Sentence (linguistics)
A sentence is a grammatical unit consisting of one or more words that
are grammatically linked. A sentence can include words grouped meaningfully to
express a statement, question, exclamation, request, command or suggestion.
A sentence can also be defined in orthographic terms alone, i.e., as
anything which is contained between a capital letter and a full stop.[2] For
instance, the opening of Charles Dickens' novel Bleak House begins with the
following three sentences:
London. Michaelmas term lately
over, and the Lord Chancellor sitting in Lincoln's Inn Hall.
Implacable November weather.
The first sentence involves one word, a proper noun. The second sentence
has only a non-finite verb. The third is a single nominal group. Only an
orthographic definition encompasses this variation.
As with all language expressions, sentences might contain function and
content words and contain properties distinct to natural language, such as
characteristic intonation and timing patterns.
Sentences are generally
characterized in most languages by the presence of a finite verb, e.g.
"The quick brown fox jumps
over the lazy dog".
Components of a sentence
Clauses
A clause typically contains at least a subject noun phrase and a finite
verb. While the subject is usually a noun phrase, other kinds of phrases (such
as gerund phrases) work as well, and some languages allow subjects to be
omitted. There are two types of clauses: independent and subordinate
(dependent). An independent clause demonstrates a complete thought; it is a
complete sentence: for example, I am sad. A subordinate clause is not a
complete sentence: for example, because I have no friends. See also copula for
the consequences of the verb to be on the theory of sentence structure.
A simple complete sentence consists of a single clause. Other complete
sentences consist of two or more clauses (see below).
By structure
One traditional scheme for classifying English
sentences is by the number and types of finite clauses:
A simple
sentence consists of a single independent clause with no dependent clauses.
A compound sentence consists of multiple independent clauses with no
dependent clauses. These clauses are joined together using conjunctions,
punctuation, or both.
A complex
sentence consists of one independent clause and at least one dependent clause.
A complex-compound sentence (or compound-complex sentence) consists of
multiple independent clauses, at least one of which has at least one dependent
clause.
By
purpose
Sentences
can also be classified based on their purpose:
A declarative sentence or declaration, the most common type, commonly
makes a statement: "I have to go to work."
An interrogative sentence or question is commonly used to request
information — "Do I have to go to work?" — but sometimes not; see
rhetorical question.
An exclamatory sentence or exclamation is generally a more emphatic form
of statement expressing emotion: "I have to go to work!"
An imperative sentence or command tells someone to do something (and if
done strongly may be considered both imperative and exclamatory): "Go to
work." or "Go to work!"
Major and minor sentences
A major sentence is a regular sentence; it has a subject and a
predicate. For example: "I have a ball." In this sentence one can
change the persons: "We have a ball." However, a minor sentence is an
irregular type of sentence. It does not contain a finite verb. For example,
"Mary!" "Yes." "Coffee." etc. Other examples of
minor sentences are headings (e.g. the heading of this entry), stereotyped
expressions ("Hello!"), emotional expressions ("Wow!"),
proverbs, etc. This can also include nominal sentences like "The more, the
merrier". These do not contain verbs in order to intensify the meaning
around the nouns and are normally found in poetry and catchphrases.[3]
Sentences that comprise a single word are called word sentences, and the
words themselves sentence words
After a slump of interest, sentence length came to be studied in the
1980s, mostly "with respect to other syntactic phenomena"
By some definitions, the average size length of a sentence is given by
"no. of words / no. of sentences".[6] The textbook Mathematical
linguistics, written by András Kornai, suggests that in "journalistic
prose the median sentence length is above 15 words". The average length of
a sentence generally serves as a measure of sentence difficulty or
complexity.[8] The general trend is that as the average sentence length
increases, the complexity of the sentences also increases
In some circumstances "sentence length" is expressed by the number
of clauses, while the "clause length" is expressed by the number of
phones.
A test done by Erik Schils and Pieter de Haan (by sampling five texts)
showed that any two adjacent sentences are more likely to have similar lengths,
and almost certainly have similar length when from a text in the fiction genre.
