#adverb clause

[thelaststarfalling]

love larping as a victorian novelist and having the hemingway app turn all of my sentences red because they're "very hard to read"

[misskamelie]

Teheh, got the first writing assignment for language class :3

[english-mirror]

[trolledu]

[deliasamed]

Subordinate Clauses

Understanding Subordinate Clauses and Their Varieties

A complex sentence, by definition, consists of one independent (main) clause and at least one dependent (subordinate) clause. A subordinate clause, also known as a dependent clause, is a group of words that has both a subject and a verb but cannot stand alone as a complete sentence. It relies on a main clause (independent clause) to provide a complete thought. Subordinate clauses can be categorized into three main types based on their grammatical function within a sentence: noun clauses, adverb clauses, and adjective clauses. Each type serves a different purpose and modifies or complements the main clause in distinct ways.     Noun Clauses: A noun clause is a group of words that functions as a noun within a sentence. It can serve as the subject, object, or complement of the main clause. Example: What she said is important(subject). I don't know what to do (object). The fact that he succeeded is amazing (complement).     Adverb Clauses: An adverb clause is a group of words that functions as an adverb within a sentence. It typically provides information about the time, place, manner, reason, condition, or degree of the action in the main clause. Example: While I was studying, my friends were playing outside (time). She sings as if she were an angel (manner). Because it was raining, we stayed indoors (reason).     Adjective Clauses (Relative Clauses): An adjective clause is a group of words that functions as an adjective within a sentence. It provides additional information about a noun or pronoun in the main clause. Example: The book that I borrowed from the library is fascinating (modifying the noun book). The person who helped me is my neighbor (modifying the noun).             Finite Subordinate clauses: A main clause, or independent clause, is finite. In grammar, a finite clause is one that has a subject and a finite verb. A finite verb is a verb that is inflected for person and tense and typically indicates a completed action or state.   A subordinate clause can also be finite. A finite subordinate clause is a group of words that contains a subject and a finite verb but cannot stand alone as a complete sentence. The finite verb in a subordinate clause is inflected for person and tense, just like in a main clause.       Here are examples of finite subordinate clauses:   Adverbial Finite Subordinate Clause (Time): After the rain stopped, we went for a walk.     Adjectival Finite Subordinate Clause (Relative Clause): The woman who lives next door is a doctor.     Nominal Finite Subordinate Clause (Subject): What you said surprised everyone.     Adverbial Finite Subordinate Clause (Reason): Because she studied hard, she passed the exam.     Adjectival Finite Subordinate Clause (Conditional): If you finish your homework, you can go out.     Nominal Finite Subordinate Clause (Direct Object): I believe that honesty is the best policy.             Non-Finite Subordinate clauses: Subordinate clauses, nevertheless, can be Non-finite. Non-finite subordinate clauses are characterized by the absence of a finite verb. A finite verb is a verb that is inflected for person and tense and is typically found in main clauses, marking agreement with the subject and providing information about when the action occurs. Non-finite verbs, on the other hand, lack this inflection for person and tense. Let's explore why the verb in non-finite subordinate clauses is referred to as such:   No Marking of Agreement and Tense: In non-finite subordinate clauses, the verb remains in its base or root form (infinitive, gerund, or participle) and does not change to reflect the person or number of the subject. It does not carry information about when the action takes place. For example: She wants to visit the museum. (Infinitive, non-finite) She visits the museum. (Finite)     Cannot Be Modal Auxiliary: Non-finite verbs cannot function as modal auxiliary verbs. Modal auxiliary verbs (such as can, could, will, would) are used with the base form of a main verb to express modality, possibility, necessity, etc. Non-finite verbs do not have the same modal properties. For example: She can visit the museum. (Finite) She wants to visit the museum. (Non-finite)     Subject Is Not in Subject Case: In non-finite subordinate clauses, the subject of the clause, if present, is often in the objective case or implied, and it does not affect the form of the non-finite verb. For example: I saw him running in the park. (Objective case) She heard them singing in the choir. (Implied subject )                    Nonfinite Subordinate clauses Types : There are several types of nonfinite subordinate clauses, including infinitives, gerunds, participles, and verbless clauses.   Infinitives: Infinitive clauses often function as nouns, adjectives, or adverbs within a sentence, serve as the direct object of the verb.   She brought a gift for him to open. They worked hard for the team to succeed. They gathered resources to build a shelter. She bought ingredients to bake a cake. They helped him leave. (bare Infinitive)         Participles: Participial clauses function as adjectives, providing additional information about a noun.   The children, playing in the park, laughed joyfully. The stormy weather, frightening the animals, forced them into hiding. The story, written by a famous author, captivated the readers. The exhausted hiker reached the summit, guided by an experienced mountaineer.         Gerunds: Gerund clauses function as nouns, often serving as subjects, objects, or objects of prepositions. Gerund clauses, being a type of non-finite subordinate clause, can sometimes have the subject omitted, especially when it is the same as the subject of the main clause. Here are examples: He's not very good at remembering names. She wrote an essay about exploring ancient civilizations. I was surprised at finding my lost keys. I was surprised at learning about the sudden change in plans. They asked him about joining the upcoming project team.         Verbless Clauses: Verbless clauses, as the name suggests, lack a finite verb. Instead, they often start with a present or past participle, an infinitive, or a prepositional phrase. These clauses can function as adverbials, providing information about time, manner, or condition.   Examples: Born in Paris, she developed a love for art. Without hesitation, he jumped into the water. His passion for painting evident, he spent hours in the studio. With a smile on her face, she accepted the award.                   Subordinate Clauses Complex Sentences Compound Sentences Imperative Sentences Subject Pronoun/ “One” and “They” as subject meaning About Phonetics Read the full article

