Bishkek State University named after K.

Karasaev

The faculty of European Civilizations

The Theory and Practice of Translations Department

Course Paper

Theme: The Types of Clauses in the English Language

Done by: Student of the 3-kurs L18-3 Dzholdoshbek kyzy Nurai

Supervisor: Osmonova J.D.

2021
Content
1. Introduction ……………………………………………………… 3
2. 1.1 Types of English sentences ………………………………….. 5
3. The nature of clause ……………………………………………… 8
4. 1.3 Specific features of subordination …………………………… 14
5. 1.4 Types of clause ………………………………………………. 19
6. 2.1 Punctuation peculiarities and subordinating
conjunctions ……………………………………………………… 26
7. 2.2 Selection of sentences with different
types of subordinate clauses …………………………………….. 31
8. Conclusion ……………………………………………………….. 40

2
Introduction
sentence subordination submission

In the process of communication people use a variety of sentences to make

their speech interesting and lively. Too many simple sentences, for example, will
sound choppy and immature while too many long sentences will be difficult to
read and hard to understand.

Coordination and Subordination are ways of combining words, phrases, and

clauses into more complex forms. The discussion below examines coordination
and subordination of clauses.

In this work will reveal extensively about The topic of our investigation
«Types of Clauses in the English Language». We will consider topics more
deeply and research about themes down bellow.

To gain the aim of the investigation we have determined the following

tasks:

- to consider types of English sentences;

- investigate the nature of clause;
- determine specific features of subordination;
- characterize types of subordinate clauses;
- investigate punctuation peculiarities and subordinating conjunctions;
select sentences with different types of subordinate clauses

The topicality of our investigation is predetermined by the necessity

understand and use in practice English language with all its grammatical and
syntactic peculiarities. English is recognized to be a global language of
communication of different people from different countries. That is why it is so
important to understand fully syntactic peculiarities of the language.

The object of the investigation is subordinate clauses.

3
 The subject of the investigation is specific features of functioning of
subordinate clauses in accordance with their different types.

The aim of the investigation is to analyze different types of subordinate

clauses in the English language.

Structure of the investigation. The paper consists of the introduction, two

chapters, theoretical and practical one, conclusion and bibliography.

4
1.1 Types of English sentences

There are different types of sentences.

SIMPLE SENTENCE

A simple sentence, also called an independent clause, contains a subject and

a verb, and it expresses a complete thought. In the following simple sentences,
subjects are in yellow, and verbs are in green.

A. Some students like to study in the mornings.

B. Juan and Arturo play football every afternoon.

C. Alicia goes to the library and studies every day.

The three examples above are all simple sentences. Note that sentence B
contains a compound subject, and sentence C contains a compound verb. Simple
sentences, therefore, contain a subject and verb and express a complete thought,
but they can also contain a compound subjects or verbs.

COMPOUND SENTENCE

A compound sentence contains two independent clauses joined by a

coordinator. The coordinators are as follows: for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so. (Helpful
hint: The first letter of each of the coordinators spells FANBOYS.) Except for very
short sentences, coordinators are always preceded by a comma.

A. I tried to speak Spanish, and my friend tried to speak English.

B. Alejandro played football, so Maria went shopping.

C. Alejandro played football, for Maria went shopping.

5
 The above three sentences are compound sentences. Each sentence contains
two independent clauses, and they are joined by a coordinator with a comma
preceding it. Note how the conscious use of coordinators can change the
relationship between the clauses. Sentences B and C, for example, are identical
except for the coordinators. In sentence B, which action occurred first? Obviously,
«Alejandro played football» first, and as a consequence, «Maria went shopping. In
sentence C, «Maria went shopping» first. In sentence C, «Alejandro played
football» because, possibly, he didn't have anything else to do, for or because
«Maria went shopping.» How can the use of other coordinators change the
relationship between the two clauses? What implications would the use of «yet» or
«but» have on the meaning of the sentence?

COMPLEX SENTENCE

A complex sentence has an independent clause joined by one or more

dependent clauses. A complex sentence always has a subordinator such as because,
since, after, although, or when or a relative pronoun such as that, who, or which.

A. When he handed in his homework, he forgot to give the teacher the last
page.

B. The teacher returned the homework after she noticed the error.

C. The students are studying because they have a test tomorrow.

D. After they finished studying, Juan and Maria went to the movies.

E. Juan and Maria went to the movies after they finished studying.

When a complex sentence begins with a subordinator such as sentences A

and D, a comma is required at the end of the dependent clause. When the
independent clause begins the sentence with subordinators in the middle as in
sentences B, C, and E, no comma is required. If a comma is placed before the
subordinators in sentences B, C, and E, it is wrong.

6
 Note that sentences D and E are the same except sentence D begins with the
dependent clause which is followed by a comma, and sentence E begins with the
independent clause which contains no comma. The comma after the dependent
clause in sentence D is required, and experienced listeners of English will often
hear a slight pause there. In sentence E, however, there will be no pause when the
independent clause begins the sentence [10, p. 144–146].

7
1.2 The nature of clause

Sentences can be complex and include a main clause, what we call main
sentence, or a subordinate clause, what we call clause. There are 3 types of clauses:
noun clauses, adjectival clauses and adverbial clauses.

Noun clauses: A clause which acts as the subject or object (O) or as the
complement (C, atributo in Spanish) Adjectival or Relative clauses: They refer to
nouns (generally) and therefore perform the same syntactic function as the
preceding noun or antecedent, this means they are PART of whatever syntactic
function that noun performs in the sentence. For instance, The girl who is eating
prawns is Russian, who is eating prawns is the relative clause which is modifying
«girl», so the subject of is Russian is the whole idea The girl who is eating prawns.
Likewise, I don’t like the film we saw last night has the relative clause we saw last
night modifying film, so the object of the main sentence (I don’t like) is the film
we saw last night, and not the film only.

Adverbial clauses are complementos circunstanciales. There are different

types: time clauses, (CCT), place (CCL), manner (CCM), comparison, reason or
cause (CCC), purpose (CCF), result (consecutivas), conditional, concession.

Clauses can be finite or non-finite. In other words, they may have a finite
verb (a verb with a subject in a tense) or a non-finite verb (an infinitive, a present
participle [-ing] or a past participle, no subject) [21, p. 87].

