Words by themsclves, or words strung together in a random way, 69

are of relatively little use, a fact known by anyone who has visited
a foreign country armed only with a dictionary, and no
knowledge of the language. Does me - bus mean 'I am a bus', 'A
bus hit me', 'I carne by bus', or 'I want to go by bus'? So let us
now look at how words may be combined together into longe r
utterances.
In this chapter, we shall consider, first, the ways in which words
may be linked together to form larger units. Second, we shall
discuss how to analyze sentences into their component parts, or
constituents in linguistic terminology. Third, we shall suggest
ways of representing this analysis. o
•••••••

Linking words together

Different languages use different devices for showing the
relationship of one word to another. Most languages have one
or two favourite devices. The following are especially common.

Word order
The device used most frequently in English is word order:
The large spider (rightened Aunt Matilda.
Aunt Matilda frightened the large spider.
The words themselves in these two sentences are identical. It is
the word order which indicates who frightened whom, and that
it is the spider which is large, not Aunt Matilda. Languages
which rely heavily on word order are known as configurational
languages.

Inflections
In a language such as Latin, word endings or inflections,
indica te the relationship bet'Neen words. In the sentence:
Magna aranea perterruit Matildam amitam.
Large spider frightened Matilda aunt
This chapter discusses the 'The large spider frightened Aunt Ma tilda' .
ways in which words can be the word order is irrelevant. The sentence would still mean the
linked together to form larger
units. It explains how to
same if the words were arranged quite differently as in:
analyze sentences into their Magna Matildam perterruit amitam aranea.
'constituents' (component Large Matilda frightened aunt spider
parts), and shows ways of
representing this type of
analvsis.
70 The endings alone show that it was the spider whicn terrificd ln this sentence, the and duck ean be replaced by a singlc word 71
Aunt Matilda, not the rcverse, and that it is the spider, not Aunt su~h as Dana/d, it, without altering the basic sentenee pattcrn.
Matilda, which is large. ln linguistic terminology, Latin is a non- Thls suggests that these two words are closely linked and
configurational language. Word order is not critical, though together constitute a single, larger eomponent. 5imilarl~, the
some word order preferenees are found. words the and burglar go together, since they also eould be
replaeed by a word sueh as Albert, him. 50 as a first stage, we
Function words have reduced a sentence with five original eomponents down to
three more basie ones (Figure 7.1):
Another eommon device, used to some extent in both English
and Latin, is the use of function words. These are words sueh
as 0(, by, that, which indica te relationships between parts of I the burglar
o
•••••••
the sentence:
Aunt Matilda was terri(ied by a spider .
[ The duck

figure 7.1

The Queen of Sheba.

I know tbat Penelope will come. Of these three components, the final two could be replaced by
Matilda amita ab aranea perterrita est. a single word such as slept. We therefore eonclude that thcy
Matilda aunt by spider frightened is[was] eould be bracketed together as a single, larger component. We
Thcre is some disagreement as to what counts as a function have therefore reduced a sentence with five components down
word in English. Part of the problem is that several English to a basic two (Figure 7.2):
words, sueh as to, can be used both as a funetion word, and as
a content word (one with intrinsie meaning):
Paul wants to go hame. (function word) [ The duc~l
Peter went to the river. (content word 'towards', 'as far as') lhe burglar ) I
ln addition, there are borderline cases, where to does not fit figure 7.2
well intoeither type of usage:
Andrew's suit was made to arder. The linguistic procedure which divides sentences into their
It seems tome a gaod idea. component parts or constituents in this way is known as
constituent analysis. The test of substitution is basic to such an
analysis, though the process is not always as straightforward as
the example above.
Constituent analysis
5entences are not simply random words strung together by
means of various deviees. We do not find English sentenees
sueh as:
*The large spider terrified Aunt Matilda swims af Sheba by Tree diagrams
a caro The sueeessive layers of eonstituents whieh make up a sentenee
lnstead, English (like every other language) has a limited ean be shown most cIearly on a teee diagram - so ealled
number of reeurring sentenee patterns. A fundamental because its branches resemble the branches of a tree. ln a tree
technique of syntactic analysis is to identify these patterns by a diagram, a basic sentenee type at the top branehes downwards
process of suceessive substitution. Take the sentence: in ever-inereasing eomplexity (Figure 7.3).
Tbe duck bit the burglar.
 Rewrite rules 73
An aI~ernativ~ way of expressing the information found on a
tree dIagram IS by means of rewritc ruIes. A rewrite rule is a
replacement rule, in which the symbol to the left of an arrow is
replaced by an expanded form written to the right of the arrow.
S-NP VP
means 'RepIace the symbol S by NP VP'.
VP-V NP
figure 7.3

