Sentence structure

2 Functions

As I pointed out in Chapter 1, understanding the structure of a sentence involves

knowing not only what its constituents are, but also the category and the
function of those constituents. As you’ll see in this and the next chapter, these
three aspects of syntactic analysis are closely bound up with one another. This
chapter is mainly about syntactic functions, and about how function relates to
category and constituency.
A systematic sentence analysis is best begun, not by immediately considering
the words in the sentence, but by first identifying the very largest phrases – those
phrases which are immediate constituents, not of any other phrase, but of the
sentence itself. So my first illustration of the relationship between constituents,
their categories and their functions, will concern the functions and categories of
the immediate constituents of the sentence itself.

Subject and predicate

To be sure of identifying only the largest (i.e. immediate) constituents of the
sentence I shall, wherever possible, divide the sentence into the fewest possible
parts, i.e. into just two. An example of the simplest possible complete sentence
structure is [1]:
[1] Ducks paddle.

Other such examples are: Max coughed, Pigs fly, Empires decline, and Martha
retaliated. In all such cases, we have no option but to analyse the sentence as
consisting of two parts, as in [2]:
[2]

But what about more complicated sentences? A speaker’s ability to recognise the
structure of the sentences of her language is largely a matter of being able to

24
 SUBJECT AND PREDICATE

perceive a similar pattern across a wide range of apparently different sentences.

Take [3], for example:
[3] The ducks are paddling away.

We want to say that [3] has the same general structure as [1]. Like [1], it’s
divisible into two constituents, and the two constituents are of the same
general kind (category) as the corresponding constituents of [1]. Furthermore,
they have exactly the same syntactic functions as those in [1] – put another
way, the relation between them is the same.
In asking which sequence of words in [3] corresponds to ducks in [1], we’re
asking which sequence of words in [3] could be replaced by the single word
ducks while leaving a grammatical sentence. The answer can only be the ducks.
Replacing that sequence by ducks yields the well-formed sentence Ducks are
paddling away. In each of these sentences, both ducks and the ducks could be
replaced by the same single word they. And the rest of [3] – are paddling away
– can be replaced by the single word paddle (from [1]), giving the well-formed
sentence The ducks paddle.
This exhaustively divides [3] into two parts, as in [4]:
[4] [ The ducks] + [are paddling away].

The same division is shown in [5] and [6]:

[5] [ Those gigantic ducks] + [were paddling away furiously].
[6] [ The mouth-watering duck on the table] + [won’t be paddling away
again].

All these sentences ([1] – [6]) have the same general structure. They only differ
at a lower (more detailed) level in their hierarchical structure. At the general
level that concerns us here, they illustrate the same relation and the same func-
tions. In making this first division, we have divided these sentences into two
constituents, the first of which is traditionally said to function as subject, and
the second as predicate.
One way of thinking of these functions is to think of the subject as being
used to mention something (e.g. the ducks) and the predicate as used to say
something about the subject (e.g. that they were paddling away). The subject
generally identifies what the sentence is about; the predicate identifies what’s
being said about it. This is usually a good way of identifying subject and predi-
cate but, as we’ll see below, there are sentences in which it doesn’t work.
In Exercise 6 of Chapter 1, I raised the question of how sunbathed fits into the
structure of Old Sam sunbathed beside a stream, and offered three alternative
analyses. Each analysis makes a different claim as to what the immediate con-
stituents of that sentence are. On the basis of the discussion so far, can you

25
CHAPTER 2 SENTENCE STRUCTURE: FUNCTIONS

see which of those analyses is being adopted here? The answer is given in the
footnote to this page.1

Sentences can be a good deal more complicated than the ones we’ve looked
at here. In fact, theoretically, there’s no limit. If you’re presented with a more
complicated sentence and you’re in doubt as to the correct subject~predicate
division, a simple test can be applied:
Question test for subject:
Turn the sentence into a question that can be answered by ‘yes’ or ‘no’ (a yes/
no question). The phrase functioning as subject is the one that changes its
position when the sentence is so changed.
You may remember from Chapter 1 that the movement of a sequence of
words in forming a construction shows that it is a constituent. This particular
movement test confirms not only that the ducks, those gigantic ducks, and that
mouth-watering duck on the table are constituents, but that they are functioning
as the subjects of the sentences:

[7]

Now form the yes/no questions that correspond to [5] and [6].