[literaryvein-reblogs]

How to Improve your Writing

Rick Riordan's Writing Tips

Rick Riordan:

Taste is subjective, and opinions differ about what "good writing" looks like. Most of us have read a bestseller or two and wondered, "How did this thing get published?" Nevertheless, I would argue that most work does not get published unless it demonstrates a certain level of technical competence. The grammar is correct. The prose is readable. I would further argue that most manuscripts are rejected because the writing is not technically competent. The manuscript never stands a chance because the writer simply doesn't know the craft of writing well enough. If you write well, you have already set yourself apart from 99% of what agents and editors see every day. Below are some notes on what I call "sentence level competence" — the ability to craft prose at the most basic level. These tips reflect the most common problems I've observed in unpublished manuscripts.

Sentence-Level Competence

Sentence focus — the subjects of all clauses should be appropriate to the content of the sentence.

Favor the concrete over the abstract, the antecedent over the pronoun.

Example: It was a sunny day. (the subject "it" is boring and vague.)

Better: The sky was brilliant blue. (Here the subject is sky, which is what the sentence was supposed to be about.)

If you are writing a sentence about a guy named Fred, the subject in the sentence should be (surprise!) Fred.

Exercise

Go through a page of prose and underline your own subjects.

How many are abstract?

How many of your sentences are truly focused?

Modifiers

Be sure the modifier refers to the right thing.

The modifier should refer to the closest noun.

Confusing modifiers will trip up the reader, consciously or subconsciously.

By the same token, pronouns should have clear antecedents.

Always place the modifier as close to the subject as possible.

Example: Can you help other writers who are writing books like me? (I got this question recently. I understand what the person is saying, but 'like me' follows the word 'books' so he is implying, without meaning to, that there are people producing books that look like him.)

Better: Can you help other writers like me who are writing books?

Exercise

Color-code a page of your manuscript, making each phrase and clause a different color.

Match up dependent clauses and phrases with their modifiers.

Avoid getting your modifier too far away from the thing being modified.

Deft Description

Choose your details carefully.

