures.
70
a suffix (-two and -seven, but since our task here is to analyse syntax - not
morphology - we simply show forty-two and ninety-seven as qds.) A ngp such as
ninety-seven is very unusual - taking ngps as a whole - in having no head (in
contrast with ninety-seven thousand, in which thousand is the head). Filling:
typically either qd in a ngp, or the amount element (am) of a quantity group (see
Section 7 below) - which itself fills the qd of a ngp - but also, more rarely, the ad
of a qtgp as in five hundred more. (The same structures are used for complex
ordinative numerals and fractions, as introduced in Sections 7.1 and 8.2 (a)
respectively.) Figure XX illustrates the analysis of an extremely complex cardinal
number, and its complexity is such that all cardinal numbers can be analyzed within
this framework. (For the ‘adjusting’ of a cardinal number, as in around two
hundred and fifty, see Section 8.2 of Section 8, which is on the quantity group.)
ngp
qd
ngp
qd
h
h
ngp
e
qd
ngp
qd
ngp
h
e qd
ngp
h
&
qd
ngp
h
&
qd
(XX) six million, nine hundred and fifty thousand, two hundred and forty-six men
Figure XX: the analysis of the verbal form of the cardinal number 6,950,246
Deictic time and place
Like other types of ‘deictic’ meaning, part of the meaning of deictic time and
place is that the ‘time’ or ‘place’ is located by reference to where THE P ERFORMER IS
LOCATED IN TIME AND SPACE. Semantically, ‘times’ and ‘places’ are simply types of
‘thing’, and on the principle that form should be shown as reflecting meaning
whenever possible, we analyse examples such as this week, today and the day after
tomorrow as nominal groups. The elements used for these structures are the
deictic determiner (dd), the head (h), the qualifier (q), and the inferer
element (i). So, just as this week and this morning are analyzed as dd h, so too
are next week and last week, and also yesterday morning and tomorrow morning.
And the day after tomorrow is dd h q, with after tomorrow being analyzed as a
prepositional group at q. When the items yesterday, today and tomorrow occur
alone, they are heads - and so also are then and now, and the word that asks about
time, i.e. when. As for deictic place, the only possible exponents of h are the
equivalents of now, then and when, i.e. here, there, and where. Expressions such
as right then and over here use the inferer element, so have the structure i h.
Filling: ngps expressing deictic time typically fills A (specifying the 'time
position'), but sometimes S, C, or cv, and ngps expressing deictic place fill either
71
an Adjunct expressing ‘place’ or a Complement in a locational clause such as She is
over there.
19.3 A third type of limited ngp is found at the adjustor in quantity groups
at qd and A as in examples such as a very great deal more (people).
These use qd, h and occasionally m, with a rather restricted set of words
and units at each. Ngps also occur as the ad in a qtgp filling p or B, e.g.
the qtgp in a few minutes before his arrival / he arrived. Once the analyst
has met a few such cases, others are readily recognized.
20 Analysis: Analysing a ngp (or any other group) is much easier than analyzing
a clause, because the SEQUENCE of the elements is almost completely fixed.
However, as with the clause (and indeed all units), you should NOT start on the
left. The best strategy is to look for the elements in the following order:
1 the head (a 'noun', 'pronoun' or 'proper noun' - the last having its own
internal structure)
2 the modifiers (if any).
3 the determiners (if any, and their associated selectors, if any),
4 the qualifiers (if any).
5 the starter, linker, inferer, and ender (if any - as in all groups).
21 Filling: ngps may fill
1 in the clause: S, C and, less frequently, A (e.g. last week)
2 in the pgp: cv,
3 in the ngp: rd, pd, fd, qd , m (in a truncated version)
4 in the qlgp: occasionally at t (e.g. two metres wide),
if the qlgp is at od: a (e.g. the two hundred and fiftieth (person)
5 in the qtgp: at am, when it is a cardinal number (e.g. two hundred and fifty)
at ad, occasionally, when it is embedded in another qtgp,
(e.g. a very little bit over (a hundred)).
6 in the genclr : po (See Section 8).
Endnotes
These endnotes, like those in earlier chapters, provide ‘follow-up’ comments,
comparisons and references for readers with prior knowledge and experience of
linguistics.
a. The term 'objects' includes, of course, 'persons', abstract 'objects', etc. As well as referring to
'objects' nominal groups may also refer to events that are PRESENTED AS IF THEY WERE OBJECTS,
in 'nominalisations'. (For these see Chapter 16.) Note too the use the word 'overtly'. This to
remind us that texts typically include at least some ellipsis. Any ellipted referring expressions are