You may find you intuitively know what the correct subject~predicate division
is without applying the question movement test. Even so, the test is important
because it’s actually part of the definition of what a ‘subject’ is. It’s the subject
that changes position in ‘yes/no’ questions. Here are the questions that corres-
pond to [5] and [6].
[8] Were [those gigantic ducks] paddling away furiously?
[9] Won’t [the mouth-watering duck on the table] be paddling away again?

The question test is essential in cases like the following:

[10a] It is snowing again. [10b] There is nothing to eat.

In [10a] it is in fact impossible to think of the predicate (is snowing again) as

being used to say something about what it mentions because it doesn’t mention
anything – it’s an ‘empty subject’ (in technical terms, an ‘expletive’). Notice that
[10a] is not an answer to the question ‘What is snowing again?’, which is an
odd question anyway. The same goes for there in [10b]: there doesn’t mention

1
It is analysis (a): Subject: [Old Sam] Predicate: [sunbathed beside a stream]. See also Further Exercise 3
in Chapter 1.

26
 SUBJECT AND PREDICATE

anything (it’s an expletive). Nevertheless, it is the subject of [10a] and there the
subject of [10b] precisely because those are the expressions that change position
in the yes/no questions:

[11a] [11b]

Using this test, identify the subjects of the following sentences:

[12] Some nasty accident could have occurred.
[13] The clown in the make-up room doesn’t want to perform.
[14] Elizabeth and Leicester are rowing on the river.
[15] None of her attempts to give up chocolate were successful.
[16] As a matter of fact, the man you paid to do it has been arrested.

Examples [12]–[15] have the following subject~predicate structures:

[12] [Some nasty accident] [could have occurred].
(Could some nasty accident have occurred?)
[13] [ The clown in the make-up room] [doesn’t want to perform].
(Doesn’t the clown in the make-up room want to perform?)
[14] [Elizabeth and Leicester] [are rowing on the river].
(Are Elizabeth and Leicester rowing on the river?)
[15] [None of her attempts to give up chocolate] [were successful].
(Were none of her attempts to give up chocolate successful?)

I included [16] to show that the subject doesn’t always begin the sentence. I
hope you discovered this for yourself in applying the question test. The question
that corresponds to this example is:
[16] As a matter of fact, has the man you paid to do it been arrested?
This identifies the man you paid to do it as the subject. The phrase as a matter of
fact hasn’t moved in forming the question, so it’s not part of the subject. Since
as a matter of fact belongs neither within subject nor within predicate, [16] is one
sentence that can’t be exhaustively analysed into a two-part, subject~predicate
structure. For the moment, I’ll concentrate on sentences that can.
A temptation the question movement test will help you avoid is that of taking
the first string of words that could be a subject as actually being the subject of
the sentence you’re considering. Look again at [13], [14], and [15]. [13] begins
with the sequence the clown, [14] with Elizabeth, and [15] with none of her
attempts. All these expressions could be subjects (see [17]–[19] below) but they
are not the subjects of [13]–[15].
[17] The clown refuses to perform.
[18] Elizabeth excels at Real Tennis.
[19] None of her attempts were really serious.

27
CHAPTER 2 SENTENCE STRUCTURE: FUNCTIONS

The temptation to identify less than the whole of the relevant phrase crops up
in all constituent analysis. In the case of subjects, the question test helps. For
example, if you take the subjects of [17]–[19] to be the subjects of [13]–[15], all
attempts to form the appropriate questions will result in ungrammatical sentences
– gobbledegook, in fact. In [14], for example, it results in *And Leicester are
Elizabeth rowing on the river?
In general, taking less than the whole of the subject will leave you with a
residue that won’t count as a well-formed predicate. For example, if the clown,
Elizabeth, and none of her attempts are taken to be the subjects of [13]–[15]
respectively, the following are left as residues:
[20] in the make-up room doesn’t want to perform
[21] and Leicester are rowing on the river
[22] to give up chocolate were successful.

But, I hope you agree, these don’t hang together as phrases, they don’t form
units of sense, and it’s difficult to see what their function could be. They can’t be
predicates; we couldn’t say, for example, that to give up chocolate were successful
is predicated as being true of none of her attempts.
In applying the question movement test to the following examples, you’ll find
that you have to modify it slightly. Form the yes/no questions that correspond
to these examples.
[23] My new duck lays lightly boiled eggs.
[24] Elizabeth and Leicester excel at Real Tennis.
[25] The chiropodist fell in love with most of his patients.