A clause is a part of a sentence. There are two main types: independent

(main clauses), dependent (subordinate clauses).

8
 Independent Clauses

An independent clause is a complete sentence; it contains a subject and verb

and expresses a complete thought in both context and meaning.

For example: The door opened.

Independent clauses can be joined by a coordinating conjunction to form

complex or compound sentences.

For example: Take two independent clauses and join them together with the
conjunction and: «The door opened.» «The man walked in.» = The door opened
and the man walked in.

Dependent Clauses

A dependent (subordinate) clause is part of a sentence; it contains a subject

and verb but does not express a complete thought. They can make sense on their
own, but, they are dependent on the rest of the sentence for context and meaning.
They are usually joined to an independent clause to form a complex sentence.

Dependent clauses often begin with a subordinating conjunction or relative

pronoun (see below) that makes the clause unable to stand alone.

For example:

The door opened because the man pushed it.

Dependent clauses can be nominal, adverbial or adjectival.

A nominal clause (noun clause) functions like a noun or noun phrase. It is a

group of words containing a subject and a finite verb of its own and contains one
of the following: that | if | whether

For example:

I wondered whether the homework was necessary.

Noun clauses answer questions like «who(m)?» or «what?»

9
 An adverbial clause (adverb clause) is a word or expression in the sentence
that functions as an adverb; that is, it tells you something about how the action in
the verb was done. An adverbial clause is separated from the other clauses by any
of the following subordinating conjunctions: after | although | as | because | before |
if | since | that | though | till | unless | until | when | where | while

For example:

They will visit you before they go to the airport.

Adverbial clauses can also be placed before the main clause without
changing the meaning.

For example:

Before they go to the airport, they will visit you.

When an adverb clause introduces the sentence (as this one does), it is set off
with a comma.

Adverb clauses answer questions like «when?», «where?», «why?»

An adjectival clause (adjective clause or relative clause) does the work of an

adjective and describes a noun, it's usually introduced by a relative pronoun: who |
whom | whose | that | which

For example:

I went to the show that was very popular.

This kind of clause is used to provide extra information about the noun it
follows. This can be to define something (a defining clause), or provide
unnecessary, but interesting, added information (a non-defining clause).

For example:

The car that is parked in front of the gates will be towed away. (Defining
relative clause.)

10
 An Adverb clause is a dependent clause that takes the place of an adverb. An
adverb clause answers questions such as when, where, why, with what result,
under what conditions, and for what purpose [26].

I watched a movie last night. 'Last night' is an adverb.

I watched a movie after I came home. 'After I came home' is the adverb
clause in this sentence. It takes the place of the adverb. As you see, the adverb
clause is dependent of the main clause «I watched a movie», which is a complete
sentence. The adverb clause does the same job as the adverb.

Information contained in the defining relative clause is absolutely essential

in order for us to be able to identify the car in question.

My dog, who is grey and white, chased the postman. (Non-defining relative
clause)

A non-defining relative clause is separated from the rest of the sentence by

commas. If you take away the non-defining clause the basic meaning of the
sentence remains intact.

For example:

My dog chased the postman.

Adjective clauses answer questions like «which?» or «what kind of?»

An adjective clause functions as an adjective (modifies a noun or pronoun);

an adverb clause functions as an adverb (describes a verb, adjective or other
adverb); a noun clause is used as a noun (subject of a verb, direct object, indirect
object, predicate nominative or object of the preposition).

Adjective Clause has a subject and a verb, and takes the place of an
adjective. An adjective clause must be connected to an independent clause.

Examples:

11
 «Faraday first worked as a bottle washer for the famous chemist Humphry
Davy, who later had become very jealous of him.»

Adjective clause: «who later had become very jealous of him.»

Main clause: «Faraday worked as a bottle washer for the famous chemist.
The main clause can stand by itself because it expresses a complete thought.»

«Faraday discovered that electricity moves through wire.» In this sentence,

conductivity of wire is not mentioned, but it is described as the 'object' of the
sentence. This sentence has two independent clauses:

The first independent clause:» Faraday discovered that». In this sentence

'that» is a clause marker acting as the object of the sentence.

The second independent clause, «the electricity moves through wire»,

replaces the object «that» and carries a complete thought.

The above two clauses are independent because they both have a subject and
verb, and impart a complete thought thus an stand alone.

The difference between a clause and a phrase is that a phrase does not
contain a finite verb.

The data, mentioned above, are summed up in Table 1, given below [27].

12
 Table 1. Types of clauses

Type of FINITE NON-FINITE CLAUSES

CLAUSE CLAUSES
Noun clauses [What you (Infinitive, Present participle)
said] was [To give up at this stage] would be a pity
great > non-finite noun clause, infinitive, subject
> subject [Closing the factory] would mean
unemployment for all
> non-finite noun clause, gerund, subject
Adjectival We bought (Infinitive, Present and Past Participles)
Clauses the house I have something [to tell you]
or Relative [which you > non-finite adjectival clause; infinitive
Clauses had rented] The thieves took two bags [containing $2,000]
> object, part > present participle
of the object! I couldn't read the instructions [given in the
manual]
> past participle
Adverbial I shall see (Infinitive, Present and Past Participles,
Clauses* you [when we Perfect Participle)
return] [To speed up the process] she bought a
> time computer
adverbial > non-finite adverbial clause, infinitive of
purpose
[While travelling by air], she was taken sick
[Given time], she'll do the job extremely well
[Having finished their task], they went out for a
drink

13
 1.3 Specific features of subordination

Based on the relationship that holds between the clauses within multiple
sentences we distinguish between compound and complex sentences. Downing &
Locke [26, p. 279] distinguish two kinds of relationship between clauses in a
multiple sentence:

a) the syntactic (structural) relationship of interdependency in which clauses

are related to each other basically in one of two ways: the relationship is either of
equivalence (the clauses have the same syntactic status) or the relationship is one
of non-equivalence (the clauses have different status). When clauses are linked in a
relationship of equivalence, we say that the relationship is paratactic. This type of
linking is often treated as equivalent of coordination. On the other hand, when
units of unequal status are related, we say that the relationship is hypotactic. In
hypotactically related clauses, one clause is syntactically and semantically
subordinated to another or to a series of clauses.

b) the logico-semantic relations, which are varied since they represent the
way the speaker/writer sees the connections to be made between one clause and
another. These connections do not simply link clauses within a complex clause, but
also clauses within a paragraph and paragraphs within a text. As Downing &
Locke state, connection is, therefore, a discourse phenomenon. These logico-
semantic relations are of two kinds, that of expansion (the nuclear situation is
expanded by means of other situation) and projection (a situation is ‘projected
through a verb of saying or thinking).