o
•••••••
The advantage of a tree diagram is that each join or node on
the tree can be labelled, so that the whole construction becomes
means 'Replace the symbol VP by V NP'.
NP-D N

ciearer (Figure 7.4). means 'Replace the symbol NP by D N'.

S (sentence) The essential structure of The duck bit the burglar can
therefore be summarized in just three ruIes:
~ S-NP VP
NP (noun phrase) VP (verb phrase)
VP-V NP
NP-D N
~ ~
On a tree diagram, these thrce rules would appear as in Figure
7.6.
O (determlner) N (noun) V (verb) ~
O N S
~
NP VP
I I
The duck bit the burglar ~
V NP
figure 7.4
~
O N
A family metaphor is used to refer to the relationships on a tree figure 7.6
(Figure 7.5). A higher no de is a mother, and the nodes on the
branches immediately beneath her are her daughters. Daughters
of the same mother are known as sisters. A mother is said to These branching mIes can then be supplemented by lexical
substitution mIes:
dominate the nodes beneath her. She immediately dominates
her daughters, but she also dominates her granddaughters, and N - duck, burglar
great-granddaughters, as it were. V -. bit
MOTHER
D -. the

~
DAUGHTER DAUGHTER
~~
SISTERS

figure 7.5
 S
belong together as a constituent elsewhere, since words that are
75
NP----------- VP
grou~ed tog.ether in
constltuent 111 other
one sentence are likely to recur as a single
sentences. One way of checking this is to
~ ~ construct sentcnces in which the original words occur in a
o N V NP diffcrent order:

~ Up the clock ran the mouse.

o N *The mouse ran the clock up.
I I These sentenees suggest that the words up the clock should be
The duck bit the burglar braeketed together, since they can be moved as a chunk to the
front of the sentence. We may therefore analyze the sentence as:
figure 7.7
[The mouse] [ran] [up the c/ock.]
The great advantage of rewrite rules is that they are perfectly and draw the tree diagram as in Figure 7.8.
explicit. They do not leave anything to the imagination. By S
following them, you could produce a perfeet English sentenee
even if you did not know any English, sinee the rules are applied NP ------------- VP
meehanieally, step-by-step, one symbol at a time.
Note, however, that the above rewrite rules eould also have
resulted in the sentenee: O
~
N V
/~ PP (preposition phrase)
~
The burglar bit the duck.
P (preposition) NP
This does not matter, as the sequenee is a perfeetly good /
sentenee of English (though admittedly a somewhat unlikely
one). The rewrite rules are there to tell us what is a well-formed The mouse
I ~~
ran up the c10ck
English sentenee, not to give us information about the probable
behaviour of burglars. figure 7.8

The sentence discussed above must be analyzed differently from

Identifying constituents another, superficially similar sentence:

As we have seen, every sentenee ean be broken down into The mouse ate up the cheese.
successive layers of eonstituents. However, not all sentences can We can show the difference by switching the sentence around:
be analyzed with as little trouble as The duck bit the burglar. *Up the cheese ate the mouse.
Consider the sentence:
(Compare: Up the clock ran the mouse.)
The mouse ran up the clock. The mouse ate the cheese up.
How should this be analyzed? Should we braeket [ran up] (Compare: *The mouse ran the clock up.)
together, on the assumption that these words eould be replaeed We may therefore analyze the second sentence as:
by a word such as climbed? Or should we braeket [up the
[The mouse] [ate up] [the cheese.]
clock] together, noting that the whole phrase could be replaced
by a single word such as upwards? Problems of this type are and draw the tree diagram as in Figure 7.9, using the extra
solved by seeing whether the groups of words in question node-Iabe1s VB for 'phrasal verb' and PRT for 'particle':
76
s Of course, other types of phrase can occur in some of thesc 77
positions. But an NP such as the cat can occur in all of them.

