Basic Syntactic Notions Free Essays

string(75) " sentence that we arrive at after dividing it into two \(the first step\)\." S Y N T A X LECTURE 6 BASIC SYNTACTIC NOTIONS 1. Some approaches to the study of syntactic units. The central role of syntax within theoretical linguistics became clear only in the 20th century, which some scholars call the â€Å"century of syntactic theory† as far as linguistics is concerned. We will write a custom essay sample on Basic Syntactic Notions or any similar topic only for you Order Now Nowadays theoretical approaches to the discipline of syntax are numerous and extremely diverse. One school of thought treats syntax as a branch of biology, since it conceives of syntax as the study of linguistic knowledge as embodied in the human mind. Other linguists regard syntax to be the study of an abstract formal system. Yet others consider syntax to be a taxonomical device to reach broad generalizations across languages. One more school of thought approaches syntactic phenomena from the philosophical point of view proceeding from the idea that reality consists of things, their qualities and relationships. Hence, the subdivision of words by the parts of speech and the treatment of syntactic problems as philisophic processes. The hypothesis of generative grammar is that language is a structure of the human mind. The goal of generative grammar is to make a complete model of this inner language (known as i-language). This model could be used to describe all human language and to predict the grammaticality of any given utterance (that is, to predict whether the utterance would sound correct to native speakers of the language). This approach to language was pioneered by Noam Comsky. Most generative theories (although not all of them) assume that syntax is based upon the constituent structure of sentences. Generative grammars are among the theories that focus primarily on the form of a sentence, rather than its communicative function. Among the many generative theories of linguistics, the Chomskyan theories are: Transformational Grammar (TG) (Original theory of generative syntax laid out by Chomsky in Syntactic Structures in 1957 ; Government and binding theory (GB) (revised theory in the tradition of TG developed mainly by Chomsky in the 1970s and 1980s); Minimalist program (MP) (a reworking of the theory out of the GB framework published by Chomsky in 1995) Categorial grammar is an approach that attributes the syntactic structure not to rules of grammar, but to the properties of the syntactic categories themselves. For example, rather than asserting that sentences are constructed by a rule that combines a noun phrase (NP) and a verb phrase (VP) (e. g. the phrase structure rule S NP VP), in categorial grammar, such principles are embedded in the category of the head word itself. So the syntactic category for an intransitive verb is a complex formula representing the fact that the verb acts as a functor which requires an NP as an input and produces a sentence level structure as an output. This complex category is regarded as † a category that searches to the left for a NP (the element on the left) and outputs a sentence (the element on the right)†. The category of transitive verb is defined as an element that requires two NPs (its subject and its direct object) to form a sentence. Dependency grammar regards structure as determined by the relations (such as grammatical relations) between a word (a head) and its dependents, rather than being based in constituent structure. For example, syntactic structure is described in terms of whether a particular noun is the subject or agent of the verb, rather than describing the relations in terms of phrases. Stochastic/probabilistic grammars/network theories These are theoretical approaches to syntax based upon probability theory. They are known as stochastic grammars. One common implementation of such an approach makes use of a neural network or connectionism. Some theories based within this approach are: Optimality theory and Stochastic context-free grammar. Functionalist grammars are functionalist theories, which (though focused upon form) are driven by explanation based upon the function of a sentence (i. e. its communicative function). Some typical functionalist theories include: Funtionalist grammar; Prague Linguistic Circle; Systemic functional grammar; Cognitive grammar; Construction grammar; Role and reference grammar; Emergent grammar Constructional Syntax. Constructional analysis of syntactic units was initiated by Prof. G. Pocheptsov (1971). The analysis deals with the constructional significance/insignificance of a part of the sentence for the whole syntactic unit. The theory is based on the obligatory or optional environment of syntactic elements. For example, the element him in the sentence / saw him there yesterday is constructionally significant because it is impossible to omit it. At the same time the elements there and yesterday are constructionally insignificant – they can be omitted