A description should be vivid, but surgically precise.

The detail must be given for a reason, and have a logical connection to the plot or advancement of character.

Avoid long "grocery lists" of details.

For a paragraph-length description, offer a uniting theme — an extended metaphor — to give the details cohesion.

Example: He was six feet tall, three hundred pounds, with brown hair, small brown eyes, a big nose and big fists. He wore jeans and a muscle shirt. He looked angry. (this is way too much description for the reader to keep track of, and it is offered as a random list)

Better: He looked like a rhino, ready to charge. (then you can pick a few details that reinforce the image of a rhino)

Exercise

Go through a chapter and delete all adjectives and adverbs.

Read through, then add some back in sparingly.

You may find you can do with less than before.

Parallelism

Clauses or phrases that are part of a list should be similar in structure.

Unparallel constructions are awkward and difficult to read, even if the reader can't put her finger on the exact problem.

Example: He likes dogs, hiking in the woods and reads books a lot. (Dogs is a single noun, hiking in the woods is a participial phrase, reads books a lot is a simple predicate. These are all totally different things. Make them the same, and the sentence will flow much better.)

Better: He likes walking his dog, hiking in the woods, and reading lots of books.

Exercise

Try constructing your descriptions in parallel units — absolutes, infinitives, adjectives.

Source ⚜ Writing Notes & References

[supersoakerfullofblood]

Dialogue Tags and Action Beats, Pacing and Scene Development; a Brief Overview

I've seen a few "dialogue tags to use instead of 'said'" posts now, but most of the tags provided by these posts are trying too hard and are much more distracting than "said" would be. "I'll kill you," he declared; "It's okay," she exonerated; He remarked, "He shouldn't have done that." These are clunky to varying degrees, and if you don't recognize that now, you will with practice.

The truth of the matter is that "said" is pretty much always blank space that the reader will skim over without a second thought. It's maybe the only word we have with this function, and it should be treated as such! So why don't we use dialogue tags that add meaning to the dialogue? Something like "argued," "rejoiced," "remarked"? You can, and these should be used now and then (maybe not "rejoiced"), but overusing them weights down the prose, and in general, they should be replaced by action beats or description.

In much the same way adverbs and adjectives should be avoided if the noun they modify already has the qualities of its modifier, wordy dialogue tags should be avoided if you can show the character's emotions through other means. Dialogue tags are telling; action beats and description are showing. Look at these examples:

He remarked, "I can't believe it's not butter."

His eyebrows rose. "I can't believe it's not butter."

"I told you not to do it," she cried.

Her body shook; words rasped her throat. "I told you not to do it."

"Cried" and "remarked" here aren't bad, but they are weaker than they could be. In the first example, "remarked" indicates tone, but it doesn't do anything else. "His eyebrows rose" indicates tone and also develops the scene. It places the character in the reader's mind's eye, and we understand how that specific character reacts to margarine. How would a different character react differently? This dialogue feels embodied; it belongs to a specific body, a specific host. The second example is embodied too, and a little flowery, though not excessively so. We see how a character reacts to whatever "it" is, and we aren't told how they react. How does she cry in the first sentence?

The debate about dialogue tags, however, misunderstands what tags are actually for. Probably 10% of it is imbuing meaning where there is none (a simple word like "whisper" is a great replacement for "said" when used with restraint), but 90% of it is about tempo/flow/beat/pacing/whatever you want to call it. Read these sentences:

She said, "This is none of your business, and you aren't telling anyone about it."

"This is none of your business," she said, "and you aren't telling anyone about it."

"This is none of your business, and you aren't telling anyone about it," she said.