;
~
~
N VP
---------- NP
Consequently, if we find a phrase which we suspect might be an
NP, we can apply these (and other) tests. For example, consider

I
::l
o O N VB the sentences below:
CIl

~~ Uncle Harry kicked the cato

V PRT O N
Suddenly Harry kicked the cat.
3 I I I I
CII

lhe mouse
10 order to find out whcther thc first two words in each seoteoce
ate up the cheese
are an NP, we cao apply the NP tests listed below:

o
••••••••
figure 7.9

Constituents behave in predictable ways, since languages ring the

• At the begioniog of a sentence before a verb:
Uncle Harry kicked the cat.
Suddenly Harry kicked the cat.
o
••••••••

changes on a few recurring patterns. It is therefore possible to • At the end of a sentence after a verb:
build up a store of specific 'tests' for the presence of a particular The cat scratched Uncle Harry.
constituent in a given language. As up the clock suggests, one test *The cat scratched suddenly Harry.
for a PP (preposition phrase = phrase containing a preposition) is • After by in a passive senteoce:
that a preposition cannot immediately follow its NP. Just as you The cat was kicked by Uncle Harry.
cannot say: *The cat was kicked by suddenly Harry.
*The mouse ran the clock up. • After an auxiliary verb in questions:
Did Uncle Harry kick the cat?
so you cannot say:
*Fene/la went the woods into. ••Did sudd~trly Harry kick the cat?
The failure of suddenly Harry to pass most of these NP tests
*Doris swam the bridge under.
shows that it cannot be an NP, whereas the success af Uncle
Let us now go on to consider this notion of 'tests' further, by Harry indicates that it probably is an NP.
considering 'NP tests'.

NP tests Adding in extra patterns

So far, our rewrite rules have dealt with only one structure, the
English NPs (noun phrases) recur in certain specifiable pattem underlying The duck bit the burglar. Let us now add in
positions. Some of the main places in which they occur are: some others. Consider the sentence:
• At the beginning of a sentence before the verb: The duck slept in the bath.
The cat ate the canary. This has the same basic division into NP VP as The duck bit the
• At the end of a sentence after the verb: burglar. But the structure af the VP differs. ln The duck slept in
The canary feared the cato the bath, the verb is followed by a preposition phrase (PP)
(Figure 7.10).
• After by in a passive sentence:
The canary was eaten by the cat. The extra rewrite ruIes required for this are:
• After an auxiliary verb in questions:
vP-v PP
PP-P NP
Did the cat eat the canary?
 s The rewrite rule in this case is: 79

NP
------------- VP
VP -. V NP PP
So far, then, we have three different rcwritc rulcs for ElIglish
~ ~ VPs:
D N V PP
VP -. V NP The duck bit the burglar.
~
P NP VP -. V (PP) The duck slept. The duck slept in the bat/;o
VP -. V NP PP The burglar put the duck in a sack.
~
D N It would be useful to combine these three separate rulcs. As a
I I first suggestion, one might simply number the types of verb (Vi
The duck slept in the bath for a verb such as bit, V2 for slept, V3 for put), and enclose
them in another type of bracket { } which is used to denote
alternative possibilities:
figure 7.10

However, the PP is not an essential part of the structure. It is an

optional extra, since The duck slept is a well-formed sentence by V3 NP PP
itself. This can be shown by putting brackets round the PP in the VP -. {~~:) }
rewrite rule, indicating that it is optional: This means: 'Rewrite the VP as either Vi NP, or V2 (PP), or V3
NP PP'. However, if we wanted to include the full range of
VP -. V (PP) alternatives available in an English VP, the rewrite rules would
The rewrite rule above therefore underlies both The duck slept become extremely long and complicated. A neater solution is to
in the bath, and The duck slept. In the first, the optional PP has keep the rew:rite rules fairly simple, and to use them in
been selected. In the second, it has been omitted. conjunction with a lexicon (dictionary) which specifies the
structure associated with each V:
Let us now consider another sentence:
bit V [-NP]
The burglar put the duck in a sack.
slept V [-(PP)]
This differs from the previous structures discussed in that it is put V [-NP PP]
essential to have both an NP and a PP after the V (Figure 7.11).
If either were omitted, the sentence would be ill-formed: First, the item in question is listed, then the fact that it is a verb
(V). In the square brackets come the structures associated with
1''Theburglar put the duck. it. The long dash [-] indicates the place where the verb is
"'The burglar put in a sack. inserted, so [-NP] says 'The verb in question must be followed
by an NP'.
With these lexical entries, we need only one rewrite rule for the
NP VP three types of verb:
~ ~ VP -. V (NP) (PP)
D N V NP PP
This rule says: 'A VP consists of a V optionally followed byan
~~ NP anel/or a PP'. It accounts for ali the possibilities discussed
D N P
A
D
NP