As you will have discovered, the appropriate questions are formed by introduc-
ing a form of the verb do. For the purposes of this test, it’s convenient to assume
that do is introduced as in [26]–[28],
[26] My new duck does lay lightly boiled eggs.
[27] Elizabeth and Leicester do excel at Real Tennis.
[28] The chiropodist did fall in love with most of his patients.

and that the questions are formed from [26]–[28] by the now familiar movement
of the subject (shown just in [29]), giving

[29]
[30] Do [Elizabeth and Leicester] excel at Real Tennis?
[31] Did [the chiropodist] fall in love with most of his patients?

This difference between [12]–[16] and [23]–[25] is explained in Chapter 6.

28
 NOUN PHRASE AND VERB PHRASE

Noun Phrase and Verb Phrase

So much, then, for the functions – subject and predicate – of the immediate
constituents of the sentence. I’ll return to the functions of constituents, in a
more general way, later in the chapter. The question that now arises is: What
kinds – categories – of phrases function as subjects and as predicates? We’ve
seen that such phrases can vary widely in their form and complexity. Nevertheless,
all the subjects we’ve looked at have one thing in common: they all contain,
and are centred on, the same category of word: noun (n). They are all noun
phrases (np). The single words that can replace them are all nouns or pro-
nouns. The phrases functioning as predicates, on the other hand, all contain,
and are centred on, a verb (v). They are all verb phrases (vp). Predictably,
they are all replaceable by single-word verbs. For example, the ducks and those
gigantic ducks are Noun Phrases centred on the Noun ducks. The clown in the
make up room is a Noun Phrase, centred on the Noun clown. Don’t worry if
you’re unsure which words are nouns or verbs at this stage. You’ll get a rough
idea indirectly during the course of this chapter but we look properly at cat-
egories in the next chapter. You can assume that any phrase that can function
as a subject is a Noun Phrase.
You might ask: Why do we need to distinguish between the category and
the function of a constituent? We need to do this because most categories of
phrase have a variety of different functions. Although we’re assuming subjects
are always Noun Phrases, this doesn’t mean all Noun Phrases function as sub-
ject. For example, the Noun Phrase the chiropodist functions as subject in [25]
above, but not in [32]:
[32] The pianist has rejected the chiropodist.

Notice it doesn’t change position in the question Has the pianist rejected the
chiropodist? Here it’s the pianist that has moved. The chiropodist is here part of
the predicate rejected the chiropodist. It’s a constituent of the Verb Phrase and
has a function we’ll look at in Chapter 4.
Below is a list of phrases. Some are Noun Phrases, some are Verb Phrases
and some are phrases belonging to categories not yet introduced. Identify the
phrases – as Noun Phrase, Verb Phrase, or ‘other’ – by combining them ( just
two at a time) and seeing which combinations make well-formed sentences of
subject (NP) + predicate (VP).

(a) remind me of you

(b) as quickly as he could
(c) soggy chips
(d) pamphlets advertising new syntactic theories

29
CHAPTER 2 SENTENCE STRUCTURE: FUNCTIONS

(e) by the end of this week

(f) suddenly rained from the sky
(g) are in demand.

The only well-formed subject~predicate combinations are:

(c) + (a), (c) + (f), (c) + (g), (d) + (a), (d) + (f), and (d) + (g).

Since (c) and (d) can function as subjects they are NPs. (a), (f), and (g), which
can function as predicates, are all VPs. (a) is centred on the verb remind, (f) is
centred on the verb rained, and (g) is centred on the verb are. As for (b) and (e),
they don’t combine, in any order, with any of the other phrases nor with each
other, so they belong to categories other than NP and VP.
We can now include information about the categories of the immediate con-
stituents of the sentence in a phrase marker, by labelling the appropriate nodes,
as in [33]:

[33]

The diagram has the obvious interpretation: the sequence those gigantic ducks
forms a constituent belonging to the category Noun Phrase; the sequence were
paddling away furiously forms a constituent belonging to the category Verb
Phrase; the NP and the VP together form a sentence (S).
In the next few chapters, all our phrase markers for sentences are going to
look like [33], with S immediately dominating NP (to the left) and VP (to the
right). Since I’ve been concerned just with the immediate constituents of the
sentence itself, NP and VP, I’ve used the triangle notation for them to avoid
giving further details about their internal structure. So, the phrase marker in
[33] serves as a partial analysis of all the sentences considered in this chapter –
with the exception of [16], which, for reasons already given, is a special case.
A point to note about [33] – and phrase markers in general – is that a
specification of the functions of the constituents (given in brackets in [33])
is not strictly part of the phrase marker, and is not normally included. This is
because the functions of constituents follows directly from other information
already contained in the phrase marker – information about category and posi-
tion. Thus:

30
 DEPENDENCY AND FUNCTION

The subject of a sentence is the NP immediately dominated by S.

