Clines of categoriality in sentence complexing

Jarmila Tárnyiková

Clines of categoriality in sentence complexing

Vol.1,No.1(2008)

PDF

This paper argues that the dynamism of multidimensional processes of sentence complexing cannot be fully understood without due attention paid to both dichotomies and clines of categoriality (also referred to as scales or gradients). First the scope of analysis is proposed, taking into view both the micro- and macrostructures of the text. Then the simplifying impact of binary sets on certain syntactic taxonomies is exemplified, followed in the application section by the discussion of the gradient of integration of dependent clauses into their respective Head-clauses, ranging from fully integrated (and interlaced) embedded clauses to loosely attached enhanced clauses.

References

Daneš, F. et al. (1987) Mluvnice češtiny 3. Skladba. Praha: Academia.

Enkvist, E. N. (1991) ‘Discourse strategies and discourse types.’ In: Ventola, E. (ed.)
Functional and Systemic Linguistics: Approaches and Uses. Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter. 3-22.

Haiman, J., Thompson, S. A. (1988) (eds) Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse.
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1961) ‘Categories of the theory of grammar.’ Word 17/3, 241-92. DOI: 10.1080/00437956.1961.11659756

Halliday, M. A. K. (1985) (Reprint 1986, 1994) An Introduction to Functional Grammar.
London: Edward Arnold.

Hopper, P. (2002) ‘Hendiadys and auxiliation in English.’ In: Bybee, J., Noonan, M.
(eds) Complex Sentences in Grammar and Discourse. Essays in Honor of Sandra A.
Thompson. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 143-173.

Huddleston, R. D. (1990 [1988]) English Grammar: An Outline. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Huddleston, R. D., Pullum, G. K. (2003 [2002]) The Cambridge Grammar of the English
Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kruisinga, E. (1931) A Handbook of Present-Day English. Part II. English Accidence and
Syntax I. Groningen: Noordhoff.

Matthiessen, C. (2002) ‘Combining clauses into clause complexes. A multi-faceted view.’
In: Bybee, J., Noonan, M. (eds). Complex Sentences in Grammar and Discourse.
Essays in Honor of Sandra A. Thompson. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company. 31-59.

Matthiessen, C., Thompson, S. A. (1988) ‘The structure of discourse and ‘subordination’.’
In: Haiman, J., Thompson, S. A. (eds) Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 275-329.

Poldauf, I. (1964) ‘The third syntactical plan.’ TLP 1. 241-255.

Quirk, R. et al. (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London and
New York: Longman Group Ltd.

Tárnyiková, J. (2000) ‘Dichotomies and scales.’ Acta Universitatis Palackianae
Olomucensis. Anglica II. UP Olomouc. 53-64.

Tárnyiková, J. (2007) Sentence Complexes in Text. Processing Strategies in English and
in Czech. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého.

Thompson, S.A. (1984) ‘Grammar and written discourse: Initial vs. fi nal purpose clauses
in English.’ Text 5 (1/2). 55-84.

Thompson, S. A., Mulac, A. (1991) ‘A quantitative perspective on the grammaticization
of epistemic parentheticals in English.’ In: Traugott, E. C., Heine, B. (eds) Approaches
to Grammaticalization. Vol.2. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 313-329.

Vachek, J. (1976) Selected Writings in English and General Linguistics. Prague:
Academia.

van Dijk, T. A. (1980) Macrostructures. Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum.

van Dijk, T. A. (1995) ‘From text grammar to critical discourse analysis.’ 1-10. http://
www.hum.uva.nl/~teun/brliar-e.html (April 6th, 2001)

Metrics

196

Views

136

PDF views

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

PDF