SUBORDINATION AND CONTENT CLAUSES

1. Abstract 2. Introduction 3. Body Introduce the reader into the topic Finite vs non-finite subordinate clauses Finite subordinate clauses: Relative Comparative Content Content clauses: Declarative content clauses Interrogative content clauses Exclamative content clauses Interrogative content clauses Interrogatives vs conditionals Exclamatives in relation to open interrogatives 4. Conclusion 5. Bibliography

Abstract In this essay I am going to discuss the issue of subordination and content clauses according to Huddleston and Pullums work. First of all, I am going to introduce the reader into the topic and I am going to explain some important concepts related to the subject. I will compare and contrast traditional grammars terminology with Huddleston and Pullums terminology. Then, I am going to discuss the first major division within subordinate clauses: finite and non-finite, and explain why I am focusing on finite clauses. After that, I am going to define the three different types of finite subordinate clauses: relative, comparative and content clauses, and provide examples for each one. I will be focusing my term paper on content clauses, so I will explain and discuss the different types of content clauses and provide examples. Once this has been done, I will be focusing my paper on problematic constructions, and ambiguities related to interrogative content clauses. .

Introduction 1

This essay is addressed to interested readers with a high level of English grammar, or advanced students of English grammar. I have chosen this topic because I find it interesting from the point of view of a grammar student. I think it is going to be useful to go through the issue of subordination because as philologists we should be able to distinguish a subordinate clause from a main clause, to identify the type of subordinate clause and also to establish the function it develops within the complex sentence. My purpose is to explain in depth the subject of subordination to the reader and clarify doubts and problems we may have on this topic. It has been difficult to decide on what aspects of subordination I am going to focus because there are a lot of things to say on this matter, and in my opinion this is a quite difficult and enriching topic .

Body In order to express ourselves with the language, we organize our ideas using words that are at the same time organized in sentences. Sometimes we need to express several ideas in one sentence and show that one idea is more important than the others. In these occasions we are using subordination. In relation to this, I am going to explain and clarify the concepts of main clause, subordinate clause and complex sentence. A main clause is a clause that can stand alone as a sentence and which does not depend on a larger clause. On the other hand, a subordinate clause is a clause that cannot stand alone as a sentence and which is embedded as a dependent in a larger clause. A complex sentence is a sentence which consists of a main clause and one or more subordinate clauses functioning as elements of the sentence. When we are analyzing subordinate clauses we also have to distinguish the matrix clause, which is the main clause minus its subordinate clause, so if we have a complex sentence with the following structure: Subject + Verb + Object, the object being the subordinate clause, the matrix clause would be the Subject + Verb. Subordinate clauses can function as subject, object, complement and adverbial. I am going to analyze the sentence He thought that he would discover a treasure when he found the chest to clarify the relationship among the concepts that I have explained. .

Complex sentence Main clause Matrix clause S V O

He thought subordinate clause S V O A

that he would discover a treasure subordinate clause S V O

when he found the chest

Usually, the subordinate clauses are introduced by a word that identifies them as subordinate, as it happens in the previous example with the words that and when. According to traditional grammar, these words are indicators of subordination and there are three types: Subordinators or subordinating conjunctions: For example: Ill lend you some money if you dont have any money on you. Although I admire her reasoning, I reject her conclusions. I agree that Sue is the best candidate / I suppose that I can use your phone Wh- elements: For example: The problem is who will water my plants/ I remember what a good time I had at your party .

Relative pronoun that (replacing Wh- pronouns):

For example: I like the boy that is playing the piano However, Huddleston and Pullum differ from traditional grammar in the cases I mentioned above. Traditional grammar uses the term subordinate conjunctions to list a number of words that also belong to the category of prepositions. Huddleston and Pullum draw a boundary between prepositions and subordinators. The reason is that a small list of them functions as markers of subordination, the subordinators, while the others function as head of the constituents they introduce, the prepositions. According to Huddleston and Pullum, the most central members are that, whether, and sometimes if when it can be interchangeable with whether. Sometimes the subordinate clause is not marked as such by a specific word, there are certain cases where the subordinator can be omitted as for example in the sentence She knows I am right. Here the subordinate clause is identical to the main clause but it is identified because it functions as complement of the verb knows. .