Subordination, generally considered to be an index of structural complexity

in language, has been studied by a number of grammarians. Thompson [29] claims
that ‘subordination’ treats as a single phenomenon all clauses which are not
independent clauses.

14
 According to Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech, Svartvik’s A Comprehensive
Grammar of the English Language (CGEL), subordination is a feature of a
complex sentence [21]. It is a way of joining clauses of unequal status, where the
independent clause is superordinate to the dependent clause(s), and he says that it
is a misleading term and doesn’t accept it as a grammatical category at all but
rather as a «negative term which lumps together all deviations from some ‘main
clause’ norm».

(i) He told me [main-super ordinate to (ii)], which depends on the main

clause for its meaning. Semantically, the information contained in the subordinate
clause is often presented as back grounded or presupposed in relation to the
information contained in the superordinate clause (independent). A clause may
enter into more than one relationship, it may be subordinate to one clause and
super ordinate to another (ibid. 14.3).

(ii) that Peter wouldn’t go there [subordinate to (i) – super ordinate to (iii)]

(iii) unless they invite him. [subordinate to (ii)]

A complex sentence is then a structure consisting of one independent clause

that can stand alone as a sentence, and of one or more dependent clauses
functioning as an element of the sentence. The subordinate clause, on the other
hand, cannot stand alone (see the examples below):

[1] I was really very surprised because Tom arrived early in the morning.

[2] John will lend you his car if you need it.

[3] That he didn’t know about it was not an excuse.

[4] She said that the test was not easy at all.

The embedded clauses in sentences 1 – 4 function as constituents of the

super ordinate clause (a clause of which a constituent is realized by another
clause). However, Downing & Locke [26, p. 278] would think of embedded
clauses only in examples [3] and [4] as they occur at subject and object functions
15
(nominal clauses) and represent situations which are participants in a super
ordinate situation. In sentence [1] and [2] the subordinate clauses function as
adverbs, they are termed adverbial clauses. The relationship of dependency is
different from that of the previous cases of embedding. Adverbial clauses
themselves show a continuum of a looser-to-tighter integration, a continuum that
correlates with their function [29, p. 176]. They have not reached the level of
incorporation that the nominal clauses have done. They are syntactically and
semantically additional to, rather than participative in, the situation expressed in
the main clause. Thus, such clauses are not considered as embedded, but
dependent.

However, there are some discrepancies in terming of the above mentioned

relationships. Downing & Locke [26] distinguish only two types of relationships
between the clauses within a sentence, namely, the relationships of equality
(parataxis) and relationships of dependency (hypotaxis), within which they
distinguish between two types of relationships, that of dependency and embedding.
Hopper and Traugott [29, p. 170]), on the other hand, redefine the terminology of
two traditions and expand the parataxis (coordination) versus hypotaxis
(subordination) pair into a three-way distinction establishing three cluster points
which they characterize by a ‘cline of clause combining (parataxis > hypotaxis >
subordination). They define ‘hypotaxis» as a kind of relationship in which there is
an independent clause and one or more clauses that cannot stand by themselves.
These are not wholly included within any constituent of the independent clause.
On the other hand, ‘subordination’ according to them is ‘embedding’, or complete
dependency, in which a dependent clause is wholly included within a constituent
of the independent clause.

Syntactically, the clearest cases of subordination are those signalled by

subordinating conjunctions. They serve not only to mark syntactic boundaries, but
also to signal the functional relationship of the combined clauses to each other.
However, the nature of relationship is not always marked explicitly and not all
16
subordinate clauses contain such markers. Other signals of subordination are wh –
words, the word that, lack of finite verbs, and inversion. Huddleston [30, p. 152–
153] names the following distinguishing markers: relative words, non-finiteness,
ellipsis, and order.

In the following example

[5] Please, pass me the book that I borrowed from Ann.

the relative clause is introduced by a relative word, which is a marker of

subordination, and it functions as a dependent structure in the noun phrase (the
book). Nevertheless, by some grammarians, it is treated as postmodification within
the complex noun phrase constituting the object the book that I borrowed from
Ann. According to Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech, and Svartvik, such structures add to
the complexity of the noun phrase, not to the sentence, thus they are considered to
be «constituents of phrases, and therefore only indirectly embedded within a larger
clause» [31].

Based on their definition that «a simple sentence is an independent clause

that does not have another clause as one of its elements. In other words, a simple
sentence does not contain a clause functioning as a subject, object, complement, or
adverbial», but a clause may be part of one of its phrases comes clear that they
consider clause structures containing relative clauses to be simple sentences.
Hopper and Closs Traugott [29, p. 190] support this idea, and they state that
languages exhibit different degrees of integration and interlacing of relative
clauses, ranging from clauses which are placed outside the nucleus to clauses
which are closely attached to a head noun inside the nucleus.

Other grammars would consider such sentences complex as they contain

more than one finite clause. The terms simple and complex sentences will be
avoided here and Huddleston’s brief definition [30, p. 152] of a subordinate clause
as «one functioning as dependent within a larger construction that is itself a clause
or a constituent of one» can form a starting point for the analysis as it covers a
17
whole range of dependencies, differing in form and syntactic function and serving
various discourse needs.

As for the classification of subordinate clauses, these tend to be classified in

grammars according to functional-semantic principles such as whether a clause
functions as a noun phrase, modifies a noun phrase, or has adverbial functions. In
the present study, they are divided into three major categories: nominal, relative,
and adverbial.

Comparative clauses are treated within the adverbial group. Structures used
for the purpose of focusing or giving information a more prominent position such
as cleft and pseudo-cleft sentences were omitted from our analysis, because
although their structure is similar to a relative or nominal clause and are introduced
by that, zero pronoun or a wh-pronoun, they are neither relative nor nominal
clauses.