The predicate of a sentence is the VP immediately dominated by S.

This definition of subject in terms of the phrase marker will confirm that
the chiropodist is not the subject of [32]. Here’s the phrase marker.
[34]

In [34] there are two NPs, the pianist and the chiropodist, but only the first is
immediately dominated by S. So the NP the pianist is the subject. The NP the
chiropodist is not immediately dominated by S because the VP node intervenes
between it and S. So, by the above definition of subject, it’s not the subject.
As mentioned, categories are dealt with in more detail in the next chapter.
What’s important here is for you to see how the parts of a sentence can be
expected to function in relation to each other. Without the idea of subject func-
tion and predicate function, it would be difficult to know where to begin the
analysis of a sentence. In giving an analysis of a sentence, you should always
be sure that anything you want to say is a constituent and has a well-defined
function and meaning. This goes not only for the immediate constituents of S
but for all constituents. So I’ll generalise the discussion a little.

Dependency and function

In discussing the functions of constituents, we need some terminology to
describe relationships between them. When two constituent nodes are immedi-
ately dominated by the same single node, as is the case with B and C in [35],
[35]

they are said to be sisters. As you might guess, since B and C are sisters in [35],
they are the daughters of A, the node that immediately dominates them. And
A is the mother of B and C. Fanciful perhaps – but easily remembered!
It’s the relationship of sister that concerns us here. sister constituents are
represented at the same level of structure in phrase markers. Constituents always
have their functions in respect of their sister constituents. Thus, in each of
the sentences considered so far, the subject NP and the predicate VP are sisters

31
CHAPTER 2 SENTENCE STRUCTURE: FUNCTIONS

and as such are represented at the same level of structure. The NP (e.g. the ducks)
has its subject function in respect of its sister, the VP (e.g. are paddling away).
And the VP has its predicate function in respect of the subject NP. Notice that
subject and predicate are dependent on each other (mutually dependent). An NP
only functions as a subject in the presence of a sister VP, and a VP only functions
as predicate in the presence of a sister NP. The two together are required to form
a complete sentence; neither can be omitted in a complete and well-formed
sentence. They are both obligatory in the structure of sentences.
Anticipating later chapters, let’s take a first look at the other main functions.
There are three general concepts here. These are head, and the two functions
that other elements have in relation to heads, modifier and complement.

■ Head
The head of a phrase is the element that the phrase is centred on. It is the one
essential – obligatory – element in that phrase. If you think of the phrase as a
solar system, then the head is the sun. Everything else in the phrase revolves
around and depends on the head. Just as a system is a solar system because it’s
centred on a sun, so a phrase is Noun Phrase because it’s centred on a Noun.
Similarly for Verb Phrase. So: it’s the category of the head of a phrase that deter-
mines the category of the phrase.

■ The modifier~head relation

Consider the structure I assigned to two rather dubious jokes in Exercise 3 of
Chapter 1. (Since I’m concentrating on the relationship between constituency
and function here, I’m omitting the category labels which would be required for
a complete analysis.)

[36]

There are three sister relationships in [36]: (1) between two and PHRASE-b
(rather dubious jokes), (2) between PHRASE-c (rather dubious) and jokes, and
(3) between rather and dubious. The relation that holds between these sister
constituents is of the same general kind, namely modification.

32
 DEPENDENCY AND FUNCTION

To begin at the lowest level of structure, rather has its function in respect
of its sister dubious. It specifies the degree of the dubiousness, telling us how
dubious the jokes are. Rather is dependent on dubious, in the sense that it’s only
present because dubious is. Were we to omit dubious, rather would be left with-
out any function, and the omission would result in an ill-formed string (*two
rather jokes). Notice, though, that dubious is in no way dependent on rather. We
can omit rather and still be left with a perfectly good phrase (two dubious jokes).
This, then, is a one-way function/dependency. Rather depends on dubious
but not vice-versa. This function is called modification. The function of rather
is to modify dubious.
What about the function of dubious itself ? You may have guessed – from
the above discussion of heads – that dubious is the head of rather dubious.
I hope this seems right to you in the light of what you now know about heads.
Whatever the category of dubious, that’s going to be the category of the phrase
rather dubious. (For information – but don’t worry about it now if you didn’t
already know – dubious is an adjective. So rather dubious is an Adjective Phrase
(AP).)
The big difference between modifiers and heads, then, is this: in the
structure of a phrase, modifiers are optional; the head is the obligatory
element.
A modifier–head relation also holds, at the next (higher) level of structure,
between the whole phrase rather dubious and the word jokes. Rather dubious
specifies the character of the jokes. Again, rather dubious as a whole is a dependent
modifier of jokes but not vice-versa. Rather dubious is optional since it could
be omitted (giving two jokes), but jokes – the head of the phrase – could not be
omitted (*two rather dubious). And the same goes for the relation – at the highest
level of structure – between two and rather dubious jokes. Two is the (optional,
dependent) modifier of the head rather dubious jokes.
A useful way of picturing the functional relations in [33] is given in [37],
where the direction of the dependencies is indicated by an arrow, and the func-
tions by M (Modifier) and H (Head):
[37]