without destroying the whole structure. Communicative Syntax. It is primarily concerned with the analysis of utterances from the point of their communicative value and informative structure. It deals with the actual division of the utterance – the theme and rheme analysis. Both the theme and the rheme constitute the informative structure of utterances. Pragmatic approach to the study of syntactic units can briefly be described as the study of the way language is used in particular contexts to achieve particular goals. Speech Act Theory was first introduced by John Austin. The notion of a speech act presupposes that an utterance can be said with different intentions or purposes and therefore can influence the speaker and situation in different ways: I just state the fact; Textlinguistics studies the text as a syntactic unit, its main features and peculiarities, different ways of its analysis. Discourse analysis focuses on the study of language use with reference to the social and psychological factors that influence communication. 2. Some concrete methods of syntactic analysis. The most commonly applied concrete methods of syntactic analysis seem to be the IC and transformational procedures. The method of IC is based on the idea that sentences have a hierarchic structure consisting of a number of layers. It is assumed that parts of a sentence are combined with each other according to strict rules. If we want to know how a sentence is built we must separate its units or constituents. Hence the notion of immediate constituents /IC/. Immediate constituents are those parts of a sentence that we arrive at after dividing it into two (the first step). You read "Basic Syntactic Notions" in category "Essay examples" Those parts or IC may, in their turn, be divided into further parts until the actual place of each word in the structure of the sentence as a whole has been established. (e. g. The old man saw a black dog there. S – sentence P – phrase N- noun V – verb t – article p – preposition A – adjective D – adverb) The method of IC is very helpful in syntactical analysis. But it has certain limitations. Sentences in which the relations between words are considerably different despite identical surface structures get in the IC model quite similar interpretations. Compare the sentences: John is eager to please and John is easy to please. In the former the relations between John and eager are of a subjective character, while in the latter John and easy stand in an objective relation to each other. By applying the method of IC we cannot establish formally the existing difference. It is because the structures of these sentences are analyzed separatel y from the structures of other sentences. The tansformational method is aimed at overcoming the demerits of the method of IC. The Transformational grammar was first suggested by American scholar Zelling Harris as a method of analyzing sentences and was later elaborated by another American scholar Noam Chomsky as a synthetic method of ‘generating’ (constructing) sentenceswhich is why the theory is also called â€Å"generative grammar†. The fundamental ideas underlying this method are as follows. Every language has a very small number of sentence patterns called kernel or basic sentences. All the variety of sentences which can exist in that language are derived or generated from these kernel sentences by derivation rules. Grammarians have made attempts at setting up a list of patterns that could be regarded as kernel sentences. It is interesting to point out that the number of these is essentially different in various books. Transformational grammar makes a fundamental distinction between two types of sentences: kernel sentences and transforms. The latter are derived from the former. Transformational grammar traces the derivational history of a sentence by establishing what is called its â€Å"depth structure†. It thus shows why sentences having similar surface structures convey different structural meanings. The differences in meaning can be formally explained applying the transformational method. Z. Harris set up the following list of kernel sentences: NV(John came); NVpN (John looked at Mary); NVN(John saw Mary); N is N (John is a teacher); N is p N (/John is in bed); N is D (John is here); N is A (John is angry) The above sentence â€Å"The old man saw a dog there† can be interpreted as the transform of the following three kernel sentences:The man saw a dog there. The man was old. The dog was black. (The man who was old saw a dog that was black. ( The old man saw a black dog there. The ambiguity of the sentence â€Å"Flying planes can be dangerous†, is easily explained by the following transformational procedure: To fly planes is dangerous. He can fly planes. ( Flying planes can be dangerous. Planes can be dangerous. Planes fly. ( Flying planes can be dangerous. Only by transformation can we explain why phrases of the N`sN type denote different relations as in John’s arrival and John’s trial, the former being a transform of the kernel