These sentences convey the same information, but to the careful ear, they carry a world of difference. The first reads snippy, like a terse command; the second gives some added gravity to the second half of the quote, landing hard on the last clause; the third one may be effective if the character is responding immediately to something another character said, since there isn't anything to preface the dialogue, and there's nothing halting it in the middle. All this happens in the two syllables of "she said." Use this word to affect the flow of your writing; use this word to affect how people read your writing. Another sin of other dialogue tags is that they may have too high of a syllable count to warrant use. "He expostulated" is a wild distraction from otherwise smooth prose. "She interrupted" is also clunkier than just having the character interrupt with your choice of dialogue tag/action beat placement or omission. In general, I'd be wary of any dialogue tag longer than two syllables.

Wordy dialogue tags can also be avoided by seeding description in your conversation scenes! Just as the world still operates when we have conversations, so too should it for your characters. Here's an exchange from a story I wrote:

He smiled. “Sleep well?” “Girls were up late.” “Is that a yes—” “No. I didn’t sleep.” She squeezed her eyes closed. “They were screeching.” The crowd caught up with them, swallowed them, and they were carried along the cement. “Oh.” Carmen paused. “Sorry.” “It’s okay.” “Is it all bad?” Bodies shifted in the crowd, and Piper glimpsed Beatrice again. Familiarity warmed her chest. Here was the world outside the camp; here was everything Piper knew. She stood between Beatrice and Carmen and lived again in band class, lived again on the bus home, let public streams flood her roots and grow her as a social monolith, an independent and undisputed landmark in her social circles. But at camp, she was little more than Beatrice’s friend, than Carmen’s apocryphal lover. “It’s not all bad,” she said. “Bea is here. And you.”

Description can easily mold into a character's internal monologue, as it does here. You can also go straight to the monologue if you'd like:

Was she sad, Piper thought, or coy? No, it was the start of a joke. “You didn’t think you were a big deal?” But Beatrice didn’t smile. “I didn’t think people cared that much.” She drew her hands close on the table, covered right with left, and looked into her knuckles. This was defeat, Piper recognized. Beatrice conceded, but of her own will. Piper won, but her score was sour, and Beatrice seemed to crumple her arms into the abject statue of her body. And Piper felt as she never had before, as if a storm of locusts ate at the border of her stomach, as if her skin turned to deep and polluted waters, as if moving one hand or twitching one muscle would irrevocably alter the course of life; the drumming of a finger would set off some idle paranoia in Beatrice, or a sniff of the nose would throw her from the wide window, drop her thirty feet down the wooded hill, and crack herself in two on the base of an implacable oak. This was grief, Piper felt, or something approximating it, something resembling internally a dark and blank horizon, something feeling as a stone feels in a pond whose size may only house that stone, something taking shape in the woman before Piper, shrinking now to a girl, now to someone uninspiring in a world of couplets. Piper sat still, because she did not know how to affect the world without ending it. “I’m sorry,” she said.

Imagine if the second example read:

"You didn't think you were a big deal?" Piper said.

Beatrice frowned. "I didn't think people cared that much."

Piper frowned because Beatrice was sad. "I'm sorry."

Much weaker! Why is the description so long in the second example? Because it's a big emotion! In the world of pacing, big things get big descriptions. In both examples, you feel exactly what the characters are feeling, even though I never used a dialogue tag besides "said." And I used "said" a few times to affect the pacing, which adds to how you perceived the characters. You understood the characters because stronger, more descriptive, more pacing-aware things replaced what could've been clunky tags.

Still, you can do whatever you want with tags, beats, and description. I've read incredible prose with zero tags and sparse beats, prose with paragraphs of beats and plenty of tags, and anything in between. It's all a matter of style, which is to say, experiment! Writers will be stubborn and say things like, "I don't use anything besides 'said' in my prose" or "I'll never use 'said' in my prose again," but neither of those are your personal style. They're declarations that you'll die on this hill you don't fully comprehend, to take a stand on an idea you've never genuinely played with. Go full maximalist; go full minimalist; find what feels right for the pacing you want to incorporate into your style, and recognize how pacing changes depending on the context and content of a scene. Nearly every word is permissible somewhere, it's just a matter of finding the right scene for it. And "said" is permissible always.