fully recoverable at the level of form by the Addressee - this being what the term 'ellipsis' means.
In other words, the forms of such meanings are, in a very real sense, also present in the text though they are not normally counted in simple word counts. But it is interesting that the effect of
not taking ellipted items into account is that, in most texts, the figure for the proportion of words
used in nominal groups will be even higher - probably over 60% in the present small sample.
72
b. Here the adjective skilful is derived from the noun skill, but the historical development of the
language is not relevant to the everyday user of the language. He or she does not process happiness
(a noun derived from an adjective) differently from joy (the noun from which the adjectives joyous
and joyful are derived). We want to be able to say, quite simply, that happiness and joy are both
nouns that express ‘qualities’
c. The particular set of specific functions served by the modifiers proposed here, together with the
sequence in which they appear and many other aspects of this part of the nominal group, is taken
(with minor amendments) from Tucker (1995:329). That work provides the fullest discussion yet
published of the adjective in English, the structures that occur around them and the functions served
by the modifiers in which they so frequently occur. Tucker’s description is made within the
framework of the Cardiff Grammar.
d. Thus it could be argued that the meaning of the modifiers different, same and other in
examples such as a different matter, the same man and some other people is informational (i.e.
part of the ‘textual’ metafunction, in Halliday’s terms). This is because such items signal that the
experiential meaning that will enable the Addressee to classify or depict the referent is to be found
elsewhere (rather as a pronoun such as she typically does) - usually in a previous reference in the
text. But such modifiers can also be said to be experiential, in that they invoke an experiential
meaning that is to be recovered from elsewhere. (This is less true of one of the items that
expounds this element, i.e. certain, as in a certain person who is not too far away as we speak.)
e. The debt to Halliday in setting up these two ‘general describing functions’ of modifiers will be
clear to those who know his work. Our terms ‘depicting’ and ‘classifying’ extend - and partly redefine - Halliday’s concept of the ‘epithet’ and ‘classifier’ types of modifier. But the major debt is
to Tucker 1995, especially in the recognition and sequencing of the specific functions of the
modifiers.
The main difference between the approach to the modifiers adopted here and Halliday’s is that
Halliday’s experiential classification of the modifiers is essentially on one dimension, while here
we recognize two cross-classifying dimensions of variation (the SPECIFIC function that each serves
(of which there are many), and the two GENERAL functions of 'classifying' and 'depicting'.
Halliday's framework, however, tries to encompass both dimensions of variation within one
string of elements. For Halliday, each modifier in a specific nominal group is classified at the
primary degree of delicacy as either an ‘epithet’ or ‘classifier’ (with some items being capable of
expounding either). Then each of the two is seen as containing several subtypes, such that several
subtypes of epithet and/or classifier may occur within the same nominal group (with the ‘epithets’
always preceding the ‘classifiers’). In contrast, the present model foregrounds the set of twenty or
so ‘specific’ modifiers, and our two concepts of 'classifying' and 'depicting' are GENERAL functions
that can be attached, in principle, to ANY of the specific modifiers - though with greatly varying
probabilities (including the possibility of a 0% probability). In Halliday's approach, then, there
can be more than one ‘epithet’ or ‘classifier’ in a single nominal group, whereas in ours each
element has a distinctive ‘specific’ functional label. (Halliday rightly points out that you can’t
always tell whether a given formal item is an ‘epithet’ or a ‘classifier’ (e.g. the modifier green in
the green grass may be either), and this point applies also to our much fuller set of types of
modifier, in that for any specific modifier it may be hard to determine, in its use in a given text,
whether itis serving a classifying or depicting function. But in our framework THE ' SPECIFIC'
FUNCTION OF A MODIFIER IS THE SAME, WHETHER ITS GERAL FUNCTION IS CLASSIFYING OR
DEPICTING .
In other words, our attempts to apply Halliday’s approach to modifiers to the description of
texts have led us to the development of an extended version of his original description. The major
differences are:
(a) We recognize many more specific types of modifier than Halliday does (largely thanks to the
research by Tucker described in Tucker 1998), as set out in Section XXX of Chapter 14.
(b) The distinction between the two types of ‘general describing function’ that we are here calling
the ‘classifying’ and the ‘depicting’ functions can in principle be served by ANY specific
modifier (though with greatly varying probabilities).
(c) We distinguish between the role of the affective strand of meaning that is found in a small
number of types of specific modifier (which it is valuable to foreground in many types of text
analysis) and two general functions that are served by most modifiers, which have a
predominantly experiential meaning. Thus a modifier that serves the depicting function
is - almost by definition - an experiential type of meaning, and modifiers that serve the
classifying function are also typically predominantly experiential. We note, however,
that even the affective modifier may be occasionally press-ganged into serving the general
73
function of 'classifying'. But for Halliday ANY modifier that we would analyze as serving a
depicting function or an affective function would be said to be an ‘epithet’ modifier. Thus he
treats 'affective' meaning as a sub-type of 'epithet' meaning
(d) Within this general framework, we should note the specific difference that our term epithet
modifier denotes one specific type of modifier, while for Halliday there can be several
‘epithets’ in one nominal group. (The nearest equivalent statement in our framework is that
there can be several modifiers in one nominal group, all of which serve the depicting
function.)
f. There is a problem here with the terminology of traditional grammar. When the 'classifying'
function is combined with a deictic determiner such as the (see Section 4), the effect is to
contribute to 'identifying' (or 'defining') the referent. The frequency of this combination is the
origin of the concept that a modifier (and also a qualifier, for which see Section 12) may have the
function of 'defining' the referent. This has led to a situation in which one of the two most widely
used pairs of terms for our terms 'classifying' and 'depicting' is that of ‘defining’ vs. ‘non-defining’
- which is typically used to identify two types of relative clauses. (We will come to the other
widely used pair of terms in the next endnote.) The concept that the 'ad hoc' description in such
cases is 'defining' in fact mistaken (unless we re-define 'defining' so that it means 'classifying',
which would be an unhelpful distortion of the usual sense of the two words). The reason is that
the meaning of 'defining' has two components. The first is the concept that we here term
'particularizing' (i.e. signalling the meaning of 'recoverable by the Addressee') through the use of a
word such as the. The second aspect is the 'classifying' function. However, notice that WE CAN
'CLASSIFY' A REFERENT WITHOUT ' PARTICULARIZING' IT , as when we say red cars (or indeed red
ones, if the cultural classification is recoverable). (Interestingly, it is not in fact possible to
'particularize' something without also giving at least some information that 'classifies' it. Even red
ones contains the information that the referent is a 'plural' object, and the items known as 'third
person pronouns', such as he, she, it and they, all similarly give a little information about the
'cultural classification' of the thing - as indeed do most proper names.) We can conclude, therefore,
(1) that 'classifying' is a more basic concept than 'defining', and (2) that 'defining' is not, strictly
speaking, a function that is performed by modifiers or qualifiers. Modifiers and qualifiers may
CONTRIBUTE to ‘defining’ a referent, THROUGH THEIR ROLE IN CLASSIFYING, but the meaning
of 'particularization' (or 'definiteness') is in fact contributed separately - typically through a separate
element, such as the deictic determiner the (but sometimes in the same element, as in the case of
the third person pronouns).
g. I explained in the previous endnote why the Cardiff Grammar does not use the terms 'definiing'
(and so 'non-defining'). The desirability of not using a negative label for a meaning (unless it is
specifically appropriate) is a second reason for avoiding 'defining' and 'non-defining'. The other
widely used pair of terms is 'restrictive' and 'non-restrictive' (e.g. in Quirk et al 1985:1239-42).
They are clearly using the terms in the same sense as we are using 'classifying' and 'depicting'.
Their first sentence is: 'Modification can be restrictive or nonrestrictive (p. 1239). Our equivalent
statement is: 'Description can be either classifying or depicting.' They define 'restrictive
modification' as occurring 'when the reference of the head [ = our 'referent of the nominal group] is