This countered the theory that "authors may aim at an alternation of long
and short sentence".Sentence length, as well as word difficulty, are both
factors in the readability of a sentence. However, other factors, such as the
presence of conjunctions, have been said to "facilitate comprehension
considerably".[
Simple sentence
A simple sentence is a sentence structure that contains one independent
clause and no dependent clauses.
Examples
I am running.
This simple sentence has one independent clause which contains one
subject, I, and one predicate, running.
The singer bowed.
This simple sentence has one independent clause which contains one
subject, singer, and one predicate, bowed.
The babies cried.
This simple sentence has one independent clause which contains one
subject, baby, and one predicate, cried.
The girl ran into her bedroom.
This simple sentence has one independent clause which contains one
subject, girl, and one predicate, ran into her bedroom. This example is
distinct from the previous three in that its verb phrase consists of more than
one word.
In the backyard, the dog barked
and howled at the cat.
This simple sentence has one independent clause which contains one
subject, dog, and one predicate, barked and howled at the cat. This predicate
has two verbs, known as a compound predicate: barked and howled. This compound
verb should not be confused with a compound sentence. In the backyard and at
the cat are prepositional phrases.
Compound sentence
A compound sentence is composed of at least two independent clauses. It
does not require a dependent clause. The clauses are joined by a coordinating
conjunction (with or without a comma), a correlative conjunction (with or
without a comma), a semicolon that functions as a conjunction, a colon instead
of a semicolon between two sentences when the second sentence explains or
illustrates the first sentence and no coordinating conjunction is being used to
connect the sentences, or a conjunctive adverb preceded by a semicolon. A
conjunction can be used to make a compound sentence. Conjunctions are words
such as for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so (the first letters of which spell
"fanboys"). The use of a comma to separate two independent clauses
without the addition of an appropriate conjunction is called a comma splice and
is generally considered an error (when used in the English language).
Complex sentence
In grammar, a complex sentence is a sentence with one independent clause
and at least one dependent clause. A complex sentence is often used to make
clear which ideas are most important, and which ideas are subordinate
Examples
"I enjoyed the apple pie that you bought for me." Here,
"I enjoyed the apple pie" is an independent clause and "that you
bought for me" is a dependent clause. The independent clause could stand
alone as a simple sentence without a dependent clause.
"I ate breakfast before I went to work." This has "I ate
breakfast" as an independent clause, and "before I went to work"
as a dependent clause.
Examples of sentences that have more than one clause but are not complex
sentences include the following:
"I was scared, but I didn't run away." Both of these clauses
are independent in this compound sentence.
"The dog that you gave me barked at me, and it bit my hand."
Here a compound-complex sentence has two independent clauses ("The dog
barked at me" and "It bit my hand") and one dependent clause
["that you gave me"].
Complex-compound sentence
A
complex-compound
sentence or compound-complex sentence is a sentence with several independent
clauses and one or more dependent clauses (also known as subordinating
conjunction).
Examples
The dog lived in the garden, but
the cat, which was smarter, lived inside the house.
Independent clauses:
The dog
lived in the garden.
The cat
lived inside the house.
Dependent
clause:
which was
smarter
Subject
The subject (abbreviated SUB or SU) is, according to a tradition that
can be traced back to Aristotle (and that is associated with phrase structure
grammars), one of the two main constituents of a clause, the other constituent
being the predicate, whereby the predicate says something about the subject.
According to a tradition associated with predicate logic and dependency
grammars, the subject is the most prominent overt argument of the predicate. By
this position all languages with arguments have subjects, though there is no
way to define this consistently for all languages.[3] From a functional
perspective, a subject is a phrase that conflates nominative case with the
topic. Many languages (such as those withergative or Austronesian alignment) do
not do this, and so do not have subjects.