18
 1.4 Types of subordinate clauses
The problem of classifying subordinate clauses is one of the vexed questions
of syntactic theory. Several systems have been tried out at various times, and
practically each of them has been shown to suffer from some drawback or other.
Some of the classifications so far proposed have been inconsistent, that is to say,
they were not based on any one firm principle of division equally applied to all
clauses under consideration. We will first of all point out what principles of
classification are possible and then see how they work when applied to Modern
English. It is quite conceivable that a sort of combined principle will have to be
evolved, that is, one principle might be taken as the ruling one, and the main types
established in accordance with it, and another principle, or perhaps other
principles, taken as secondary ones and applied for a further subdivision of clauses
obtained according to the first principle. It might also prove expedient to have two
different classifications independent of each other and based on different
principles. As we proceed to point out the various principles which may be taken
as a base for classification, we shall see that even that is a matter of some
difficulty, and liable to lead to discussion and controversy. The first opposition in
the sphere of principles would seem to be that between meaning, or contents, and
syntactical function. But this opposition is not in itself sufficient to determine the
possible variants of classification. For instance, under the head of «meaning» we
may bring either such notions as «declarative» (or «statement») and
«interrogative» (or «question»), and, on the other hand, a notion like
«explanatory». Under the head of «function» we may bring either the position of a
clause within a complex sentence, defined on the same principles as the position of
a sentence part within a simple sentence, or (as is sometimes done) on the analogy
between a clause and a part of speech performing the same function within a
simple sentence. Besides, for certain types of clauses there may be ways of
19
characterising them in accordance with their peculiarities, which find no parallel in
other clauses. For instance, clauses introduced by a relative pronoun or relative
adverb may be termed «relative clauses», which, however, is not a point of
classification [25].

In order to obtain a clearer idea of how these various principles would work
out in practice, let us take a complex sentence and define its subordinate clauses in
accordance with each of these principles. Let the sentence be this: It was unreal,
grotesquely unreal, that morning skies which dawned so tenderly blue could be
profaned with cannon smoke that hung over the town like low thunder clouds, that
warm noontides filled with the piercing sweetness of massed honeysuckle and
climbing roses could be so fearful, as shells screamed into the streets, bursting like
the crack of doom, throwing iron splinters hundreds of yards, blowing people and
animals to bits.

Let us first look at the two subordinate clauses introduced by the conjunction
that: (1) that morning skies… could be profaned with cannon smoke, (2) that warm
noontides., could be so fearful.

From the point of view of meaning they may be called declarative clauses,
or subordinate statements, l as they contain statements which are expressed in
subordinate clauses. From the point of view of function they may be termed, if we
consider them as something parallel to parts of a simple sentence, either
appositions to the impersonal it which opens the sentence, or subject clauses, if we
take the view that the it is merely an introductory subject, or a «sham» subject, as it
is sometimes called. If, last not least, we wish to compare the clauses to the part of
speech which might perform the corresponding function in a simple sentence, we
may call them noun clauses, or substantive clauses, which is a very usual way of
treating them in English school grammars. Now let us turn to the clause coming
after the noun skies of the first subordinate clause: which dawned so tenderly blue.
From the viewpoint of meaning this clause can also be said to be declarative, or a
subordinate statement. It may also be termed a relative clause, because it is
20
introduced by a relative pronoun and has a relative connection with the noun skies
(or the phrase morning skies). From the functional point of view it may be called
an attributive clause, and if we compare it to the part of speech which might
perform the corresponding function in a simple sentence, we may call it an
adjective clause, which is also common in English school grammars.

The same considerations also apply to the clause that hung over the town
like low thunder clouds; it is evident from the context that the word that which
opens the clause is a relative pronoun (without it the clause would have no
subject).

Now we take the last subordinate clause: as shells screamed into the streets,
bursting like the crack of doom, throwing iron splinters hundreds of yards, blowing
people and animals to bits. This again would be a declarative clause or a
subordinate statement, and from the viewpoint of function it may be termed an
adverbial clause, as it corresponds to an adverbial modifier in a simple sentence.
More exactly, it might be termed an adverbial clause of time. Now, for the last
item, if we compare it to the part of speech performing the corresponding function
in a simple sentence, we might term it an adverb clause, which, however, is too
close to the term «adverbial clause» to be of much use in distinguishing the two
notions.

To sum up these various possibilities, we have, for the first two clauses, the
following terms: declarative clause, or subordinate statement; apposition clause, or
subject clause; noun clause.

For the second two clauses: declarative clause, or subordinate statement;

attributive clause; adjective clause [19].

For the clause coming last: declarative, or subordinate statement; adverbial

clause of time; adverb clause.

The next question is, what are we to make of all this variety of possible
treatments, and what classification, or what classifications of subordinate clauses
21
should be accepted as the most rational? It is perhaps best to start with the last of
the enumerated views, viz. that which draws a parallel between subordinate clauses
and parts of speech. There is little to be said in favour of this view. The strongest
argument here is probably the fact that in Modern English a clause may sometimes
be treated like a noun, namely when it is introduced by a preposition, as, for
instance, in the following sentence: But after the initial dismay he had no doubt as
to what he must do.

This seems practically the only feature which shows some likeness between
clauses of the given kind and nouns as such. As for the rest, the analogy is merely
one of function: clauses and parts of speech resemble each other only in so far as
both of them can perform certain functions in the sentence, viz. that of subject,
object, or attribute. This kind of similarity can hardly be said to be a sufficient
ground for classifying clauses according to parts of speech. The term «noun
clause», for example, can only mean «a clause which performs in a complex
sentence one of the functions which a noun can perform in a simple sentence». In a
similar way, the term «adjective clause» would mean «a clause which performs in
a complex sentence one of the functions that an adjective can perform in a simple
sentence». This treatment of clauses does not appear to have any serious
foundation, and the only consideration in favour of it, that of clauses sometimes
being introduced by prepositions (as if they were nouns), is not strong enough to
prove the case. We will therefore not adopt the classification of subordinate
clauses based on comparing them with parts of speech. Now let us consider the
principle according to which declarative and interrogative clauses (or subordinate
statements and subordinate questions) are given as types. This principle has
certainly something to say for itself.

The difference between the subordinate clauses in the following two

sentences viewed from this angle is clear enough: However, she felt that something
was wrong.