N
above, since one can slot in a verb only if it fits the structure
choscn. For cxample, suppose we had chosen both the optional
items, NP and PP, we must then slot in a verb followed by NP
I I PP, in this case put. Similarly, if we had chosen V alone, the only
80 V which fits in this case is sleep. Maurice took a photograph of a p/atypus. 81

I
le
With a detailed lexicon of this type, which can be cxpanded to
include other word classes also, we no longe r need substitution
~
S

I
rules such as: V -t bit, N -t burglar. NP VP
Let us therefore summarize the rewrite rules and lexical cntries
for: ~
V NP
The duck bit the burglar.
~
The duck slept. O ?
The duck s/ept in the bath.
The burglar put the duck in a sack.

A Rewrite rules N
~

~
o
••••••••

P NP
S -tNP VP
VP -t V (NP) (PP) ~
NP-tD N O N
PP -tp NP \ I
Maurice took a photograph of a platypus
B Lexicon
burg/ar N figure 7.12
duck N
sack N The sequence a photograph of a platypus is c1early a noun
bath N phrase (NP) and the words photograph and p/atypus are no uns
bit V [-NP] (N). But what of the intervening node, comprising photogra{Jh
s/ept V [-(PP)] af a platypus? It seems to be something between an N and a fu!,!
put V [-NP PP] NP, so what is it? A useful solution is to give the label N
the D (pronounced N-bar, since it has a bar along the top) to
a D something that is neither ª
simple N, nor a whole NP. Some
tn P people ais o give the label N (N-double bar) to a whole NP. (In
Figure 7.13, a triangle has been drawn in place of the details of
af course, if more data had been considered, the rules and the the PP. This is a standard procedure which avoids wasting time
lexicon would have to be complicated further. For example, if and space when the details are irrelevant to the point under
we had included a proper name such as Donald, the lexicon discussion. )
wouId have to specify which nouns are found with a determiner
(D), as in the duck, a sack, and which not, as in Donald not *a NP ar fJ
Donald. However, we set out to write ruIes for the sentence
patterns in question, and we have done this as economically as ~
possibIe. O N
~
N PP

Layers of branches I ~
a photograph of a platypus
The tree diagrams we have considered so far have reIatively few
Iayers. But consider a sentence such as:
figure 7.13
 The use of bars has one further major advantage: they can be IP
82 83
used with adjectives (A), verbs (V), and prepositions (P), as welJ
~
as with nouns (N). It is then easy to see similarities in structure I V
between NPs, APs (adjective phrascs), VPs and PPs which wcre
not so evident before. It turns out that the head (main word) in I 1
to fish
one type of phrase is in a very similar position to the head in
will
another. ln other words, a noun in an NP is likely to be in a
-ed
paralJellocation to an adjective in an AP, a verb in a VP and a
preposition in a PP. For example, the AP very proud of the figure 7.15
platypus has a structure that is similar in its branching pattern
to the NP a photograph of the platypus. (ln Figure 7.14, DEG
stands for 'degree'.) Complex sentences
AP arà $0 far, we have assumed that ali sentences are simple ones such as:
~ The duck bit the burglar.
DEG A The mouse ran up the c/ock.
~ In practice, however, many sentences have one or more sentence-
A PP like structures attached to them or inserted inside them. Consider:
I ~ Archibald played tennis, and Peter went fishing.
very proud of the platypus
Here we have two sub-sentences of equal importance attached
together to form a single one. This process is known as
figure 7.14 conjoining. lntheory an indefinite number of sentences could be
joinecl together:
A number of details still have to be worked out concerning X- Archibald played tennis, and Peter went fishing, and Pip
bar syntax or X-bar theory, the na me of this method of dealing played cricket, and Mary washed her hair, and Drusilla
with sentence patterns. For example, there is some controversy cIimbed the EiffeI tower ...
as to how many layers of bars it is useful to set up. But the
theory appears to be here to stay, and it plays an important role However, conjoining is not the only process by which sentence-
in Chomsky's work. like structures are linkecl together. More often subsidiary
sentences are inserted into one main sentence. This is known as
Yet another way of handling layers has emerged in recent years, embedding (Figure 7.16):
partly combined with X-bar syntax. Functional phrases, that is,
phrases introduced by function words (Chapter 6) have a The rumour that the dinosaur had escaped worried the publico
structure similar to lexical phrases, it has been claimed. For
example, inflections (verb attachments) and the accompanying I The rumour worried the public I
verb can be labelled an inflectional phrase (IP). 50 to fish, will
fish, and fished are ali IPs. In English, the inflection, I,
some times known as INFL, mostly comes before the verb, as
with to, will, though some times aner it, as with fished (Figure figure 7.16
7.15).
 In theory, a sentence can have an indefinite number of sentences Mavis believes the burglar took the duck. (Figure 7.19). 85
embedded in it. In The (act that the rumour that the dinosaur
had escaped worried the lJUblic is not surprising, the simple s ~
:J
..•
<li
sentence has two others embedded in it (Figure 7.17). ~
:J
(')
<li
NP VP 'O
Simple senlence: DI
I lhe fact is not surprising I I~ ~
N V S 3cn
Embedding 1: worried the public
II~ believes
Mavis lhe burglar took the duck
Embedding 2: (that) the dinosaur had escaped