All of these positions see the subject in English determining person and
numberagreement on the finite verb, as exemplified by the difference in verb
forms between he eats and they eat. The stereotypical subject immediately
precedes the finite verb in declarative sentences in English and
represents
an agent or a theme. The subject is often a multi-word constituent and should
be distinguished fromparts of speech, which, roughly, classify words within
constituents.
Forms of the subject
The
subject is a constituent that can be realized in numerous forms in English and
other languages, many of which are listed in the following table:
oun (phrase) or pronoun The large
car stopped outside our house. A gerund (phrase)
His constant hammering was
annoying.
A to-infinitive (phrase) To read
is easier than to write.
A full that-clause That he had
traveled the world was known to everyone.
A free relative clause Whatever
he did was always of interest.
A direct quotation I love you is
often heard these days.
Zero (but implied) subject Take
out the trash!
An expletive
It is raining.
A cataphoric it
It was known by everyone that he
had traveled the world.
Three criteria for identifying
subjects in English
Three criteria for identifying
subjects in English and other languages are listed next:
1.
Subject-verb
agreement: The subject agrees with the finite verb in person and number, e.g. I
am vs. *I is.
2.
Position
occupied: The subject typically immediately precedes the finite verb in
declarative clauses in English, e.g. Tom laughs.
3.
Semantic
role: A typical subject in the active voice is an agent or theme, i.e. it
performs the action expressed by the verb or when it is a theme, it receives a
property assigned to it by the predicate.
Of these
three criteria, the first one (agreement) is the most reliable. The subject in
English and many other languages agrees with the finite verb in person and
number (and sometimes in gender
as well). The second and third criterion are merely strong tendencies
that can be flouted in certain constructions, e.g.
a. Tom is studying chemistry. - The three criteria
agree identifying Tom as the subject.
b. Is Tom studying chemistry? - The 1st and the 3rd
criteria identify Tom as the subject.
c. Chemistry is being studied (by Tom). - The 1st and the 2nd criteria
identify Chemistry as the subject.
In the first sentence, all three criteria combine to identify Tom as the
subject. In the second sentence, which involves the subject-auxiliary inversion
of a yes/no-question, the subject immediately follows the finite verb (instead
of immediately preceding it), which means the second criterion is flouted. And
in the third sentence expressed in the passive voice, the 1st and the 2nd
criterion combine to identify chemistry as the subject, whereas the third
criterion suggests that by Tom should be the subject because Tom is an agent.
Two further criteria for
identifying subjects
Two further critiera for
identifying subjects are helpful in many other languages (other than
English):
4.
Morphological
case: In languages that have case systems, the subject is marked by a specific
case, often the nominative.
5. Omission: Many languages systematically omit a
subject that is known in discourse.
The fourth criterion is not very applicable to English because English
largely lacks morphological case, the exception being the subject and object
forms of pronouns, I/me, he/him, she/her, they/them. The fifth criterion is
helpful in languages that typically drop pronominal subjects, such as Spanish,
Portuguese, Italian, Latin, Greek, Japanese, and Mandarin. Though most of these
languages are rich in verb forms for determining the person and number of the
subject, Japanese and Mandarin have no such forms at all. This dropping pattern
does not automatically make a language a pro-drop language. In other languages,
like English and French, most clauses should have a subject, which should be
either a noun (phrase), a pronoun, or a clause. This is also true when the
clause has no element to be represented by it. This is why verbs like rain must
have a subject such as it, even if nothing is actually being represented by it.
In this case, it is an expletive and a dummy pronoun. In imperative clauses,
most languages elide the subject, even in English which typically requires a
subject to be present, e.g.
Give it to me.
Dā mihi istud. (Latin)
Me dá isso. (Brazilian
Portuguese)
Dá-me isso. (Portuguese in
Brazil)
Dammelo. (Italian)
Difficult cases
There are certain constructions that challenge the criteria just
introduced for identifying subjects. The following subsections briefly illustrate
three such cases in English: 1) existential there-constructions, 2) inverse
copular constructions, and 3) locative inversionconstructions.
Existential there-constructions
Existential there-constructions allow for varying interpretations about
what should count as the subject, e.g.