22
 Thereafter, when they talked it over, they always wondered why they had
failed to notice Scarlett's charms before. (Idem) It may accordingly be adopted as a
criterion for the classification of subordinate clauses. It has a weak point, however,
and this is that not every clause will fit into either of these categories. For instance,
the subordinate clause in the following sentence cannot naturally be termed either a
declarative or an interrogative clause: If he had been destitute and she had had
money she would have given him all he wanted.

The clause if… money expresses condition, it neither asserts anything nor
does it ask any question. There are, of course, a number of clauses of a similar
kind. It would appear, therefore, that the distinction between declarative and
interrogative clauses (subordinate statements and subordinate questions) applies to
certain types of clauses only and cannot be made a general principle of
classification. The term «relative clause» may very well be applied to any clause
introduced by a relative pronoun or relative adverb. O. Jespersen devotes several
chapters of his book «A Modern English Grammar» to relative clauses. In
accordance with his general view that elements of language may be divided into
primaries, adjuncts, and subjuncts, he treats the syntactical functions of
subordinate clauses as falling under these heads: «relative clauses as primaries»
and «relative clause adjuncts». From the viewpoint of function the subordinate
clauses of these types are of course quite different, yet they may be all termed
«relative clauses» [25]. This makes it evident that the notion «relative clause» is
not a notion of syntactic function, since it cuts right across syntactical divisions. It
is also evident that the term «relative clause» cannot be an element of any system:
the clauses which are not relative do not make any kind of syntactical type which
might be put on the same level as relative clauses: what unites them all is merely
the fact that they are non-relative. Thus the notion of «relative clauses», which is
doubtless useful in its limited sphere, as a description of a certain type of
subordinate clauses characterised by a peculiarity they all share, is useless as an
element of a general classification of clauses. In that respect it is no better than

23
«declarative» or «interrogative» clauses. There remains now the classification of
subordinate clauses based on the similarity of their functions with those of parts of
the sentence, namely the classification of clauses into subject, predicative, object,
attributive, adverbial, appositional, and parenthetical clauses. In this way the
general parallelism between parts of a simple sentence and subordinate clauses
within a complex sentence will be kept up; however, there is no sufficient ground
for believing that there will be complete parallelism in all respects and all details:
on the contrary, it is most likely that differences between the two will emerge
(especially in the sphere of adverbial modifiers and adverbial clauses). Subordinate
clauses may well be expected to have some peculiarities distinguishing them from
parts of a simple sentence. In studying the several types of subordinate clauses, we
will compare them with the corresponding parts of a simple sentence, and point out
their peculiarities, and the meanings which are better rendered by a subordinate
clause than by a part of a simple sentence. With this proviso we proceed to
examine the various types of clauses.

Table 2. Types of adverbial clauses

TYPES OF ADVERBIAL CLAUSES CONNECTORS

TIME when, whenever, while, as,
I’ll show it to you [when you come back]; or since / ever since,
[When you come back], I’ll… after, before, until/till, as soon
We could do it [whenever you like] as, then, during,
the sooner, no sooner…than,
hardly… when, immediately,
the moment, the minute
PLACE where, wherever
I am always meeting her [where I least expect
her]

24
MANNER as, as if, as though
He solved the problem [as one might have
expected]
COMPARISON as (as…as, not so…as, as
He writes [as incoherently as he speaks] much…as),
Her stepmum treated her more kindly [than more/-er….than…, less…than
any real mum would have done]
REASON OR CAUSE because, as, since, for
He stole the money [because he was out of (sometimes: if), seeing that
work]
[Since we haven't seen him], we must assume Alternative linkers: so,

he isn't coming therefore

[Having heard nothing from her], we assumed

she wasn't coming (reversible +,)
PURPOSE so that, in order that, for fear
She spent most of her time studying [so that that, in case, lest,
she might later get a better job] Non-finite purpose: to-
[To speed up the job], she bought a computer infinitive (specific), for + – ing
(it can be reversed) (general), in order to, so as to,
for +noun/pron+ to-inf
RESULT so
The boy was so exhausted [that he fell asleep so+ adj/adv + that
on the bus] such + (adjective+) noun + that
Weapon production is now increasing so much
[as to constitute a major problem]
CONDITION if, unless, whether
[If I were rich], I would go on a world cruise whether…or not, as/so long as,
(It can be reversed) provided that, supposing, on
We could leave now [provided we called her condition that

25
first]
CONCESSION although/though, even though,
[Although she is over eighty], she's still very even if,
active (reversed;,) while, no matter, however +
Alternative link: in spite of the fact that adj/adv, whatever, wherever,
whenever, as + «be»

26
 2.1 Punctuation peculiarities and subordinating conjunctions

A CONJUNCTION is a word that connects or joins together words, phrases,

clauses, or sentences. There are two kinds of conjunctions, a primary class of
COORDINATING conjunctions and a secondary class called SUBORDINATING
or SUBORDINATE conjunctions. There are also words called CONJUNCTIVE
ADVBERBS; these conjunctive adverbs sometimes act a bit like conjunctions, but
at other times act like plain old adverbs.

Conjunctive adverbs are sometimes used as simple adverbs. If they do not

connect independent clauses, they are not conjunctive adverbs. Then, they are
merely adverbs modifying a verb, adjective, or another adverb. For instance, in the
sentences below, the words accordingly, still, and instead are adverbs. When
functioning this way, the adverb needs no punctuation to separate it from the
surrounding material. For example, see the following sentences:

I knew the test would be hard, so I planned accordingly to study for several
hours.

I was still studying at six o'clock in the evening!

Joey decided to go to a party instead.

In these examples above, there is no comma needed before the words

accordingly, still, and instead. That's because they are acting like adverbs,
modifying verbs like planned and was studying, and decided.

The tricky part is that these same adverbs can also transform into
conjunctive adverbs. Conjunctive adverbs can be used with a comma to introduce a
new independent clause, or they can help connect two independent clauses together
after a semicolon. Typically, each conjunctive adverb is followed by a comma. For
example, look at the comma usage below:

Joey had an upset stomach. Accordingly, he took antacid tablets.

27
 Joey had an upset stomach; accordingly, he took antacid tablets.

The antacids must not have worked. Otherwise, he would quit complaining.