Now that I have explained what a subordinate clause is, I am going to introduce the first major division within subordinate clauses. There are two types of subordinate clauses: finite and non-finite. Non-finite clauses are easier to identify as subordinate because the verb is an infinitival, past participle or gerund participle form, so I am focusing on finite clauses because it is more difficult to distinguish them to the main clause. Here are some examples of finite and non-finite subordinate clauses: I think that he is in Brussels (finite) I insist that he be in Brussels (non-finite) He wants to be in Brussels (non-finite) Within the finite subordinate clauses there are three main classes: relative, comparative and content clauses. I am going to provide examples that differentiate them: John couldnt find the book that I wanted (relative) Megan gave me more books than I wanted (comparative) You know that I wanted that book (content) The structure of the content clauses is more similar to main clauses than the other two, and they lack the special properties of relative and comparative clauses, which I am not 4 .

going to discuss here because I am focusing on content clauses. As a note, I have to say that I made this division of finite clauses according to Huddleston and Pullums work, but traditional grammar differentiates four types of finite clauses: relative, comparative, nominal and adverbial. . There are four clause types for main clauses: declarative, interrogative, exclamative and imperative. They are the same for content clauses except that there are not imperative content clauses. I am going to provide examples to clarify this: MAIN They are at home What are you reading? What a liar she is! SUBORDINATE Sue said that they are at home I wonder what you are reading You know what a liar she is (declarative) (interrogative) (exclamative) .

I decided to focus on interrogative content clauses because I found a lot of ambiguities and problems to discuss related to them, but first I am going to explain them and their functions a little more in depth. Interrogative content clauses, as well as main interrogatives, express questions. The difference is that interrogative content clauses are embedded within a complex sentence and they lack the interrogation mark at the end. But the set of possible answers is the same for both, content and main interrogatives. If we have for example Where was she born? and Tom asked me where she was born both express the same question. Traditional grammar uses the term indirect question to refer to this type of construction, but Huddleston and Pullum refer to them as embedded questions. Another difference that distinguishes interrogative content clauses from main interrogatives is that the subject-auxiliary inversion used in main interrogatives is not used in subordinate clauses. This can be seen in the following examples: Has Jim read the book? What have you done? I wonder whether Jim has read the book I know what you have done .

But there are certain cases where subject-auxiliary inversion is not totally excluded from interrogative content clauses, it only appears in constructions where the question is cited, for example: The most controversial question the journalist asked to the President was: Are you repealing the law that allows homosexual marriage?

There are two types of interrogative content clauses: open interrogatives and closed interrogatives. Closed interrogative content clauses are introduced by the subordinators whether or if and the set of possible answers is limited by affirmative or negative. On the other hand, open interrogatives are introduced by an interrogative phrase, which at the same time distinguishes them from declarative content clauses, and the set of possible answers is much wider. Here are some examples of open and closed interrogatives: OPEN I dont know what he wants I dont know what to do It is obvious why she left I cant say what will happen next week CLOSED I dont know if it is possible I dont know whether to tell him He asked me if I went to the beach I asked them if they wanted a cake .

There are certain types of items that allow closed interrogatives but not allow open interrogatives, like the verbs doubt and question and their derived adjectives doubtful and questionable. We can say I doubt whether he did it but we cannot say I doubt who did it. From a semantic point of view, it can be argued that the example I doubt whether he did it is not an interrogative clause but a declarative one. If we consider the following pair of examples: I doubt that he wrote it / I doubt whether he wrote it, we can see that there is no difference in meaning between the first example which is declarative, and the second example which is a closed interrogative. The verb doubt tends to indicate that the embedded proposition is not true, so syntactically the complement is interrogative but semantically it does not express a question. As I mentioned previously, closed interrogative subordinate clauses are introduced by the subordinators whether or if. In most constructions it doesnt matter which one appears, but there are some cases where if is excluded and we have to know them in order to avoid mistakes: it or not the possibilities. . . . In the exhaustive conditional construction: Im going to see her whether you like This construction is called exhaustive because the interrogative clause covers all When the interrogative clause is infinitival: I cant decide whether to accept

When the interrogative clause precedes the predicator of the main clause: Whether it will rain is remains unclear to go . . When or not immediately follows the subordinator: I dont know whether or not

Up to here, I have been talking about interrogative content clauses where there is only one question embedded, but there can be more than one question embedded with their corresponding interrogative phrases. In these constructions, one interrogative phrase precedes the subordinate clause and the other is located at the end of the subordinate clause. The following examples show this statement: I didnt hear what Sara was saying to whom They havent told us who is responsible for what Another point to take into account in relation to subordinate interrogatives is that there are two dimensions of contrast: one between information questions and dimension questions, and the other between polar, alternative, and variable questions. The distinction between information questions and direction questions is easily recognizable because direction questions always have an infinitival form of the verb. Here are some examples that show the difference between information and direction question: INFORMATION Rick didnt know where he was going Nate didnt know what he was painting DIRECTION Rick didnt know where to go Nate didnt know what to paint . .