sentence John arrives and the latter having a different derivational history: X triesJohn ( John is tried ( John’s trial. S. Porter reduces the number of kernel sentences to three: â€Å"All simple sentences belong to one of three types: A) The sun warms the earth; B) The sun is a star; C) The sun is bright; As an argument S. Porter adds: â€Å"Word order is changeless in A) and B), but not in C). Even in sober prose a man may say â€Å"Bright is the sun†. The sentences derived fromsuch kernel sentences are words or combination words added to the kernel ones in accordance with their combinability so as to make the communication as complete as the speaker wishes. Thus, the kernel sentence â€Å"Boys play† can be quite independent. But this sentence can be extended by realizing the combinability of the noun â€Å"boys† and the verb â€Å"play† into â€Å"The three noisy boys play boisterous upstairs†. We can develop the sentence into a still more extended one. But one should bear in mind that the rules of combinability have to be observed for the sentence to be valid. It should also be stressed that there are rules of grammatical and lexical combinability as well as stylistic ones. The combination of words will be ungrammatical if we put together â€Å"boys plays†, instead of â€Å"boys play† or â€Å"the fish shouted† instead of â€Å"the boy shouted†. 3 The Subject Matter of Syntax Words by themselves do not, as a rule, make up complete units of speech, in order to become such units, they must get combined with one another in the framework of linguistic items of a higher rank. These are the sentence and the phrase. As a whole, they make up the syntactical structure of a language. From the point of view of Structural Grammar syntax is the part of grammar that studies the laws in accordance with which words become phrases, and sentences. Hence, syntax is the part of grammar that investigates the syntactical structure of a language. It treats of both phrases and sentences which, though belonging to different levels of language structure, are closely connected with each other. The traditional definition of syntax was extended by Prof. L. S. Barkhudarov who states that syntax has also to investigate phenomena lying on a still higher level, namely the level on which sentences combine into groups of sentences. Considering the fact that syntax studies the way words and phrases are combined into phrases, sentences and texts some scholars define syntax as the science which studies the types of formal and semantic relations within word combinations, sentences, supra-phrasal unities and texts. The syntactic language level can be described with the help of special linguistic terms and notions: syntactic unit, syntactic form, syntactic meaning, syntactic function, syntactic position, and syntactic relations. Syntactic unit is always a combination that has at least two constituents. The basic syntactic units are a word-group, a clause, a sentence, and a text. Their main features are: they are hierarchical units (the units of a lower level serve the building material for the units of a higher level); as all language units the syntactic units are of two-fold nature (the content side – the syntactic meaning of a syntactic unit- being opposed to the expression side -the syntactic form of a syntactic unit); they are of communicative and non-communicative nature (word-groups and clauses are of non-communicative nature while sentences and texts are of communicative nature. Syntactic meaning is the way in which separate word meanings are combined to produce meaningful word-groups and sentences. Syntactic form may be described as the distributional formula of the unit (pattern). John hits the ball – N1 + V + N2. Syntactic function is the function of a unit on the basis of which it is included to a larger unit: in the word-group a smart student the word ‘smart’ is in subordinate attributive relations to the head element. In traditional terms it is used to denote syntactic function of a unit within the sentence (subject, predicate, etc. ). Syntactic position is the position of an element. The order of constituents in syntactic units is of principal importance in analytical languages. The syntactic position of an element may determine its relationship with the other elements of the same unit: his broad back, a back district, to go back, to back sm. Syntactic relations are syntagmatic relations observed between syntactic units. They can be of three types -coordination, subordination and predication. 