The antacids must not have worked; otherwise, he would quit complaining.

The antacids didn't work for Jill either. Instead, they made her feel even
more sick.

The antacids didn't work for Jill either; instead, they made her feel even
more sick.

Here, the conjuctive adverb helps connect the ideas of the two sentences
together. Note also that after a semicolon, the word beginning the next independent
clauses needs no capitalization.

(A) Two independent clauses can be joined by a comma and a pure

conjunction. However, a comma by itself will not work. (Using a comma without a
conjunction to hook together two sentences creates a comma splice!)

[Independent Clause], pure conjunction [independent clause].

Examples: The gods thundered in the heavens, and the mortals below
cowered in fear.

I dodged the bullet, but Joey was shot seventeen times in the tibia.

Susan appreciated the flowers, yet a Corvette would be a finer gift.

(B) Two independent clauses joined by a conjunctive adverb are separated

by a semicolon. However, the writer still needs to insert a comma after the
conjunctive adverb.

[Independent clause]; conjunctive adverb, [independent clause].

Examples: The gods thundered in the heavens; furthermore, the mortals

below cowered in fear.

28
 The bank robber dodged the bullet; however, Joey was shot seventeen times
in the tibia.

Susan appreciated the flowers; nevertheless, a Corvette would be a finer a

gift.

(C) Two independent clauses not joined by a conjunction are separated by a

semicolon.

[Independent clause]; [independent clause].

Examples: The gods thundered in the heavens; the mortals below cowered
in fear.

The bank robber dodged the bullet; Joey was shot seventeen times in the
tibia.

Susan appreciated the flowers; a Corvette would be a finer gift.

In the examples above, you can see that the semicolon does the same job as
both a comma and a conjunction.

(D) A dependent clause at the beginning of a sentence is introductory, and

like most bits of introductory material, it is usually followed by comma. A
dependent clause following the main (independent) clause is usually not
punctuated.

Examples Using Introductory Clauses:

While the gods thundered in the heavens, the mortals below cowered in fear.

As the bank robber dodged the bullet, Joey was shot seventeen times in the
tibia.

Though Susan appreciated the flowers, a Corvette would be a finer gift.

But on the other hand, no punctuation is necessary for the dependent clause
following the main clause:

29
 The gods thundered in the heavens as mortals below cowered in fear.

The bank robber dodged the bullet while Joey was shot seventeen times in
the tibia.

Susan appreciated the flowers even though a Corvette would be a finer gift.

English has a wide range of subordinate conjunctions: that, if, though,

although, because, when, while, after, before, and so forth…. They are placed
before a complete sentence or independent clause to make that clause dependent.
This dependent clause now needs to attach to another clause that is independent.
Otherwise, a sentence fragment results:

«While the State exists, there can be no freedom. When there is freedom
there will be no State.»

«If everyone demanded peace instead of another television set, then there
would be peace.»

«I can believe anything, provided that it is quite incredible.»

«Every man, wherever he goes, is encompassed by a cloud of comforting

convictions, which move with him like flies on a summer day.»

«A platitude is simply a truth repeated until people get tired of hearing it.»

«I had a funny feeling as I saw the house disappear, as though I had written
a poem and it was very good and I had lost it and would never remember it
again.»

Most subordinate clauses are signalled by the use of a subordinating

conjunction. There are three main types:

– simple subordinators consist of one word:

although, if, since, that, unless, until, whereas, while, etc.

– complex subordinators consist of more than one word:

30
 in order that, such that, granted (that), assuming (that), so (that), as long as,
insofar as, in case, etc.

2.2 Selection of sentences with different types of subordinate clauses

Let’s, mention once more that a subordinate clause is a clause that supports
ideas stated in the main clause. Subordinate clauses are also dependent on main
clauses and would be otherwise incomprehensible without them.

For example:

Because I was leaving.

Concessive Clauses

Concessive clauses are used to concede a given point in an argument. The

principle concessive conjunctions introducing a concessive clause are: Though,
although, even though, while, and even if. They can be placed at the beginning,
internally or at the of the sentence. When placed at the beginning or internally,
they serve to concede a certain part of an argument before proceeding to question
the validity of the point in a given discussion.

For example:

Even though there are many advantages to working the night shift, people
who do so generally feel that the disadvantages greatly outweigh any financial
advantages that might be gained.

By placing the concessive clause at the end of the sentence, the speaker is
admitting a weakness or problem in that particular argument.

For example:

I tried hard to complete the task, though it seemed impossible.

Other examples of concessive clauses are given below.

31
 Despite /in spite of the rain, he walked to the station.

Despite /in spite of being tired, he walked to the station.

The café was crowded, but we found a table.

Benjamin has a car, but he doesn’t often drive it.

Although the café was crowded, we found a table.

Although Benjamin has a car, he doesn’t often drive it.

Although he was tired, he couldn't get to sleep', the first clause is a

concessive clause.

I think his name is John, although I'm not completely sure about that.

While I am willing to help, I do not have much time available.

I'm going to the party even though (even if) it rains.

Although he had laughed at me, (nevertheless) I did not become angry.

Although we had seen them, nevertheless we did not want to speak.

Although we are in Italy, nevertheless we shall not go to Rome.

Time Clauses

Time clauses are used to indicate the time that an event in the main clause
takes place. The main time conjunctions are: when, as soon as, before, after, by the
time, by. They are placed either at the beginning or the end of a sentence. When
placed at the beginning of the sentence, the speaker is generally stressing the
importance of the time indicated.

For example:

As soon as you arrive, give me a call.

Most often time clauses are placed at the end of a sentence and indicate the
time that the action of the main clause takes place.
32
 For example:

I had difficulties with English grammar when I was a child.

Below we will give some other examples of sentences, which contain time
clauses.

When I went to Regina, I visited my aunt.

I visited my aunt when I went to Regina.

After Francois ate dinner, he went to the movies.

Francois went to the movies after he ate dinner.

Before I went to bed, I finished my homework.

I finished my homework before I went to bed.

Place Clauses

Place clauses define the location of the object of the main clause. Place
conjunctions include where and in which. They are generally placed following a
main clause in order to define the location of the object of the main clause.

For example:

I will never forget Seattle where I spent so many wonderful summers.

I was there before I came here.