As [37] shows, phrases – as well as words – can function as heads and as

modifiers.

33
CHAPTER 2 SENTENCE STRUCTURE: FUNCTIONS

Compare analysis [36] above with the incorrect (*) analyses in [38] and [39]:
[38]

[39]

Both these analyses should now strike you as odd. Two and rather both belong
to categories that have modifying functions. They can’t themselves function as the
head of a phrase. So they can’t have their functions in respect of each other – they
can’t both be heads and can’t modify each other. In a given phrase, there can only
be one head. But in [38], two and rather are represented as sisters, forming a
phrase. The fact that this supposed phrase (*two rather) doesn’t have a well-defined
meaning – and couldn’t be the answer to any question – is thus quite predictable.
Notice that, since constituents function in respect of their sister constituents, rather
in [38] is completely cut off from the element (dubious) it wants to modify.
[39] is marginally better, but still wrong. Before reading further, decide for
yourself in the light of the preceding discussion exactly in what respect it’s better
than [38], and exactly in what respect it’s still not as good as [36].

[39] is better than [38] in that two is correctly represented as a (modifying) sister
of PHRASE-b (rather dubious jokes). [39] is still wrong, though, because it
represents rather and dubious jokes as sisters, so that rather is now modifying, not
dubious, but the phrase dubious jokes. But we saw earlier that rather is dependent
on (and belongs with) just dubious. Rather has to do with the dubiousness of the
jokes, not the jokes themselves. The original analysis of PHRASE-b (given in
[36]) correctly predicts that the string rather dubious jokes corresponds in meaning
with the phrase given as [40]:
[40] jokes which are rather dubious.

By contrast, PHRASE-b in [39] is odd because it predicts that rather dubious

jokes corresponds in meaning with the ungrammatical [41]:
[41] *dubious jokes which are rather.

34
 DEPENDENCY AND FUNCTION

By the way, dubious jokes is another example of a word-sequence that forms a

phrasal constituent in some contexts but not others. We’ve seen that, in the
context of rather, we need to relate rather and dubious to each other before relating
the whole phrase rather dubious to jokes. So dubious and jokes don’t form a
constituent in the context of rather. In the absence of rather (or any other
modifier of dubious), on the other hand, dubious and jokes may well form a con-
stituent, as they do in the phrase two dubious jokes.
[42]

■ The head~complement relation

We have now looked at the two-way function/mutual dependency of subject
and predicate and several examples of the one-way function/dependency of
modifier and head. Now look again at the phrase beside a stream (from the sentence
Old Sam sunbathed beside a stream) in the light of the discussion in this chapter.
Here’s the phrase marker. How many sister relations are there in the phrase?

[43]

At the lowest level of structure, a and stream are sisters and, at the next level
up, beside and PHRASE–b (a stream) are sisters. In the last chapter I showed that
a has its function only in respect of stream. But what kind of relationship holds
between beside and PHRASE–b (a stream)? Try to determine whether it’s a two-
way dependency (both elements obligatory) or the one-way dependency of
(optional) modifier and (obligatory) head. You will need to consider the
phrase in the context of its sentence, Old Sam sunbathed beside a stream.