[german-enthusiast]

Scary scary German syntax... right?

The following sentence exhibits a typical mistake German-learners make: Heute ich gehe in ein Museum.

It's not conjugation ("ich gehe" is correct!), it's not declension ("ein Museum" is correct too!). The issue is "heute ich gehe". Correct would be: Heute gehe ich in ein Museum (or: Ich gehe heute in ein Museum.)

What's the rule here?

It's unfortunately not simply "there can only be one word before the verb"

German word order is so difficult be cause it is so variable. All following sentences are correct and synoymous (though emphasis shifts):

Der Opa schenkt seiner Enkelin zum Geburtstag ein Buch über Autos.

Seiner Enkelin schenkt der Opa zum Geburtstag ein Buch über Autos.

Ein Buch über Autos schenkt der Opa seiner Enkelin zum Geburtstag.

Zum Geburtstag schenkt der Opa seiner Enkelin ein Buch über Autos. All mean: The grandfather gifts his niece a book about cars for her birthday.

What do they all have in common, syntax-wise? There's only one phrase in front of the finite verb. What does this mean? A phrase is a completed (!) unit that can consist of one or more words (depending on the word class (-> noun, verb, …)) Typical word classes that can be a phrase with just one word are:

Proper nouns, plural nouns, personal pronouns, relative pronous (Lukas kocht. Busse fahren. Ich schreibe. Der Mann, der kocht, …)

Adverbs (Heute, Morgen, Bald, Dort, Darum, …) Most other word classes need additional words to form a full phrase:

adjectives need a noun and article: der blaue Ball, der freundliche Nachbar

nouns need a determiner (= article): der Mann, eine Frau, das Nachbarskind

prepositions need… stuff (often a noun phrase): auf der Mauer, in dem Glas, bei der Statue

…

A finite verb is the verb that has been changed (=conjugated) according to person, time, … All verbs that are NOT infinitive or participles are finite. ich sagte -> "sagte" is the finite verb ich bin gegangen -> "bin" is the finite verb The infinitive and the participle are called "infinite verbs" and are always pushed towards the end (but not always the very end!) of the sentence: Ich bin schon früher nach Hause gegangen als meine Freunde.

So: Before the verb (that is not the participle or infinitive) there can only be one phrase.

Since "heute" is an adverb (-> forms a full phrase on its own) and "ich" is a personal pronoun (-> forms a full phrase on its own), they can't both be in front of the verb "gehe" You have to push one of them behind the verb: Heute gehe ich in ein Museum Ich gehe heute in ein Museum.

Both of these are main clauses (Ger.: Hauptsätze), which in German exhibit "V-2 Stellung", meaning the finite verb is in the second position (after one phrase).

What happens if we push all phrases behind the finite verb?

Gehe ich heute in ein Museum? (Watch out: Gehe heute ich in ein Museum would be ungrammatical! The subject has to come in the second position)

It's a question now!

In German, question sentences (that do not start with a question word like "Was?", "Wo?", …) start with the finite verb (called "V-1 Stellung").

Questions, main clauses,… what's missing?

Dependent clauses!

The third type of sentence exhibits "V-letzt Stellung" or "V-End Stellung", meaning the finite verb is at the very end of the sentence. Ich bin gestern in ein Museum gegangen, … main clause -> V-2 Stellung … weil es dort eine interessante Ausstellung gab. dependent clause -> V-letzt Stellung If you want to practice this....

... determine if the following German sentences are correct. If not, what would be the right way to say it?

Der Zug war sehr voll.

Gestern ich war in der Schule.

Die Lehrerin mich nicht hat korrigiert.

Gehst du heute zur Arbeit?

Das Buch ich finde nicht sehr interessant.

To practice this further, translate the following sentences into German and focus on the order of words:

The boy gave the ball back to me.

I called my girlfriend because I missed her.

The girl saw her brother at the train station.