She stood where I had left her.

She wiped her face with the back of her hand and looked where he looked.

As I was going down the road, I met your sister.

I won’t leave until you come.

I haven’t seen her since she left school.

After the agreement had been signed, the delegation left Moscow.

33
 We have not had any news from him since he left Moscow.

Reason Clauses

Reason clauses define the reason behind a statement or action given in the
main clause. Reason conjunctions include because, as, due to, and the phrase «that
the reason why». They can be placed either before or after the main clause. If
placed before the main clause, the reason clause usually gives emphasis to that
particular reason.

For example:

Because of the tardiness of my response, I was not allowed to enter the

institution.

Generally the reason clause follows the main clauses and explains it.

For example:

I studied hard because I wanted to pass the test.

Conditional clause is a type of adverbial clause that states a hypothesis or

condition, real or imagined.

A conditional clause may be introduced by the subordinating conjunction if

or another conjunction, such as unless, provided that, or in case of.

If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog.

If I find her address, I’ll send her an invitation.

If I found her address, I would send her an invitation.

If he talked to her yesterday, he told her about our plan.

If I had only known, I would have been a locksmith.

Conditions deal with imagined situations: some are possible, some are
unlikely, some are impossible. The speaker/writer imagines that something can or
cannot happen or have happened, and then compares that situation with possible
34
consequences or outcomes, or offers further logical conclusions about the
situation.»

There are six main types of conditional sentence:

For example, the equilibrium between liquid and vapor is upset if the
temperature is increased.

(General rule, or law of nature: it always happens.)

If you start thinking about this game, it will drive you crazy.

(Open future condition: it may or may not happen.)

But if you really wanted to be on Malibu Beach, you'd be there.

(Unlikely future condition: it probably won't happen.)

If I were you, I would go to the conference center itself and ask to see
someone in security.

(Impossible future condition: it could never happen.)

«I would have resigned if they had made the decision themselves,» she said.

(Impossible past condition: it didn't happen.)

If he had been working for three days and three nights then it was in the suit
he was wearing now.

(Unknown past condition: we don't know the facts.)

Special attention should be also paid to comparative subordinate clauses.

This is a lot more difficult than I expected.

She earns as much money as I do.

I think London is less crowded than it used to be.

Rodney Huddleston also determines content clauses.

35
 These usually function as Subject or else Complement of a verb, noun,
adjective or preposition:

i. That they accepted the offer is very fortunate. [Subject]

ii. I KNOW she likes it. [Complement of verb]
iii. The FACT that it's so cheap makes me suspicious. [Complement of
noun]
iv. We stayed in BECAUSE it was raining. [Complement of preposition]
Like main clauses they select for clause type, except that there are no
subordinate imperatives:

i. Declarative He didn't know that everybody supported the proposal.

ii. Closed interrogative He didn't know whether everybody supported the
proposal.
iii. Open interrogative He didn't know which proposal everybody
supported.
iv. Exclamative He didn't know what a lot of them supported the
proposal.
Declaratives are often marked by the subordinator that; and since that occurs
in both the tensed clause and the subjunctive we include both in the declarative
class.

Closed interrogatives have whether or if instead of the Subject-auxiliary

inversion found in main clauses (compare the main clause counterpart of the
subordinate clause in [ii]: Did everybody support the proposal?).

Open interrogatives have the interrogative phrase in initial position and

normally no Subject-auxiliary inversion (again compare the main clause
counterpart of that in [iii]: Which proposal did everybody support?).

Exclamatives mostly have the same form as their main clause counterparts,
as with [iv].

36
 It should be mentioned that Participles can function as Adjectives and
Participles can operate as Adverbials.

Let’s consider these sets of made-up examples:

1a. The noise made by the car suggested an engine problem.

1b. Tired from the trip, we went to bed right after dinner.

2a. The tall women standing in the corner are from Brazil.

2b. Standing in the corner, the tall women watched the other people in the
classroom closely.

1a and 2a show participle clauses that have adjectival function; they come
after the noun and are attached to it and have become part of it. They can be
analyzed as reduced relative clauses:

1a. The noise that was made by the car suggested an engine problem.

2a. The tall women who are standing in the corner are from Brazil.

While the other clauses have the same types of words and the same
organization, they have different functions–and are analyzed as coming from
different sourses. 1b and 2b are actually adverbial in function and meaning.

1b. Because we were tired from the trip, we went to bed right after dinner.

2b. While they were standing in the corner, the tall women watched the
other people in the classroom closely.

Here's are authentic sentences from the sociology source. They're from a
chapter opener that tells the story of an anthropologist's encounters with another
culture.

Anthropologist Napolean Chagnon was nearing the end of a three-day

journey to the home territory of the Yanomamo, one of the most technologically
primitive societies remaining on earth.

37
 The anthropologist's clothes were soaked with perspiration, and his face
and hands were swollenfrom the bites of innumerable gnats swarming around him.

He and his guide climbed from the boat and walked toward the village,
stooping as they pushed their way through the dense undergrowth.

Entering the world of Yanomamo, Chagnon experienced a severe case of

culture shock, personal disorientation that accompanies exposure to an unfamiliar
way of life.

Some twelve thousand Yanomamo live in villages scattered along the border
of Venezuala and Brazil.

Reassured that he would survive at least the afternoon, he was still horrified
by his inablility to make any sense of the people surrounding him.

38
 Conclusion

Writers use different types of subordinate clauses to give their language

complexity and stylistic variety. A clause, in general, is a group of words that
contains a subject and a verb, while a subordinate clause is a clause that cannot
stand on its own as a complete sentence. Instead, it takes the place of a single noun
or acts as a modifier for the sentence. Subordinate clauses are also called
dependent clauses, because they are dependent on the rest of the sentence.

The study focuses on the occurrence of grammatical subordination strategies

and patterns of inter-clausal relations as they are used in interactional language
within the mentioned differing text types of written and spoken English. The aim
of this study was to investigate the frequency of occurrence of different types of
subordinate clauses as well as the form-function dichotomy in the syntax of four
text types. As D. Hudson-Ettle assumes, variation in linguistic performance is
determined by the choices made by the speakers/writers of the discourse and that
these choices may be the result of a variety of influencing factors.

