Ronald W. Langacker
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- May 2008
- ISBN:
- 9780195331967
- eISBN:
- 9780199868209
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.003.0012
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
The distinction between coordination and subordination is not clear-cut. The essence of coordination is the mental juxtaposition of structures construed as parallel and co-equal. Subordination has a ...
More
The distinction between coordination and subordination is not clear-cut. The essence of coordination is the mental juxtaposition of structures construed as parallel and co-equal. Subordination has a number of dimensions, including form, the participation of one clause in the relationship profiled by another, and a clause's profile being overridden at the composite structure level. Constituency and profiling are often flexible, depending on factors like the size of clauses and their discourse function. The traditional division into adverbial, relative, and complement clauses is based primarily on how clauses are connected with one another. To the extent that these distinctions hold, they are based on semantic function rather than specific structural configurations. In the case of complements, the classic distinction between control and raising constructions is non-fundamental, the latter being just a special case of the former. Finite and nonfinite complements differ not just in form but in meaning and typical function. Predicates taking finite complements pertain to the epistemic status of propositions; those taking nonfinite complements pertain to the realization of occurrences. Complementation involves multiple conceptualizers and levels of conception. Different conceptualizers apprehend the same proposition each from their own perspective, assessing it with respect to their own conception of reality. Complement-taking predicates refer to different phases of this assessment. Impersonal constructions invoke a conceptualizer and the relevant scope of awareness in generalized fashion, suggesting that anyone would make the assessment under the circumstances.Less
The distinction between coordination and subordination is not clear-cut. The essence of coordination is the mental juxtaposition of structures construed as parallel and co-equal. Subordination has a number of dimensions, including form, the participation of one clause in the relationship profiled by another, and a clause's profile being overridden at the composite structure level. Constituency and profiling are often flexible, depending on factors like the size of clauses and their discourse function. The traditional division into adverbial, relative, and complement clauses is based primarily on how clauses are connected with one another. To the extent that these distinctions hold, they are based on semantic function rather than specific structural configurations. In the case of complements, the classic distinction between control and raising constructions is non-fundamental, the latter being just a special case of the former. Finite and nonfinite complements differ not just in form but in meaning and typical function. Predicates taking finite complements pertain to the epistemic status of propositions; those taking nonfinite complements pertain to the realization of occurrences. Complementation involves multiple conceptualizers and levels of conception. Different conceptualizers apprehend the same proposition each from their own perspective, assessing it with respect to their own conception of reality. Complement-taking predicates refer to different phases of this assessment. Impersonal constructions invoke a conceptualizer and the relevant scope of awareness in generalized fashion, suggesting that anyone would make the assessment under the circumstances.
Arie Verhagen
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199226702
- eISBN:
- 9780191706646
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226702.003.0003
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
This chapter discusses two ways of looking at complements. It describes problems with clauses as constituents, including issues of grammatical analysis like direct object vs. oblique object and ...
More
This chapter discusses two ways of looking at complements. It describes problems with clauses as constituents, including issues of grammatical analysis like direct object vs. oblique object and subject vs. predicate and issues of discourse analysis and language. The chapter also explains the use and structure of complementation constructions. The following are shown: the special role of complementation in discourse structure, a template and its meaning, third-person conceptualizers and degrees of directness in intersubjective coordination, manipulating the relation between Ground and onstage conceptualizers, Wh-extraction ‘in the wild’, impersonal intersubjectivity and the irrelevance of syntactic relations, perspectival and causal connections, and clauses as discourse segments.Less
This chapter discusses two ways of looking at complements. It describes problems with clauses as constituents, including issues of grammatical analysis like direct object vs. oblique object and subject vs. predicate and issues of discourse analysis and language. The chapter also explains the use and structure of complementation constructions. The following are shown: the special role of complementation in discourse structure, a template and its meaning, third-person conceptualizers and degrees of directness in intersubjective coordination, manipulating the relation between Ground and onstage conceptualizers, Wh-extraction ‘in the wild’, impersonal intersubjectivity and the irrelevance of syntactic relations, perspectival and causal connections, and clauses as discourse segments.