A. There's problems.
B. There are problems.
In sentence a, the first criterion (agreement) and the second criterion
(position occupied) suggest that there is the subject, whereas the third
criterion (semantic role) suggests rather that problems is the subject. In
sentence b, in contrast, agreement and semantic role suggest that problems is
the subject, whereas position occupied suggests that there is the subject. In
such cases then, one can take the first criterion as the most telling; the
subject should agree with the finite verb.
Inverse copular constructions
Another difficult case for identifying the subject is the so-called
inverse copular construction, e.g.
A. The boys are a chaotic force around here.
B. A chaotic force around here is the boys. - Inverse
copular construction
The criteria combine to identify the boys as the subject in sentence a.
But if that is the case, then one might argue that the boys is also the subject
in the similar sentence b, even though two of the criteria (agreement and
position occupied) suggest that a chaotic force around here is the subject.
When confronted with such data, one has to make a decision that is less than
fully arbitrary. If one assumes again that criterion one (agreement) is the most
reliable, one can usually identify a subject.
Locative inversion constructions
Yet another type of construction
that challenges the subject concept is locative inversion, e.g.
A. Spiders have been breeding under the bed.
B. Under the bed have been breeding spiders. -
Locative inversion
C. *Where have been breeding spiders? - Failed attempt
to question the location
D. Where have spiders been breeding? - Successful
attempt to question the location
The criteria easily identify spiders as the subject in sentence a. In
sentence b, however, the position occupied suggests that under the bed should
be construed as the subject, whereas agreement and semantic role continue to
identify spiders as the subject. This is so despite the fact that spiders in
sentence b appears after the string of verbs in the canonical position of an
object. The fact that sentence c is bad but sentence d good reveals that
something unusual is indeed afoot, since the attempt to question the location
fails if the subject does not immediately follow the finite verb. This further
observation speaks against taking spiders as the subject in sentence b. But if
spiders is not the subject, then the sentence must lack a subject entirely,
which is not supposed to be possible in English.
Subject-less clauses
The existence of subject-less clauses can be construed as particularly
problematic for theories of sentence structure that build on the binary
subject-predicate division. A simple sentence is defined as the combination of
a subject and a predicate, but if no subject is present, how can one have a
sentence? Subject-less clauses are absent from English for the most part, but
they are not unusual in related languages. In German, for instance, impersonal
passive clauses can lack a recognizable subject, e.g.
Gestern wurde nur geschlafen.
Yesterday was only slept
'Everybody slept yesterday.'
The word gestern 'yesterday' is generally construed as an adverb, which
means it cannot be taken as the subject in this sentence. Certain verbs in
German also require a dative or accusative object instead of a nominative
subject, e.g.
Mir graut davor.
Me-DAT is uneasy about it 'I am
uneasy about it.'
Since subjects are typically marked by the nominative case in German
(the fourth criterion above), one can argue that this sentence lacks a subject,
for the relevant verb argument appears in the dative case, not in the
nominative.
Predicate
There are two competing notions of the predicate in theories of grammar
The first concerns traditional grammar, which tends to view a predicate as one
of two main parts of a sentence, the other part being the subject; the purpose
of the predicate is to modify the subject. The second derives from work in
predicate calculus (predicate logic, first order logic) and is prominent in
modern theories of syntax and grammar. In this approach, the predicate of a
sentence corresponds mainly to the main verb and any auxiliaries that accompany
the main verb, whereas the arguments of that predicate (e.g. the subject and
object noun phrases) are outside the predicate. The competition between these
two concepts has generated confusion concerning the use of the term predicate
in theories of grammar. This article considers both of these notions.