Choices of syntactic strategy may differ in each of the examined text type,
which can be only investigated if grammatical descriptions of a large amount of
comparable language data are available.

Subordinate Clause:

· Contains both a subject and a verb

· Incomplete thought–cannot stand alone as a sentence

· Connected to the independent clause with a subordinating conjunction or

relative pronoun.

39
 Subordinating Conjunctions: after, although, as, as if, as long as, as soon as,
as though, because, before, even though, if, in order that, once, provided that,
since, so that, than, though, unless, until, when, whenever, where, while

Relative Pronouns: that, how, what, who, whom, which, whichever,

whoever, whomever, whose, whether, why

1) Adverb Subordinate Clause

· Modifies verbs, adjectives, or adverbs.

· Begins with a subordinating conjunction.

· Location–anywhere, usually before or after independent clause.

· Punctuation Rules: If it opens sentence, use a comma; if inside sentence, a

comma is usually unnecessary.

2) Adjective Subordinate Clause

· Modifies nouns or pronouns.

· Begins with a relative pronoun.

· Location–always follows the noun it modifies

· Punctuation Rules: If essential (noun is general), do not use commas; if

inessential (noun is specific), use commas.

3) Noun Subordinate Clause

· Functions as a noun.

· Begins with a relative pronoun.

· Punctuation Rules: No comma unless it is an appositive.

Thus, we have analyzed main aspects of different types of subordinate

clauses and their functioning in Modern English.

40
41
 Bibliography

1. Бурлакова, В.В. Синтаксические структуры современного английского

языка / В.В. Бурлакова. – М.: Просвещение, 1984. – 112 с.
2. Вейхман, Г.А. Новое в грамматике современного английского языка:
учебное пособие для вузов / Г.А. Вейхман. – 2-е изд., дополн. и исправ. – М.:
Астрель, АСТ, 2002. – 544 с.
3. Гальперин, И.Р. Текст как объект лингвистического исследования /
И.Р. Гальперин. – М.: Высшая школа, 1981. – 185 с.
4. Гималетдинова Г.К., Халитова Л.К. Английский язык. Аудирование:
Учебное пособие к комплексу «English File» (Oxford). – Казань: Казанский
гос. ун-т, 2007. – 27 с.
5. Грамматика английского языка: Морфология. Синтаксис: учебник /
Н.А. Кобрина, Е.А. Корнеева, М.И. Оссовская, К.А. Гузеева. – СПб.:
Лениздат; Союз, 2001. – 496 с.
6. Гуревич, В.В. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка.
Сравнительная типология английского и русского языков: учебное пособие /
В.В. Гуревич. – М.: Флинта: Наука, 2003. – 168 с.
7. Ельмслев, Л. Пролегомены к теории языка / Л. Ельмслев // Зарубежная
лингвистика: в 3 ч. / общ. ред. В.А. Звегинцева и Н.С. Чемоданова. – М.:
Прогресс, 1999. – Ч. I. – С. 131–256.
8. Звегинцев, В.А. Предложение и его отношение к языку и речи /
В.А. Звегинцев. – 2-е изд. – М.: Эдиториал УРСС, 2001. – 312 с.
9. Зверева Е.А. Типы эмфатической конструкции, встречающиеся в
современной научной и общественно-политической литературе на
английском языке. Сб. «Вопросы методики преподавания иностранных
языков». Москва, 2008.

42
10. Иванова, И.П. Теоретическая грамматика современного английского
языка: учебник / И.П. Иванова, В.В. Бурлакова, Г.Г. Почепцов. – М.: Высшая
школа, 1981. – 285 с.
11. Ившин, В.Д. Синтаксис речи современного английского языка
(Смысловое членение предложения): учебное пособие / В.Д. Ившин. – 2-е
изд., перераб. и дополн. – Ростов н/Д: Феникс, 2002. – 320 с.
12. Израилевич Е.Е., Качалова К.Н. Практическая грамматика английского
языка. Москва, 2009.
13. Кауфман С.И. Некоторые особенности стиля американской технической
литературы. М., 2006.
14. Качалова К.Н., Израилевич Е.Е. Практическая грамматика английского
языка, Москва, 2007.
15. Ковальницкая О.В. Выявление значения многозначных глаголов из
грамматических связей. Сб. «Вопросы методики преподавания иностранных
языков». Москва, 2008.
16. Левицкая Т.Р., ФитерманА. М. Теория и практика перевода с английского
языка на русский. М., 2006.
17. Лихтенштейн Е.С. Редактирование научной книги. М., 2007.
18. Михельеон Т.Н. Некоторые вопросы методики обучения переводу текста
по специальности. Сб. «Грамматические разработки по английскому языку».
Москва, 2007.
19. Новицкая Т.М., Кучин Н.Д. Практическая грамматика английского языка.
Москва, 2006.
20. Попова Е.К. Техника перевода с английского языка на русский (учебное
пособие). Ленинград, 2009.
21. ПредвечнаяЛ. А. Практический курс английского языка. Ростов-на-Дону,
2006.
22. Рецкер Я.И. Стилистико-грамматическое значение абсолютных
конструкций в современном английском языке. М., 2009.

43
23. Федоров А.В. Введение в теорию перевода (лингвистические проблемы).
2 изд. Москва, 2008.
24. Яковлев В.Н., Кацюба А.В. Сборник научно-популярных и технических
статей на английском языке. М., 2009.
25. Biber, D., Conrad, S. & Reppen, R. (2002): Corpus Linguistics, Cambridge
University Press.
26. Downing, A. & Locke, F.A. (1992): A University Course in English Grammar,
Prentice Hall International (UK).
27. Gethin. H. (1992): Grammar in Context, Proficiency level English, Thomas
Nelson and sons Ltd.
28. Greenbaum, S., Quirk, R., Leech. G., Svartvik, J. (1993): A Student’s
Grammar of the English Language, Longman Group UK Ltd.
29. Hopper, P.J. & Closs Traugott E. (1993): Grammaticalization, Cambridge
University Press.
30. Huddleston, R. (1995): English Grammar an outline, Cambridge University
Press.
31. Lock, G. (1997): Functional English Grammar, Cambridge University Press.
32. Rafajlovičová R. (2002): A Survey of the English Syntax, Prešov: FHPV.
Размещено на Allbest.ru

44