4 The Phrase Level and the Sentence Level Modern linguistics distinguishes between the phrase level and the sentence level. There exist many definitions of phrases, the difference between them being that one group of scholars hold that phrases consist of only notional words while their opponents think that the constituents of a phrase can be function words (prepositions, conjunctions, etc. ). Most definitions mention some negative feature characteristic of phrases. Prof. B. A. Ilyish, for instance, terms as phrase â€Å"every combination of two or more words which is a grammatical unit but is not an analytical form of some word. † Prof. L. S. Barkhudarov, on the other hand, defines a phrase as â€Å"a group of syntactically connected notional words being part of a sentence but not being the sentence itself. † We have already mentioned how difficult it is to draw a rigid demarcation line between phrases and analytical forms. As to the borderline between phrases and sentences, it is much easier to establish. The most important feature of a sentence as distinct from a phrase is its intonation. The structure of a phrase is of a very wide and abstract character. While singling out particular types of phrases we do not take into account the lexical meanings of the words or their morphological features. (So, for example, all the groups of words, that follow, can be classed as phrases of the V+N type: writes a letter, has seen the friend, has been giving lessons, having completed the work, etc. ) Since phrases are only parts of sentences, we must assume that there exists a higher level with its own peculiar structure. It is called the sentence level. Irrespective of its linear character (a succession in time or space of morphemes, words, phrases), the sentence has a hierarchic structure. That means that the parts of a sentence are not independent, they can exist as such only in their mutual interrelation. The interdependence of the parts of a sentence is not necessarily reflected in their linear succession. 5. Types of Syntactical Relations; Means of Expression The relations between words within phrases and sentences are not uniform. It is one of the most important tasks of syntax to single out and to define the types of syntactical relations. The universally recognized types of syntactic relations are: subordination, coordination and predication. Subordination is the type of syntactical relation under which the function of one part of the phrase coincides with the function of the phrase as a whole. The leading part is called the head of the phrase while the part having a function different from that of the head is called the adjunct of the phrase. Apart from the purely semantic criterion it is quite possible to establish which word is the head by applying the formal procedure of substitution (e. g. â€Å" A young man entered the room†. In this sentence the whole group a young man performs the function of the subject. We may replace the group by the word man: â€Å"A man entered the room†. Hence, the word man is the head of the phrase and young – the adjunct. ) While performing the substitution procedure one should not change the syntactical relations within the sentence as a whole(e. g. He is a young man. He is a man. He is young /wrong/). Coordination is the type of syntactical relation under which he syntactical function of the whole group coincides with that of its parts. Coordination can also be established by applying the substitution test (Thus, in the sentence â€Å"Boys and girls studied at that school†, the group boys and girls performs the function of the subject. The same function can be performed by either of the words making up the group: â€Å"Boys and girls studied at that school†. â€Å"Boys studied at that school†, â€Å"Girls studied at that school†). Coordinative relations are found in phrases with coordinative conjunctions /but, neither†¦nor/ and also in groups like the poet Byron, my brother the teacher(e. g. The poet Byron lived in Greece. – The poet lived in Greece. – Byron lived in Greece; My brother the teacher got married last year. – My brother got married last year. – The teacher got married last year). Predication is the type of syntactical relation under which the syntactical function of the group as a whole is different from the functions of each of its components /IC/. The most typical predicative relation is that between the subject and the predicate. This is most distinctly seen in complex sentences such as: â€Å"I hate†¦talking loudly†; â€Å"I knew he had come† None of the IC of the subordinate clauses can be replaced by the clause as a whole. It is impossible to say â€Å"I knew he† or â€Å"I knew had come†. The types of syntactic bonds just described are generally recognized, though not all scholars use the terms given above to designate them. However, these types of syntactic bonds can fail to explain the relation between, for instance, the main predication and the inserted elements in the sentences (â€Å"The boy, as it were, left the house†. â€Å" Interestingly and fortunately for him nobody saw him†). That is why some grammarians consider it also necessary to single out other types of syntactic relation to cover the cases in question. The number and types of syntactic bonds added to the above given ones varies from author to author and we are not going to dwell on them here. Instead, we shall confine ourselves to presenting the system of syntactic bonds worked out by Prof. Smirnitskiy which will serve as an example. According to him there are four types