Chapter 7
Phrasal Structure and Verb Complementation
Exercise 7.1Constituent Structure
Specific constituency tests include the following:
Pronominalization: a complete constituent is replaceable by a single word (a pro-form or word of the same category):
a personal pronoun replaces a noun phrase:
The fat man ate a hamburger, didn't he?
the dummy verb do replaces a verb phrase:
Jacques likes hamburgers, and Monique does too.
* Jacques likes hamburgers, and Monique does fries too.
the adverbs there and then replace prepositional phrases:
Dylan went to the store after school and Dudley went there then too
Interrogation: a complete constituent serves as an answer to a wh question:
a noun phrase:
What did Jacques eat for dinner? A large, juicy hamburger. *A large, juicy.
Who ate a hamburger for dinner? Jacques. *The fat.
a prepositional phrase or adverb phrase:
When did Jacques eat a hamburger? At noon/yesterday.
Why did Jacques eat a hamburger? Because he was hungry.
sometimes a verb phrase (this is not a particularly good test):
What did Jacques do? ? Ate a hamburger.
Movement: a complete constituent can be moved or can occur in different positions in a sentence, but it retains its integrity or configuration; its unity cannot be disrupted. If we begin with the sentence Jacques ate a hamburger for dinner, the following types of permutations can occur (these will be studied in more detail in Chapters 8, 9, and 11):
fronting (preposing) of a noun phrase or an adverbial prepositional phrase:
A hamburger, Jacques ate for dinner (not a steak).
For dinner, Jacques ate a hamburger.
movement of noun phrases in a passive sentence:
A hamburger was eaten by Jacques.
cf. The man rang the bell of the church.
The bell of the church was rung by the man.
* The bell was rung of the church by the man.
inversion of the subject noun phrase and the auxiliary verb in a question:
Did Jacques eat a hamburger for dinner?
focusing of a noun phrase or an adverbial prepositional phrase in a “cleft sentence”:
It was Jacques who ate a hamburger for dinner.
It was a hamburger that Jacques ate for dinner.
It was for dinner that Jacques ate a hamburger.
cf. It was the bell of the church that the man rang.
* It was the bell that the man rang of the church.
* It was of the church that the man rang the bell.
focusing of a noun phrase or a verb phrase in a “pseudocleft sentence”:
What Jacques ate for dinner was a hamburger.
What Jacques did was eat a hamburger for dinner.
What Jacques did for dinner was eat a hamburger.
cf. What the man rang was the bell of the church.
* What the man rang of the church was the bell.
What the man did was ring the bell of the church.
Omission: a complete constituent, if it is optional, may be deleted, but not all constituents are optional:
Jacques ate (a hamburger) (for dinner).
* Jacques ate a (hamburger) for (dinner).
Conjunction: complete constituents are joined by conjunctions such as and or or:
The cat and the mouse ran away.
She read the newspaper and ate lunch.
The quite large and smoothly rounded stone.
He runs very quickly and extremely gracefully.
Using these tests, determine whether the underlined sequences are constituents or not. (Not all tests will work in each case, nor will any one test necessarily be conclusive.) Compare (a) and (b) and then compare (c) and (d)
The workers lowered the desk from the balcony.
The workers lowered the desk from the estate auction.
She worked with two other people on the project.
She worked with great diligence on the project.
Determine the function (Modifier, Head, Governor, Complement) of each of the underlined constituents and indicate which other constituent it functions in relation to.
Example: She got a disappointingly low grade on her paper.
Answer: Modifier in relation to the head low.
He is afraid of heights.
He didn't feel very confident.
He was worried about avalanches.
He checked with the weather office daily.
The approaching storm clouds looked ominous.
He asked his companions what they wanted to do.
They decided to cancel the climb.
They agreed to climb another mountain in the same area.
Explain the ambiguity of the following expressions in terms of the modifier-head relation:
new boy's shirt
red cedar shingle
Comparing (a) and (b), we find that the tests work for the sequence in (b) but not for that in (a):
Pronominalization: The workers lowered it (= the desk from the estate auction, not the desk from the balcony).
Interrogation: What did the workers lower? The desk from the estate auction. *The desk from the balcony.
Movement:
| Fronting: | The desk from the estate auction, the workers lowered. |
| *The desk from the balcony, the workers lowered. | |
| Passive: | The desk from the estate auction was lowered by the workers. |
| *The desk from the balcony was lowered by the workers. | |
| Question: | Was the desk from the estate auction lowered by the workers? |
| *Was the desk from the balcony lowered by the workers? | |
| Cleft: | It was the desk from the estate auction the workers lowered. |
| *It was the desk from the balcony the workers lowered. | |
| Pseudocleft: | What the workers lowered was the desk from the estate auction. |
| *What the workers lowered was the desk from the balcony. | |
| cf. | What the workers lowered from the balcony was the desk. |
Omission: (not relevant)
All of the tests for constituency fail for (a) except possibly conjunction: The workers lowered the desk from the estate auction and the chair from the furniture store. ?The workers lowered the desk from the balcony and the chimney from the roof.
Comparing (c) and (d), we find that the tests work for the sequence in (d) but not for that in (c):
Pronominalization: (not relevant)
Interrogation: How did she work on the project? With great diligence. *With two other people. (The latter answers the question “With whom did she work?”)
Movement:
| Fronting: | With great diligence, she worked on the project. |
| *With two other people she worked on the project. | |
| Passive: | (not relevant since these are not transitive sentences) |
| Question: | (not relevant since the test identifies only constituents serving as subject) |
| Cleft: | It was with great diligence that she worked on the project. |
| *It was with two other people that she worked on the project. | |
| Pseudocleft: | (not relevant since this test isolates noun phrases and verb phrases, but not prepositional phrases) |
Omission: Omitting the phrase in (c) changes the meaning, whereas doing so in (d) does not.
Complement in relation to governor afraid
Complement in relation to governor feel
Complement in relation to governor about
Modifier in relation to head checked
Modifier in relation to head storm clouds
Complement in relation to governor asked
Complement in relation to governor decided
Modifier in relation to head mountain
Either boy's modifies shirt and new modifies boy's shirt (‘a boy's shirt which is new’) or new modifies boy, and new boy modifies shirt (‘shirt which belongs to the new boy’).
Either cedar modifies shingle and red modifies cedar shingle (‘cedar shingle which is (painted) red’) or red modifies cedar and red cedar modifies shingle (‘shingle which is made of red cedar’). Note that the structurally similar expression red traffic signal would have a structure like the former (‘traffic signal which is red’, i.e., traffic modifies signal and red modifies traffic signal), not like the latter (not ‘signal which is red traffic’).