The horse, which was standing on the field, was white and black.

[max1461]

Have people on here (not the linguists I mean everybody else) fully appreciated the "spoken French is mildly polysynthetic" thing? Let me caveat this be saying that I am not a proficient French speaker in any capacity; the paper (or conference talk, I guess?) which lays out this argument is fairly convincing to me assuming that its facts are right, but I have no capacity to judge how well the grammatical claims about spoken French hold up empirically.

Anyway, the take away for the non linguist is basically this: traditional French grammar, as it is taught to French schoolchildren and to foreign learners, is significantly divergent from how French is actually spoken, i.e. the grammar that a culturally-neutral linguist producing an analysis of French would come up with. In particular,

Spoken French has a complex prefixal verb template involving subject, object, and indirect object marking. In traditional French grammar these prefixes are considered independent pronouns and auxiliary verbs and are written with spaces between them, but their rigid ordering with respect to the verb root, significant phonological reduction, and the inability to dislocate them from the verb (e.g. with intervening adverbs) suggest that analyzing them as prefixes would be more standard. The fact that they are able to co-occur with independent nominals and that such constructions are quite common furthers this analysis.

If the above analysis is taken up, then spoken French is verb-centric and moderately non-configurational, in the sense that the inflected verb is the only obligatory element of the clause, and independent NPs are somewhat free with regard to the positions they can occur in. This is another typical characteristic of polysynthetic languages.

This is a strikingly different analysis than the largely analytic and moderately inflecting, strictly SVO picture of French syntax one is usually presented with. Certainly this latter picture is more descriptive of the written standard, but it seems that the spoken language either has evolved or is in the process of evolving away from that standard.

My impression from various discussions is that the more traditional, analytic constructions still widely exist in spoken French, but the "polysynthesis-like" constructions are becoming increasingly common and favored in the spoken language. So perhaps we might say that French is "becoming mildly polysynthetic", rather than that it's already there. Still, this should be very striking even for the non-linguist: the language you see on the page is very much not always the language that is in people's mouths!

[xuexishijian]

句法学 - Syntax

词类 cílèi / 词性 cíxìng - Parts of speech

名词 míngcí - Noun

动词 dòngcí - Verb

形容词 xíngróngcí - Adjective

副词 fùcí / 状语 zhuàngyǔ - Adverb

前置词 qiánzhìcí / 介词 jiècí - Preposition

后置词 hòuzhìcí - Postposition

连词 liáncí - Conjunction

代词 dàicí - Pronoun

限定词 xiàndìngcí - Determiner

句法功能 jùfǎ gōngnéng - Syntactic function

主语 zhǔyǔ - Subject

谓语 wèiyǔ - Predicate

宾语 bīnyǔ - Object

语序 yǔxù - Word order

格 gé - Case

主格 zhǔgé - Nominative

宾格 bīngé - Accusative

与格 yǔgé - Dative

属格 shǔgé - Genitive

具格 jùgé - Instrumental

题元角色 tíyuán juésè - Theta roles （语义角色，语义关系，主题关系）

施事 shīshì - Agent

受事 shòushì / 客事 kèshì - Patient

主事 zhǔshì - Theme

感事 gǎnshì / 经验者 jīngyànzhě - Experiencer

益事 yìshì - Beneficiary

领事 lǐngshì - Recipient

终点 zhōndiǎn - Goal

工具 gōngjù - Instrument

Syntactic structure

中心语 zhōngxīnyǔ - Head

附加语 fùjiāyǔ - Adjunct

标定语 biāodìngyǔ - Specifier

论元 lùnyuán - Argument

补足语 bǔzúyǔ - Complement

短语 duǎnyǔ / 词组 cízǔ - Phrase

句子 jùzi - Sentence

分句 fēnjù - Clause

从句 cóngjù - Subordinate clause

(句子)成分 (jùzi) chéngfen - Constituent

Theoretical terms

管辖 guǎnxiá - Govern

约束 yuēshù - Bind

移位 yíwèi - Movement

语迹 yǔjì - Trace

拷贝 kǎobèi - Copy (n.)