a member of a class which can be identified only through the modification that has been supplied [
= our ad hoc description']. But they describe 'non-restrictive modification' in terms that are still
somewhat negative, i.e. as 'additional information that is not essential for identification' (p. 1239).
Over the page, however, they offer as a second gloss of 'non-restrictive' the words 'information ...
offered ... for additional interest' - and this is close to our characterization of 'depicting'. Thus,
while the terms 'restrictive' and 'non-restrictive' terms have the virtue of avoiding the misleading
implications of 'defining' and non-defining', the term 'non-restrictive' still fails to give any
indication of what function that type of meaning serves. This is why, in the Cardiff Grammar,
with its commitment to using explicitly functional labels wherever possible, the terms
'classifying' and 'depicting' - for both modifiers that occur before the head and for qualifiers (or
'post-modifiers') that occur after the head.
h.
It is called the 'subclassification' modifier in Tucker 1998,
i. This way of modelling the variation in sequence among modifiers and the essential idea behind
the functional explanation proposed here was first suggested in Tucker (1995:329).
j. In principle, the relationship of ‘particularization’ could also be regarded as one of ‘selection’.
But it seems that the language does not reflect this view, in that the word of NEVER occurs
between the determiner whose function is to express ‘particularization’ (i.e. the deictic determiner)
74
and what follows. (Examples such as those of us who knew him well are instances of a different
determiner - the qualifier-introducing determiner, which is described in Section 12. And
examples such as the tallest of the boys and the first of the runners are similarly instances of two
other types of determiner which we shall meet in Chapter 12.)
k. Matthiessen (1995:655-7) takes over part of my description of the nominal group (e.g. as set
out in Fawcett 1980:202-32), courteously acknowledging the debt. Specifically, he introduces the
concept of 'selection', essentially as set out in this chapter, in relation to what he calls the 'facet'
function in the nominal group.. However, it seems from the way in which he writes about his
examples that he treats as just one element (the 'facet' function) what we treat in this chapter and
in Chapter 15 as FOUR different determiners. These are the typic, representational, partitive
and quantifying determiners. The description of these that is provided here shows that each can
co-occur with any other, and that we need to recognize all four in order to provide a satisfactory
account of the English nominal group. The term 'facet' also appears in Halliday 1994:195-6, but
Halliday (unlike Matthiessen) limits its use to a sense equivalent to what are seen here as the
quantifying and partitive determiners, and he has nothing to say about examples that include what
we would treat here as representational and typic determiners.
A further important difference from the Sydney Grammar is that Halliday suggests that we
need to provide two complementary structural analyses for nominal groups with a ‘measure’, such
as a yard of cloth. - and also, more tentatively, for those that denote a ‘part’ of something, such as
the front of the house. He suggests that in the ‘experiential’ structure of a yard of cloth the 'head'
is cloth, and that in the ‘logical’ structure it is yard. Matthiessen takes the same position.
The approach presented here demonstrates that it is possible to express the central concepts for
which Halliday introduces two structures through just one structure. As the main text shows, this
is done through recognizing that the ‘head’ expresses the ‘cultural classification’ of things in terms
of ‘nouns’ (or ‘pronouns’), while the ‘leftmost’ referent provides material relevant to the concept of
‘subject-verb agreement’. Notice, however, that the ‘leftmost’ referent can only be seen as doing
so WHEN THERE IS NO CO-ORDINATION WITHIN THE S UBJECT. Thus two co-ordinated nominal
groups, each of which is singular, may together form a plural Subject (e.g. My boss and his wife
are going to be there. So ‘subject-verb agreement cannot be a criterion for identifying the head.
Finally, I should say that Matthiessen adds usefully to the discussion of these constructions by
pointing out the existence of examples such as Dorian Gray I haven’t seen a picture of (alongside I
haven’t seen a picture of Dorian Gray). The description in Chapter 15 provides for the analysis of
such examples, which involve a type of discontinuity similar to that required at other points in