The way to do this, remember, is to see if either of the constituents of the phrase can be
omitted individually in the context of the sentence. In fact, neither can be omitted.
Both [44] (with beside omitted) and [45] (with a stream omitted) are ungrammatical:
[44] *Old Sam sunbathed a stream
[45] *Old Sam sunbathed beside

35
CHAPTER 2 SENTENCE STRUCTURE: FUNCTIONS

Although the whole phrase could be omitted from Old Sam sunbathed beside a
stream, giving Old Sam sunbathed, neither of the constituents of beside a stream
can be omitted individually. It seems (a) that beside calls for – requires – the
presence of a phrase like a stream and (b) that a stream depends on the presence
of beside. So it’s a two-way (mutual) dependency; both elements are obligatory
in the structure of the phrase beside a stream.
That phrase tells us where the sunbathing took place. It specifies a location.
The location of a thing or an activity is usually expressed by orientating it in
space (or time: after the storm, before midnight) in relation to some other thing,
activity, event, or time. We can’t express a spatial location just by means of
beside; we have to specify beside what. Now, although beside and a stream are
both needed to express the spatial orientation in this case, it’s clearly the word
beside that’s giving the phrase as a whole its locational character. So beside is
the head of the phrase. And, just as Noun Phrases are named after – have the
same category as – their heads (Nouns), we will be naming the whole phrase
beside a stream after the category of the word beside. This is dealt with in the next
chapter (but, if you’re interested, it’s a preposition).
We’ve seen that, unlike the modifier–head relations considered earlier, the
relation between beside and a stream is a two-way dependency, with both
obligatory. So we need to distinguish between the function of elements that
relate to a head in a one-way dependency (i.e. as modifiers) from the function
of elements that relate to a head in a two-way dependency. When a head
demands a further expression, that further (obligatory) expression is said to
complement the head. A stream functions as the complement of beside. Notice
that a stream doesn’t tell us something about the head (beside) as modifiers do.
What we have here, then, is not the functional relation of modification, but the
functional relation of complementation.
Complements typically follow their heads in English. Modifiers can precede
or follow their heads, though so far I’ve only given examples of modifiers
preceding their heads.
Now look at [46].
[46] Phil dreads affectionate cats.

It’s a sentence – so, overall, it’s an example of the subject~predicate relation. But
its predicate includes both a relation of modification and a relation of comple-
mentation. Before reading further, first identify the subject and predicate and
then try to identify the modifier~head relation and the head~complement
relation within the predicate.

Phil is the subject and [dreads affectionate cats] is the predicate. Within the
predicate, affectionate can be omitted (Phil dreads cats), so it must be a modifier.
It’s clearly telling us about the cats. So it’s modifying cats. Cats, then, is the

36
 SUMMARY

head of the phrase [affectionate cats]. Now for the relation between dreads and
[affectionate cats]. I hope you agree that neither can be omitted. Neither *Phil
affectionate cats nor *Phil dreads is a well-formed sentence. This shows that the
relation between dreads and [affectionate cats] is a (two-way) head~complement
dependency. Since heads precede their complements in English, dreads must be
the head and [affectionate cats] the complement. There’s a more important rea-
son for thinking that dreads is the head. You now know that, as the predicate of
the sentence, [dreads affectionate cats] is a Verb Phrase and must therefore have
a Verb as its head. If you didn’t already know, dreads is a verb (more on this in
Chapter 4). These functional dependencies can be represented as in [47]:
[47]

With this example, and throughout the chapter, I’ve aimed to show how
constituency, function, and meaning are interrelated. Giving appropriate ana-
lyses of sentences in terms of their constituents depends on how you actually
understand those sentences. Constructing the phrase marker of a sentence
involves giving an explicit graphic representation of what you intuitively know
about that sentence. The meaning of a sentence depends not just on the meaning
of its words, but on how those words are structured into phrases, and on the
functions of those words and phrases. If you insist that each sequence of words
that you want to say forms a constituent has a well-defined meaning and func-
tion (is a phrase), that’s a good starting point for analysis.

Summary
Constituents have their functions in respect of their sisters.
There are three kinds of functional relation between sisters:
Subject~Predicate. The functional relation between the immediate constituents
of sentences, Noun Phrase (NP) and Verb Phrase (VP).
It is a mutual (two-way) dependency – S and P are both obligatory.
S precedes P.
Modifier~Head. This is a one-way dependency: modifiers depend on heads.
Modifiers are optional (omissible).
Some modifiers precede and some follow the heads they modify.

37
CHAPTER 2 SENTENCE STRUCTURE: FUNCTIONS

Head~Complement. A two-way dependency.

Complements are obligatory, needed to complete the meaning of the phrase.
The head generally precedes its complement.
Heads. The head is the obligatory centre of its phrase.
Every phrase has a head and no more than one head.
The category of the head determines the category of the phrase.

Exercises
1. Identify the subjects and predicates of the following sentences. Remember to
apply the question movement test in cases of uncertainty.
(a) No one has ordered my lovely prune-and-spinach fritters.
(b) Her memory for names was a constant source of amazement to him.
(c) There are too many uninvited guests here.
(d) Only two of the sky-diving team brought their parachutes.
(e) It was Lydia who finally trapped the pig.
(f) The fact that you received no birthday greetings from Mars doesn’t mean
it is uninhabited.
(g) That evening, Laura learned the Health and Safety Regulations by heart.