提升 tíshēng - Raising

控制 kòngzhì - Control

合并 hébìng - Merge

辖域 xiáyù - Scope

一致 yīzhì - Agreement

特征 tèzhēng - Feature

投射 tóushè - Project (v.)

扩充的投射原则 kuòchōngde tóushè yuánzé - Extended projection principle

语段 yǔduàn - Phase

语段不可渗透性条件 yǔduàn bùkě shèntòuxìng tiáojiàn - Phase impenetrability condition (PIC)

句法树 jùfǎ shù - Syntax trees

节点 jiédiǎn - Node

姐妹节点 jiěmèi jiédiǎn - Sister nodes

母节点 mǔ jiédiǎn - Mother node

女节点 nǚ jiédiǎn - Daughter node

终端节点 zhōngduān jiédiǎn - Terminal node

支配 zhīpèi - Dominate

Theoretical frameworks

生成语法 shēngchéng yǔfǎ - Generative grammar

X' 理论 lǐlùn - X-bar theory （also X次理论）

管辖与约束理论 gǔanxiá yǔ yuēshù lǐlùn - Government & binding

词汇功能语法 cíhuì gōngnéng yǔfǎ - Lexical functional grammar

依存语法 yīcún yǔfǎ - Dependency grammar

[nosferatini]

🎧That the One Ought to Have of the Other [PODFIC]

A birthday podfic of @adverbian ‘s fic!!!

10 Minutes | Rated T

Summary:

“First clause,” said Aziraphale. “‘I take you to be my husband.’”

“Ill-defined term,” said Crowley.

💍🎧Listen Here🎧💍

If you like this work, definitely give kudos to the original fic too!

I’m constantly grateful for the community I’ve found at @goodomensafterdark , where I met adverb and so many other lovely folks who give me excuses to write, as well as pretend to be middle aged man shaped beings. 🖤

[neuxue]

me: *slaps roof of sentence* this bad boy can fit so many subordinate clauses in it!

sentence in question: *collapses at the slightest touch like a fucking jenga tower, adverbs clattering down all over the floor, nouns lying broken and bleeding, impaled on verbs they were never meant to touch,*

[ukfrislandembassy]

Scottish Gaelic throws up some interesting challenges to Anglo-centric assumptions about word class and syntactic structure sometimes. A few months ago I came across this sentence in a corpus: Theabas mo bhàthadh.

Translated into English this means 'I almost drowned'. So straightforward enough right?

But no! When you actually do the morphological analysis, you realise that the structure of the Gaelic assigns all the 'wrong' word classes (to an English speaker) to the various lexical meanings.

Starting with what in English is the predicate, 'drown'. In the Gaelic this is whay they call in the Celtic literature a 'verbnoun', a kind of masdar form which shows a lot of nominal properties. The verb root in this case would be bàth 'drown'.

One of the nominal properties of verbnouns is that they take an argument in the genitive, sometimes the direct object, or in this case the subject mo 'my' (versus the non-possessive form mi 'I, me'), which also triggers lenition on the possessed, hence mo bhàthadh.

Now for the real head scratcher. The first element in this clause is theabas. This is a verb, meaning basically 'to almost happen', which only occurs in the past tense. By itself the root is theab, but here we seen an additional -as suffix. What's that? Well it's an archaic form of the past tense impersonal, which would normally be -adh (and I've come across a couple of examples of theabadh too). So this means that there was an erstwhile subject that has been demoted and an object raised in its place, and in this case the only conclusion that can be drawn is that this subject was the firsr person singular mi, now expressee as a possessive pronoun modifying the erstwhile object, the verbnoun bàthadh.

So to spell that out, compared to the English translation we find a finite verb instead of an adverb, a possessive pronoun instead of a subject pronoun and a verbnoun (in subject position!) instead of a finite verb.