the grammar. However, I should also point out three limitations in Matthiessen's otherwise
insightful discussion. Firstly, he seems to assume that the problem arises only with the 'facet'
determiners, when in fact it occurs with all types of determiner except the deictic and the typic
determiners - as the examples here and in Chapter 15 show. Secondly, he only exemplifies the
discontinuity in relation to the marked theme construction, but in fact it also occurs in new
content seekers and relative clauses - the latter being the most frequent syntactic
environment of the three. Thirdly, he does not provide complete examples of analyses. Because
selection occurs so frequently with quantifying determiners, these constructions are far more central
to the description of English (and other languages) than Matthiessen’s treatment of them suggests.
l. Grammarians who are more strongly influenced by formal considerations than by functional
ones may consider the existence of this type of discontinuity as evidence that the analysis of
determiners described here is wrong. But no grammarian would deny that some discontinuity in the
elements of syntactic units is a fact of language, and the recognition that we have here another type
of discontinuity is a price that is well worth paying in order to maintain the many insightful
generalizations that flow from the acceptance of the approach to the concept of determiners and
their relationships of ‘selection’ that is taken here.
m. For Halliday (1994:225f.) the nearest equivalent to our term 'depicting' would be 'elaborating'.
However, his 'elaborating' clauses that occur after the head of a nominal group are said to be related
by 'hypotaxis' (i.e. 'dependency' without 'being embedded'). Furthermore, his term 'elaborsation'
covers what he suggests is the same relationship between most types of unit, whereas here we
restrict the term 'depicting' to the uses within the nominal group that are described in the main text
.
n.
Note that for present purposes a ‘response to a question’ is treated as a ‘statement’.
o.
Note that ‘proposals for action’ include proposals for action by the Performer (‘offers’), by the
75
Addressee (‘orders’ and ‘requests’) and for joint action by both Performer and Addressee (one of the
various meanings of ‘suggestion’).
p. Some of the ‘emotive beliefs’ listed here such as hope and fear are typically associated with the
future - but not necessarily (e.g. as in my hope / fear that he arrived in New York last night).
They are therefore listed here.
q. Halliday (1994:263-9) recognizes far fewer types of embedding than we do in the present
framework, but in this area he proposes essentially the same analysis as that suggested here.
However, he divides the noun senses up in a far more complex manner - which results, in my
view, in the creation of certain artificial classes that seem to me to be introduced to fill out his
paradigm. My primary distinction is between ‘discourse acts’ and ‘beliefs’, with ‘facts’ being
simply a sub-category of ‘beliefs’ (for reasons that will be stated shortly). Halliday, however,
separates out facts as completely different from ‘ideas’ (Halliday 1994:264-9), and within the rest
he distinguishes first between ‘propositions’ and ‘proposals’ (which corresponds very roughly to
my ‘discourse act’ labels) and then, within each, between ‘locutions’ and ‘ideas’. I find the
suggestion that a ‘wish’ is in some way a ‘commanding idea’ odd, and the idea that a ‘problem’ is a
‘questioning idea’ unhelpful, and I prefer to keep concepts such as ‘commanding’ and ‘questioning’
for the discourse acts. Nor does it seem insightdul to class a ‘possibility’ as a type of ‘fact’. The
present framework gives precedence to the distinction between ‘discourse acts’ and ‘beliefs’,
recognizing a subdivison within ‘beliefs’ between ‘general beliefs’ and ‘beliefs about the future’. In
the present framework the difference between ‘facts’ and other types of ‘belief’ is simply that ‘facts’
are beliefs that are held with 100% confidence (unless, of course, they are modified by a word such
as doubtful). So my category of ‘beliefs’ includes both Hallidays ‘facts’ and his ‘ideas’. In
summary, we can say that the present set of noun senses is considerbly simpler than Halliday’s.
76

This chapter is work in progress, but is about three-quarters... it does contain useful material (which others have used already).

Transcription

Similar documents

OPINION LEADERSHIP MADAM NOREEN NOOR ABD.AZIZ

george mangoletsi`s gm manifold modifier

Brookwood Pet Resort 37 Old Boyce Road Canterbury, NH 03224

Njorgen - Mecc Alte SpA

Enecsys Micro Inverters

2016 CCQP Spring Workshop Slide Deck

Modifiers: How to Choose Which to Use Nancy Clark, CPC, CPMA, CPC-I

Heatron Ascendia High-Performance LED Board Datasheet

Visual Signs