of syntactic relations in English: 1) the attributive bond characterized by A. I. Smirnitskiy as the closest kind of syntactic relations (we deal with the attributive bond in attributive word combinations or between the attributive subordinate clause and its head in the main clause); 2) the completive bond connecting the predicate and all kinds of objects, objective subordinate clauses. Adverbial subordinate clauses are also said to be connected with the main clause with the help of this kind of bond; 3) the copulative bond connecting homogeneous parts of a sentence, or independent clauses in a compound sentence. Parenthesis(or insertions) of all kinds are also regarded as syntactic phenomena introduced into the sentence with the help of this kind of syntactic bond; 4) the predicative bond, which is described as the loosest of all syntactic bonds, establishes the relations between the subject and the predicate. Every language has its peculiar grammatical means that signal different syntactical relations. Like morphemes indicating various forms of words, these may be called syntactical forms for they express syntactical relations. The relations between words in a phrase or a sentence are diverse and multiple. In syntactical analyses we normally avoid mentioning relations which can be ascribed to the lexical meanings of the words (e. g. In the phrases his singing and his hat the semantic relations between the words are different (doer- process, possession) but syntactically we have one and the same relation (subordination). Modern English makes use of the following syntactical means of expressing syntagmatic relations: Word-order. It is with the help of word-order that we make out the syntactical relations between the words in the following groups: a young man; to read a book; stone wall; Peter sees Mary; etc. Word order may indicate not only that the words stand in some kind of relation to one another but also what kind of relation it is. The forms of the words. This linguistic device has more than often been underestimated by scholars writing on the grammar of English. In the opinion of Prof. A. I. Smirnitskiy, it is just due to their scarcity that the forms of the words acquire an important role in the structure of the sentence or phrase. The importance of the morphological forms can be clearly seen if we compare the following two groups of which only the former is a sentence: He likes them – Him like they. Function words. By these we mean prepositions and conjunctions which show different relations between words (e. g. the poet Byron – the poet after Byron; a poor man – poor and proud). Intonation. Intonation may perform different functions: it helps to distinguish between a phrase and a sentence, it may also indicate different relations between words. LECTURE 7 THE PHRASE 1. Syntactical Classification of Phrases In accordance with the character of syntactic relations existing between the parts of a phrase, these are divided into three large classes: subordinative phrases, coordinative phrases, predicative phrases. This division is based on the definition under which a phrase is understood as a combination of two. or more notional words standing in some syntactical relation to one another’ and being . art of a sentence. 2. Formal Relations within a Phrase. The inner relations between the parts of a phrase are expressed formally in some way or other. No uniform classification of these formal devices has not been established so far. Still, the following types of formal syntactical means have been outlined so far: Agreement by which grammarians understand the phenomenon of two or more words having similar morphological forms due to their being connected syntactically. As a rule, the subordinate element adapts its form to that of the word it is subordinated to. Agreement is found in noun phrases with demonstrative pronouns: (this book – these books that house – those houses. ) As to the agreement between the subject and the predicate, it is of a less formal character (e. g. The United States is a country situated in North America. Our group are fond of sports. ) In this respect English is less formal than, say, Russian. In English the subject and the predicate agree with each other semantically rather than formally. This type of connection is called correspondence. Government by which grammarians understand he phenomenon of one of the words in a phrase having some grammatical form conditioned by the word it is subordinate to Government is very common in Russian where even prepositions can require that the nouns following them should stand in a certain case form. As a syntactical device government is rather rare in Modern English. We find it in combinations of the V+In type in which the verb requires that the personal pronoun s hould have the form of the objective case. The same can be said of p + In and p + whom (see him, invite us, to me, about whom, etc). Adjoining and enclosure. The absence of both agreement and government, termed adjoining, is the most