If you want more examples search for theabas at Corpas na Gàidhlig.

[trolledu]

[deliasamed]

The Conjunction

  The Conjunction

  A conjunction is a fundamental part of grammar that serves as a link or connector between words, phrases, clauses, or sentences. Conjunctions are essential for constructing coherent and well-structured sentences. They help establish relationships between different elements within a sentence, making the text more readable and conveying precise meaning.       Types of Conjunctions:   Conjunctions can be broadly categorized into several types based on their functions and roles within a sentence. Here are the primary types of conjunctions:         Coordinating Conjunctions: These conjunctions connect words, phrases, or clauses of equal grammatical importance. The most common coordinating conjunctions are often remembered using the acronym "FANBOYS":   For: Adds information or gives a reason. And: Connects similar ideas or elements. Nor: Indicates a negative alternative or denial. But: Shows contrast or opposition. Or: Presents alternatives. Yet: Indicates contrast or surprise. So: Demonstrates cause and effect.   Example: She wanted to go to the movies, but she didn't have enough money.           Subordinating Conjunctions: These conjunctions introduce dependent clauses (subordinate clauses) and connect them to independent clauses (main clauses). Subordinating conjunctions indicate the relationship between the two clauses, such as cause and effect, time, condition, or contrast. Example: Because it was raining, we stayed indoors.   Common subordinating conjunctions include because, although, if, when, and while.           Correlative Conjunctions: These conjunctions come in pairs and work together to join words, phrases, or clauses. The most common correlative conjunctions include:   Either...or: Indicates a choice between two alternatives. Neither...nor: Presents two negative alternatives. Both...and: Connects two similar elements. Not only...but also: Emphasizes two related ideas.   Example: She is not only intelligent but also hardworking.           Conjunctive Adverbs: Although not true conjunctions, conjunctive adverbs function similarly to coordinating conjunctions but add more information or clarify relationships between clauses. Common conjunctive adverbs include however, therefore, consequently, and nevertheless.   Example: She studied diligently; however, she didn't perform well on the exam.           Relative Pronouns: While not typically considered conjunctions, relative pronouns like who, which, and that connect relative clauses to the noun they modify. These clauses provide additional information about the noun. Example: The book that I read was fantastic.   Understanding the different types of conjunctions and their functions is essential for constructing clear and effective sentences. Properly using conjunctions helps convey relationships between ideas, ensuring that writing is coherent and well-organized.             Here's a table of coordinating conjunctions along with examples: Coordinating Conjunction Example For I need to go to the store, for I am out of milk. And I have to study for my exam, and I need to finish my project. Nor She neither called nor texted me. But He wanted to go out, but he was feeling tired. Or Do you want tea or coffee? Yet It was late, yet he continued working. So She practiced a lot, so she performed well in the competition. These coordinating conjunctions are used to join words, phrases, or independent clauses of equal importance in a sentence. They help create compound sentences and express relationships between ideas.           Here's a table of subordinating conjunctions along with examples: Subordinating Conjunction Example Although Although it was raining, they went for a hike. Because He stayed home because he was feeling unwell. If If you finish your homework, you can go out to play. Since Since she passed the exam, she's been very happy. Unless You can't watch TV unless you finish your chores. While She read a book while waiting for her flight. After After the rain stopped, they went for a walk. Before Please finish your dinner before you have dessert. Even though Even though it was late, they continued the meeting. As He left quietly as everyone was asleep. Subordinating conjunctions are used to join a subordinate (dependent) clause to a main (independent) clause, creating complex sentences. The subordinate clause cannot stand alone as a complete sentence and relies on the main clause for its meaning.               The Conjunction Phrasal Prepositions Prepositions -“For”, “During”, “In”, and “Within” to compare Collective and Individual Nouns Vowel and Consonant Sounds in Syllable Auxiliary Verbs: should and would Read the full article