2. Identify the category of the following phrases (as Noun Phrase, Verb Phrase, or
‘other’).

(a) installed for only £199.95

(b) were being given away
(c) too far to drive in a day
(d) obsolescent washing machines
(e) ten long holidays at the Hotel Mortification
(f) which I had bought only the day before
(g) have made me realise that ‘cheap’ does indeed mean ‘nasty’.

3. The phrase more exciting ideas is ambiguous and needs a different structural
analysis for each of its two interpretations. Draw the phrase markers, giving a brief
indication of which interpretation goes with which analysis.

4. Draw phrase markers for the following phrases:

(a) young car salesmen; (b) used car salesmen.

5. The phrase the old Romanian history teacher has several different interpretations.
Here are three structural analyses.

38
 EXERCISES

(a)

(b) (c)

(1) Which analysis corresponds with the interpretation ‘the old teacher of
Romanian history’?
(2) Give the interpretations that correspond with the other analyses.
(3) ‘The history teacher from Old Romania’ is an unlikely interpretation. Never-
theless, it is possible to construct a phrase marker that would impose that
interpretation on the phrase. Draw the phrase marker.

6. Decide on the functions of the bracketed constituents in the following sentences.

(a) Old Sam sunbathed [beside a stream].
(b) The [well-built] gentleman offered me a cigar.
(c) People [in running kit] are coming from all directions.
(d) People in [running kit] are coming from all directions.
To answer this properly, you should not only give the function of the
constituent but also indicate in respect of what other constituent it has that
function. As mentioned in this chapter, you’ll find this easier if you first make
sure you know the general structure of each sentence (i.e. can identify the
subject NP and the predicate VP). First decide whether the bracketed con-
stituent belongs within the subject or the predicate. Since constituents have
their functions in respect of SISTER constituents, a constituent within the subject
can only relate to other constituents within the subject, and a constituent
within the predicate to other constituents within that predicate.

39
CHAPTER 2 SENTENCE STRUCTURE: FUNCTIONS

■ Discussion of exercises
1. (a) [No one] [has ordered my lovely prune-and-spinach fritters].
(b) [Her memory for names] [was a constant source of amazement to him].
(c) [There] [are too many uninvited guests here]. As mentioned in the chapter,
there doesn’t mention anything. Nevertheless, the question movement test
gives a clear result: cf. Are there too many uninvited guests here?
(d) [Only two of the sky-diving team] [brought their parachutes]. If you applied
the question movement test with this one, you would have had to
supply a form of the verb do: Did only two of the sky-diving team bring their
parachutes?
(e) [It] [was Lydia who finally trapped the pig]. Like there in (c) above, it is an
empty subject, but it undergoes movement in the question (cf. Was it Lydia
who finally trapped the pig?).
(f) [The fact that you received no birthday greetings from Mars] [doesn’t mean
it is uninhabited].
(g) This is an example where the subject does not begin the sentence. That eve-
ning is not part of the subject. So:
[Laura] [learned the Health and Safety Regulations by heart].

2. The following are the only well-formed subject~predicate combinations: (d) + (b);
(d) + (g); (e) + (b); (e) + (g). Since they can function as subjects, (d) and (e) are
the NPs; (b) and (g), functioning as predicates, are the VPs. (a), (c), and (f) belong
to other categories.

3. One interpretation (a) is equivalent to that of ‘more ideas that are exciting’. The
other (b) corresponds with ‘ideas that are more exciting’. On both interpre-
tations, the syntactic function of more is that of a modifier (notice that it can be
omitted). The difference in interpretation is a matter of whether more modifies
just exciting, as in (b) or exciting ideas (that is, ideas, which happens to be modified
by exciting), as in (a). The two phrase markers are:

for (a) for (b)

4. (a) Since people (e.g. salesmen) but not things (e.g. cars) can be described as
‘young’, young must modify a constituent that has salesmen as head. It can-
not modify car and hence doesn’t form a constituent with car. The natural
phrase marker, then, is:

40
 EXERCISES

(i.e. ‘young salesmen of cars’,

not ‘salesmen of young cars’)

(b) Things, but not people, can be used, so used must modify (and form a con-
stituent with) car, rather than any constituent having salesmen as its head.

