REDUCED CLAUSES

REANALYSED

Manuela Orbe Adscripta Alumna

Gramática Inglesa I

Objectives

• To reorganise the data corpus.

• To provide and reclassify examples illustrating all types of reduced clauses

• To extend the description of the corresponding structures in terms of the new

types included in the corpus.

• To research into some unresolved issues

Reduced Clauses

What are reduced clauses?

In what ways are they reduced?

How can they be classified?

Pay careful attention to the clauses between brackets…

Look at the girl [sitting near the fire].

It’s great [to see you here]!

First images from Mars will appear [when available].

[Being too young], he was not allowed to join the group.

Gussie, [a glutton for punishment], stared at himself in the mirror.

I don’t know [what to do].

What are reduced clauses?

• Reduced Clauses are very frequent both in everyday speech and in written

literary language. Compared with their non-reduced counterparts, these

constructions can be said to have suffered alterations that deal with the

omission of some of their constituents. Due to the fact that superfluous items

are omitted, they are often communicatively stronger and more effective than

full clauses (Stamboni, 2004).

Reduced clauses are clauses in which some of the elements are

covert, i.e. these elements don’t have phonological representation

but they do have a place in syntax.

In what way are they reduced?

• Different subordinate clauses show different kinds of reduction.

• We can begin by saying that in all reduced clauses the finite

inflection is omitted: they are either non-finite or verbless clauses

and the finite TP is replaced by a non-finite TP. The subject is

also usually omitted and depending on the type of reduced

clause, operators, complementisers and some subordinating

items may be omitted as well.

How can they be classified?

REDUCED RELATIVE CLAUSES

• Reduced RESTRICTIVE relative clauses

•

Ø op

•

Ø op

•

Ø op

Non-finite

Covert operator

Covert complementiser

Verbless

REDUCED RELATIVE CLAUSES

• Reduced NON-RESTRICTIVE relative clauses

Ø

Ø

Non-finite

Covert operator

Covert complementiser

Verbless

REDUCED RELATIVE CLAUSES

• Reduced FREE relative clauses

Be specific and provide examples [where (they) (are) appropriate].

Be specific and provide examples [where PRO appropriate].

Non-finite

Overt operator

Covert complementiser

Covert subject

Verbless

REDUCED RELATIVE CLAUSES

• Reduced relative clauses + adjectival predicates

When an adjectival predicate describes a generic type of human being (with a

universal interpretation), the demonstrative pronoun signaling human entities

must be replaced by a definite article.

Non-finite

Covert operator

Covert complementiser

Verbless

REDUCED INTERROGATIVE NOUN

CLAUSES

• WH-Questions

• Yes/no questions: whether

Non-finite

Overt operator

Covert subject

REDUCED DECLARATIVE NOUN CLAUSES

Many infinitival constructions, like infinitives of PURPOSE or ARGUMENTAL

infinitival clauses, included those introduced by complementiser for, can be regarded as

REDUCED CLAUSES whose finite equivalents would be (full finite) Declarative Noun

Clauses:

• Infinitival constructions: PURPOSE

I went home [so that I could watch the match on TV].

I went home [to PRO watch the match on TV].

• Infinitival constructions: ARGUMENTAL

It is great [that I should see you here].

It is great [(for me) to PRO see you here].

• Problems

Some DNC do not allow these non-finite counterparts:

It is great [that you should mention our menu] as we have literally just changed it in the last week].

?? It is great [to PRO mention our menu] as we have literally just changed it in the last week.

This seems to be a matter of control and interpretation of the PRO subject. The reduced

clause is acceptable when its PRO subject has generic interpretation or refers to the speaker.

When the PRO subject is coindexed with a different entity than the speaker and its

interpretation is not generic, there is a change in meaning (different interpretation).

REDUCED DECLARATIVE NOUN CLAUSES

REDUCED DECLARATIVE NOUN CLAUSES • Equative sentences

[That I should travel to Bolivia] is my dream.

My dream is [to PRO travel to Bolivia]

It is my dream [to PRO travel to Bolivia]

My biggest fear is [that when I die my husband will sell all my bags for what I told him they cost].

Again, it seems to be a matter of CONTROL of the PRO subject when it

is not coindexed with the speaker. Possessive determiners can control the

reference of the PRO. When the subject of the DNC is an entity different

from the speaker, we need a reduced version with complementiser «for»

introducing the subject that controls the PRO: «for my husband to PRO

sell…»

REDUCED DECLARATIVE NOUN CLAUSES:

unresolved issues…

• Alternation between DNC and infinitival constructions with:

NOUNS

We give our mind the suggestion [to PRO go to sleep]

ADJECTIVES

I was eager [to PRO get back to work as soon as possible].

REDUCED ADVERBIAL CLAUSES

•Time

[While I was walking to the station], I ran into my best friend.

REDUCED VERSIONS:

[While PRO walking to the station], I ran into my best friend.

[PRO walking to the station], I ran into my best friend. (FREE ADJUNCT)

Non-finite

Covert subject

Overt subordinating element /

Covert subordinating element (in free

adjuncts)

The PRO subject of REDUCED

ADVERBIAL CLAUSES is

generally coindexed with the subject

of the main clause

REDUCED ADVERBIAL CLAUSES •Concession

[Though she is very young] she is an excellent professional.

[Though PRO very young] she is an excellent professional

• This is acceptable with STAGE LEVEL PREDICATES [= estar]. INDIVIDUAL LEVEL

PREDICATES [=ser] seem not to allow the reduced version:

Though she was very tall], she couldn’t join the basketball team.

?? Though PRO tall, she couldn’t join the basketball team.

REDUCED ADVERBIAL CLAUSES

•Condition

[If you are tired], take a break.

[If PRO tired], take a break.

• As with Adverbial Clauses of Concession, the reduced version is only acceptable with STAGE

LEVEL PREDICATES.

REDUCED ADVERBIAL CLAUSES

• FREE ADJUNCTS

[As she was tired], she went to bed

[PRO Being tired], she went to bed

[PROTired], she went to bed -> This further level of reduction is allowed by STAGE

LEVEL PREDICATES.

FREE ADJUCNTS are present/past participle clauses,

whose PRO subject is generally coindexed with the

subject of the main clause.

The express MANNER or TIME

REDUCED ADVERBIAL CLAUSES

• ABSOLUTE CONSTRUCTIONS

When the SUBJECT of the adjunct is an entity other than the

subject of the main clause, it may be overt. The result is an

absolute construction:

[As her birthday was a Monday], she could sleep ‘til noon.

[Her birthday being a Monday], she could sleep ‘til noon.

OTHER TYPES OF REDUCED CONSTRUCTIONS

• ECM constructions

? I want (that you stay with me)

I want (you to stay with me)

• ECM + SMALL CLAUSES

I consider [that he is intelligent].

I consider [him to be intelligent].

I consider [him intelligent]. (SMALL CLAUSE)

Non-finite

Overt subject

• RASING CONSTRUCTIONS

It seems [that he is great].

He seems (he) (to be) great

OTHER TYPES OF REDUCED CONSTRUCTIONS

Practice

• Can you go back to SLIDE #4 and label all the examples

according to the classification that has been developed?

THANK YOU!

Manuela Orbe Adscripta Alumna

Gramática Inglesa I