o
•••••••
figure 7.17 figure 7.19 o
•••••••

Another example of embedding is the old nursery rhyme (Figure 50 far, this chapter has shown how linguists analyze sentence
7.18). patterns, with particular attention to configurationallanguages
(those which rely on word order). There are extra problems
involved in the investigation of non-configurational languages,
lhis is the cat ] but the notion of checking whether one constituent (component
part of sentence) can be substituted for another is basic to a11
syntactic analyses.

Verbs: the syntax-meaning overlap

Verbs straddle the gap between syntax and semantics: the
structure surrounding them provides clues to their meaning.
Take the nonsense sentence:
figure 7.18 The wickwock jipped.
Here, the wickwock has clearly done something alone, maybe
Both embedding and conjoining illustrate an important property jumped, or hiccuped. Or consider:
of language - that of recur5ion.
The wickwock grunched the mobe.
Recur5ion is the possibility of repeatedly re-using the same
construction, 50 that there is no fixed Iimit to the Iength of In this case, the wickwock has done something or other to
sentences. This has important implications. It means that we can something else.
never make a complete Iist of a11the possible sentences of any The nouns accompanying verbs display different semantic roles,
language. Instead, we must work out the system of rules which ar, in more recent terminology, thematic relations - from the
underlie the sentences. word theme - the Iabel sometimes given to a noun involved in
It is quite easy to incorpora te recursion into the rewrite rules, if an action, though not initiating it, as in:
one allows a symbol such as VP to be rewritten to include an 5: The snowball (theme) rolled down the hill.
VP-+V S But how many different roles are there? Some are obvious. An
This ruIe (which would need to be'combined with the other VP agent initiates action, and a patient receives it, as in:
ruIe discussed earlier) a110wsone to generate a sentence such as: The dog (agent) chewed abone (patient).
86 A recipient receivcs somcthing, as in:
r.n
~
Paul sent a letter to Patsy.
:J
r+ Patsy received a letter front Paul.
~
o~:J But problems arise. Consider:
-g Veronica leapt into the water.
~
~
.,:J Is the wate'r a recipient? Or is it a goaI Veronica is aiming at?
til
And supposing Veronica had fallen into the water, what then?
This example shows the difficulty af deciding how many roles
there are, and which one is which. The overall aim is to specify
a set of re1ations which can be used to describe any human
C) language, and discussions continue.
-..J
This chapter has looked at syntactic patterns, and also drawn
attention to the overlap between syntax and meaning. The next
cha pter will discuss how linguists handle meaning.

Questions
1 Suggest three ways in which languages show the relationship
of one word to another.
2 What is a tree diagram, and why is it usefu/?
3 What are rewrite rules?
4 Draw a tree diagram for each of the following sentences:
The bus ran down the dog.
The boy ran down the street.
5 Distinguísh between conjoining and embedding. Give
examples.
6 What are thematic relations?