One interesting thing to mention is that the answers to the direction questions have the force of directives and are characteristically expressed as imperatives. The possible answers to the previous direction questions could be: Go to Paris or Paint a landscape. We have to consider that infinitivals do not occur with expressions of disbelief, surprise, dependence, or significance. . The other contrast I mentioned is between polar, alternative, and variable questions. Polar questions are those whose answer is either affirmative or negative. Alternative questions are those that include the possible answers within them. Variable questions are those that have an indefinite number of possible answers. Here are some examples that illustrate the difference between them: Polar: I dont know if she read the note 7 .

I wander whether tom has prepared dinner Alternative: I cant decide whether to go or not Sue doesnt know if Tom arrives today, tomorrow, or the following week. Variable: I wander who left the message I dont know what to say I have been discussing so far interrogative subordinate clauses that are introduced by an interrogative phrase so the receive the term of embedded questions; but there are some cases where they can also take the form of a definite NP and they are known as concealed questions, for example: I cant remember the kind of pizza she likes. This is equivalent to the embedded question I dont remember what kind of pizza she likes. Concealed questions are only found in sentences with items that license interrogative clauses. The verb like for example does not license interrogative complements, we cannot say I dont like what kind of pizza she likes. And in the other hand, not all items that license interrogative clauses allow concealed questions, for example we can say I wonder what day it is but we cannot say I wonder the day. But there is only one exception here: Whether license certain types of anaphoric NP, when they are retrieving information of something previously mentioned. I am not going to analyze the concealed questions in depth, but I think it is useful to know that not all subordinate interrogatives are marked by an interrogative phrase. .

Embedded questions can be classified as having an orientation towards the question or towards the answer depending on the context. If we have a look at the following examples we can notice this distinction: She asked where he lived / she told me where he lived . .

The first example is question-orientated because it implies the act of asking a question, while the second example is answer-orientated because it gives the answer to a question that may have been asked or not. I provide more examples to make this clear: QUESTION-ORIENTATION Tell me how you made the cake I wonder who knocked the door Claire wanted to know where he went ANSWER-ORIENTATION I know haw you made the cake I saw who knocked the door Claire knows where he went

There can be some cases of ambiguity between conditionals and closed interrogative clauses when both use if. Consider the following example: . I wont tell anybody if you come back today

If we consider this example to be conditional the meaning would be that I promise to keep your secret (in this case it is supposed that the secret was mentioned before) but in return you have to come back today. If we consider the example to be closed interrogative the meaning would be that I am not telling anybody the possibility that you come back today. If we want to make clear that the example is a closed interrogative we can substitute whether for if, because whether is interrogative, not conditional. The overlap between the conditional and the closed interrogatives is quite common because there is a semantic connection between conditions and questions. There are also some cases of ambiguity between exclamative and interrogative content clauses. How and what can be either exclamative or interrogative, and exclamatives lack the final exclamation mark as well as interrogatives lack the final interrogation mark that could establish de difference. Consider the following examples: He realised what a terrible mistake he made She told me how very aggressive he had been We can only say whether these examples are exclamative or interrogative if we know that how cannot modify very, and interrogative what cannot combine with the definite article. There are certain expressions where not such features distinguish them, for example phrases like how old and what games occur in both types of clause. In these cases there is a much greater degree of overlap between the clause types. Here are some examples: She forgot how old he was I know what games they play When both interrogative and exclamative interpretations are possible, the exclamative is often more salient where how is used in its degree sense, as in the following examples: This shows how immature he is I remember how stupid he was She knows how sensitive I am The exclamative reading is more specific and more informative than the interrogative one. When we say these examples we already know the answer, the intention is not to .

make the answer but to emphasize that he is immature, that he was stupid, and that I am sensitive. .

Conclusion It has been very useful to go through subordination in depth because I have learnt a lot of new things, the ones that I put forward on this term paper, and also I have refreshed things that I knew while I was doing the research. Now I know all the different types of subordinate clauses that can appear in a sentence and their functions, although I did not included the functions here because it is too much information and I decided to focus on other aspects.

10