Predicates in traditional grammar
The predicate in traditional grammar is inspired by propositional logic
of antiquity (as opposed to the more modern predicate logic). A predicate is
seen as a property that a subject has or is characterized by. A predicate is
therefore an expression that can be true ofsomething.[3] Thus, the expression
"is moving" is true of those things that are moving. This classical
understanding of predicates was adopted more or less directly into Latin and
Greek grammars and from there it made its way into English grammars, where it is
applied directly to the analysis of sentence structure. It is also the
understanding of predicates in English-language dictionaries. The predicate is
one of the two main parts of a sentence (the other being the subject, which the
predicate modifies).[4] The predicate must contain a verb, and the verb
requires, permits, or precludes other sentence elements to complete the
predicate. These elements are:objects (direct, indirect, prepositional),
predicatives, and adjuncts:
She dances. - verb-only predicate
Ben reads the book. - verb +
direct object predicate
Ben's mother, Felicity, gave me a
present. - verb + indirect object + direct object predicate
She listened to the radio. - verb
+ prepositional object predicate
They elected him president. -
verb + object + predicative noun predicate
She met him in the park. - verb +
object + adjunct predicate
She is in the park. - verb +
predicative prepositional phrase predicate
The predicate provides information about the subject, such as what the
subject is, what the subject is doing, or what the subject is like. The
relation between a subject and its predicate is sometimes called a nexus. A
predicative nominal is a noun phrase that functions as the main
predicate of a sentence, such as George III is the king of England, the
king of England being the predicative nominal. The subject and predicative
nominal must be connected by a linking verb, also called a copula. A
predicative adjective is anadjective that functions as a predicate, such as
Ivano is attractive, attractive being the predicative adjective. The subject
and predicative adjective must also be connected by a copula.
This traditional understanding of predicates has a concrete reflex in
all phrase structure theories of syntax. These theories divide the generic
declarative sentence (S) into a noun phrase (NP) and verb phrase (VP), e.g
Predicates in modern theories of
syntax and grammar
Most modern theories of syntax and grammar take their inspiration for
the theory of predicates from predicate calculus as associated with Gottlob
Frege. This understanding sees predicates as relations or functions over
arguments. The predicate serves either to assign a property to a single
argument or to relate two or more arguments to each other. Sentences consist of
predicates and their arguments (and adjuncts) and are thus predicate-argument
structures, whereby a given predicate is seen as linking its arguments into a
greater structure. This understanding of predicates sometimes renders a
predicate and its arguments in the following manner:
Bob laughed. → laughed (Bob) or,
laughed = ƒ(Bob)
Sam helped you. → helped (Sam,
you)
Jim gave Jill his dog. → gave
(Jim, Jill, his dog)
Predicates are placed on the left outside of brackets, whereas the
predicate's arguments are placed inside the brackets One acknowledges the
valency of predicates, whereby a given predicate can be avalent (not shown),
monovalent (laughed in the first sentence), divalent (helped in the second
sentence), or trivalent (gave in the third sentence). These types of
representations are analogous to formal semantic analyses, where one is
concerned with the proper account of scope facts of quantifiers and logical
operators. Concerning basic sentence structure however, these representations
suggest above all that verbs are predicates and the noun phrases that they
appear with are their arguments. On this understanding of the sentence, the
binary division of the clause into a subject NP and a predicate VP is hardly
possible. Instead, the verb is the predicate, and the noun phrases are its
arguments.
Other function words - e.g. auxiliary verbs, certain prepositions,
phrasal particles, etc. - are viewed as part of the predicate.The matrix
predicates are in bold in the following examples:
Bill will have laughed.
Will Bill have laughed?
That is funny.
They had been satisfied.
Had they been satisfied, ...
The butter is in the drawer.
Fred took a picture of Sue.
Susan is pulling your leg.
Who did Jim give his dog to?
You should give it up.
Note that not just verbs can be part of the matrix predicate, but also
adjectives, nouns, prepositions, etc. The understanding of predicates suggested
by these examples sees the main predicate of a clause consisting of at least
one verb and a variety of other possible words. The words of the predicate need
not form a string nor a constituent, but rather they can be interrupted by
their arguments (and/or adjuncts). The approach to predicates illustrated with
these sentences is widespread in Europe, particularly in Germany, where the
understanding predicates from traditional grammar discussed above seems to
hardly exist (for those who know German, see the Wikipedia article in German on
the predicate).