(i.e. ‘salesmen of used cars’, not

‘used salesmen of cars’)

5. (1) Phrase marker (c). This should be clearer after the following discussion.
(2) In diagram (a) Romanian modifies a phrase (history teacher) which has teacher
(modified by history) as its head, so it is the (history) teacher that is Romanian,
not the history. The same goes for old: it modifies a phrase (Romanian history
teacher) which has teacher as its head. So, again, it is the teacher who is old. The
interpretation can be expressed as ‘the old teacher of history who comes from
Romania’. In diagram (b), Romanian is the sister, and hence the modifier, of
history. Here it’s the history that is Romanian, not the teacher. And old modifies
a phrase that has history as head, so again it‘s the (Romanian) history that is old,
not the teacher. So the interpretation is ‘the teacher of old Romanian history’.
(3)

6. (a) You know the sentence is divided into subject and predicate as follows: [Old
Sam] [sunbathed beside a stream], so beside a stream must have its function
in respect of its sister within the predicate VP, sunbathed. We’ve already noted
that it’s optional and that it specifies something about the sunbathing,
namely its location. So the function of beside a stream is that of modifier of
sunbathed. This is our first example of a modifier following the head.
(b) Well-built is a constituent in the structure of the subject NP the well-built
gentleman, so it must have its function in respect of either the or gentleman.
Well-built gentleman seems to form a unit of sense, unlike the well-built. In fact,

41
CHAPTER 2 SENTENCE STRUCTURE: FUNCTIONS

the structure of this phrase is almost identical to that of their rather dubious
jokes (also a Noun Phrase – as you may have already noticed). So the function
of well-built is that of modifier of gentleman.
(c) It should be clear that people in running kit is the subject NP. In running kit
must therefore have its function in respect of people. It is also optional in that
NP (people are coming from all directions is a well-formed sentence). By con-
trast, people is obligatory. So people must be the head of that NP (indeed,
people is a Noun); in running kit is the modifier of that head. This is another
example of the modifier following the head.
(d) Notice that neither in nor running kit can be omitted individually: *people run-
ning kit are coming from all directions; *people in are coming from all directions.
This indicates that running kit is required to complete the meaning of in and
that running kit is only present because in is. We have here the mutual depen-
dency of complementation, and – as usual in complementation – the second
constituent (running kit) is said to complement the first (in), which is the head.
This is the same category of phrase as beside a stream. See the next chapter.

Further exercises
1. For each of the following sentences, identify the subject NP and the predicate VP
by drawing phrase markers like that in [33] on page 30. In the (two!) cases where
the sentence is not exhaustively divisible into NP followed by VP, list the extra
constituents separately.

(a) I am accepting your invitation.

(b) The income received from fines can’t be taken into account.
(c) Grishkin and the man in brown are in league.
(d) A gorilla swinging about in the trees above our heads interrupted this already
lengthy story.
(e) One day will be enough for this job.
(f) One day, my boy, all this will be yours.
(g) Next Sunday or the Sunday after that would be convenient dates.
(h) Regrettably, your dancing and colourful language are frightening the guests.
(i) The existence of stars of such extreme density that not even light can escape
them has not been doubted recently.
(j) The temptation to identify less than the whole of the relevant phrase crops
up in all constituent analysis.
(k) No one who accepted that invitation to visit the slaughterhouse found it
quite as enjoyable as you.
(l) A lengthy discussion about the unreliability and irrelevance of parental advice
followed.

42
 FURTHER EXERCISES

(m) The many meetings in Downing Street between the Prime Minister and other
leaders involved in the crisis have failed to yield any solution acceptable to
them or to the United Nations.

2. Below are five phrases and four phrase markers. On the basis of your understand-
ing of them, assign each phrase to the appropriate phrase marker. One of
the phrase markers is appropriate for two of the phrases. If you have problems,
re-read the discussion of the ‘sister’ relation in the chapter.
(1) Refurbished citrus fruit markets
(2) New central fruit markets
(3) Animals from the zoo
(4) Gas appliances from Italy
(5) Home grown vegetable sales

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

3. Using just ‘phrase’ and ‘word’ (as in Exercise 2 above), draw phrase markers for
the following phrases:

(a) Students doing chemistry.

(b) Students doing chemistry in September.
(c) Students with long hair doing chemistry.
(d) Several very noisy newspaper vendors.
(e) Ten fully automatic deluxe hair driers.

4. For each sister relation in the phrase marker you have drawn for (c) in Exercise 3,
decide whether it is a head~complement relation or a modifier~head relation. In
each case, which element is the head?

43