This modern understanding of predicates is compatible with the
dependency grammar approach to sentence structure, which places the finite verb
as the root of all structure
Predicators
Some theories of grammar seek to avoid the confusion generated by the
competition between the two predicate notions by acknowledging predicators.[13]
The term predicate is employed in the traditional sense of the binary division
of the clause, whereas the term predicator is used to denote the more modern
understanding of matrix predicates. On this approach, the periphrastic verb
catenae briefly illustrated in the previous section are predicators
The predicators are in blue. These verb catenae generally contain a main
verb and potentially one or more auxiliary verbs. The auxiliary verbs help
express functional meaning of aspect and voice. Since the auxiliary verbs
contribute functional information only, they do not qualify as separate
predicators, but rather each time they form the matrix predicator with the main
verb.
Carlson classes
The seminal work of Greg Carlson distinguishes between types of
predicates. Based on Carlson's work, predicates have been divided into the
following sub-classes, which roughly pertain to how a predicate relates to its
subject.
A stage-level predicate is true of a temporal stage of its subject. For
example, if John is "hungry", then he typically will eat some food,
which lasts a certain amount of time, and not his entire lifespan. Stage-level
predicates can occur in a wide range of grammatical constructions and are
probably the most versatile kind of predicate.
Individual-level predicates
An individual-level predicate is true throughout the existence of an
individual. For example, if John is "smart", this is a property that
he has, regardless of which particular point in time we consider.
Individual-level predicates are more restricted than stage-level ones.
Individual-level predicates cannot occur in presentational "there"
sentences (a star in front of a sentence indicates that it is odd or
ill-formed):
There are police available. -
available is stage-level predicate
*There are firemen altruistic. -
altruistic is an individual-level predicate
Stage-level predicates allow
modification by manner adverbs and other adverbial modifiers.
Individual-level predicates do
not, e.g.
Tyrone spoke French loudly in the corridor. - speak French can be
interpreted as a stage-level predicate
*Tyrone knew French silently in the corridor. - know French cannot be
interpreted as a stage-level predicate
When an individual-level predicate occurs in past tense, it gives rise
to what is called a lifetime effect: The subject must be assumed to be dead or
otherwise out of existence.
John was available. - Stage-level
predicate does NOT evoke the lifetime effect.
John was altruistic. - Individual-level
predicate does evoke the lifetime effect.
Kind-level predicates
A kind-level predicate is true of a kind of thing, but cannot be applied
to individual members of the kind. An example of this is the predicate are
widespread. One cannot meaningfully say of a particular individual John that he
is widespread. One may only say this of kinds, as in
Humans are widespread.
Certain types of noun phrases cannot be the subject of a kind-level
predicate. We have just seen that a proper name cannot be.Singular indefinite
noun phrases are also banned from this environment:
*A cat is
widespread. - Compare: Nightmares are widespread.
Collective vs. distributive
predicates
Predicates may also be collective or distributive. Collective predicates
require their subjects to be somehow plural, while distributive ones do not. An
example of a collective predicate is "formed a line". This predicate
can only stand in a nexus with a plural subject:
The students formed a line. -
Collective predicate appears with plural subject.
*The student formed a line. -
Collective predicate cannot appear with singular subject.
Other examples of collective predicates include meet in the woods,
surround the house, gather in the hallway and carry the piano together. Note
that the last one (carry the piano together) can be made non-collective by
removing the word together. Quantifiers differ with respect to whether or not
they can be the subject of a collective predicate. For example, quantifiers
formed with all the can, while ones formed with every or each cannot.
All the students formed a line. -
Collective predicate possible with all the.
All the students gathered in the
hallway. - Collective predicate possible with all the.
All the students carried a piano
together. - Collective predicate possible with all the.
*Every student formed a line. -
Collective predicate IMpossible with every.
*Each student gathered in the
hallway. - Collective predicate IMpossible with each.