characteristic feature of the syntactical structure of Modern English. Adverbs, for example, are said to be adjoined to verbs and adjectives. Strictly speaking it is not only the actual position of the adjective that helps the hearer or reader to understand what word is modified by the adverb, but in many cases some semantic features have also to be taken into account, for the adverb may be considerably far from the word it is connected with. Modern English makes extensive use of another means of expressing syntactical relations. It is called en enclosure. A very illustrative example of enclosure is found in word groups like a. fine day, where the article is separated from the noun permitting other words to become syntactically connected with the noun. In this way any word, word group and even whole sentences may become adjuncts of the noun (e. g. The above statement; a big-circulation newspaper; a take-it-or-leave-it tone). 3. 0. Jespersen ‘s Theory of Ranks A very interesting syntactical theory, known as the theory of three ranks. was elaborated by O. Jespersen. According to this theory, there is a certain analogy between the distribution of words into parts of speech and their interrelations in actual speech. Analysing the word group extremely hot weather 0. Jespersen points out that the chief word is defined by another word which in its turn may be defined by a third word, etc. â€Å"We are thus†, he writes, â€Å"led to establish different â€Å"ranks† of words according to their mutual relations as defined defining. † In his example weather is called_the primary, hot – the secondary, extremely – the tertiary In this way one can establish the rank of a word in respect of the other words it is connected with. . Subordinative phrases: noun phrases; verb phrases; adjective phrases; adverb phrases; pronoun phrases. .Subordinative phrases are distinctly different from co-ordinative and predicative phrases. In these phrases we always find parts winch are unequal as regards their syntactical status. The word wh ose function coincides with the function of the whole_phrase is called the head, and the dependent or subordinate word is called the adjunct. Unlike coordinative phrases subordinative phrases are always binary in structure. That means that irrespective of the actual number of words making up a subordinative phrase it always falls into two immediate constituents. So, for example, the phrase continued to refuse to meet demands for higher wages, at the initial stage of division into I? falls into two parts: continued and to refuse to meet demands for higher wages. What was the adjunct during the first division, in its turn, falls into the next I?: to refuse and to meet demands for higher wages; the latter also consists of two parts: to meet and demands for higher wages, and so on. The principles of classification of subordinative phrases may be various. They may be classified depending on the part of speech the head of the phrase belongs to. Under this classification the following types of phrases are distinguished: noun phrases, verb phrases, adjective phrases, adverb phrases, pronoun phrases. The second classification takes into account whether the I? of the phrase consist of one or more than one. notional words. If each I? of the phrase has only one notional_word, the phrase is called simple. If at least one of the I? has_two or more notional_words, the phrase is called complex. We can also distinguish, in this connection, between complex phrases with an expanded head and complex phrases with an expanded adjunct , and, finally, there may be phrases in which both the head and the adjunct are expanded. (e. g. The reception of the delegation by the President (a complex phrase with an expanded head) Saw the father of the youth (a complex phrase with an expanded adjunct); The reception of the delegation by the President of the state (a complex phrase in which both the head and the adjunct are expanded). Subordinative phrases may additionally be divided into continuous and discontinuous. This division takes into account the fact whether the I? of the phrase are found in succession or whether they are separated by some word which does not belong to this phrase. (e. g. Slowly, Old Jolyon got up out of the chair – a discontinuous phrase). a. Noun Phrases Noun_phrases are subordinatiye phrases in which the,head is a noun. As regards the mutual positions of the head and its adjunct linguists distinguish noun phrases with preposed adjuncts and noun phrases with postposed adjuncts. In noun phrases with preposed adjuncts the latter can be expressed by the following classes of words: adjectives, pronouns, numerals, verbs in the form of participle I or participle II, nouns having the ‘s morpheme or without it. To use symbols, these phrases have the following structures: AN (white snow; thick books); laN (this room; his friend); QN (three windows; the second lesson); V-ingN (shouting boys; melting ice); V-enN (written works; corrected mistakes); N’sN (Mary’s book; a week’s delay); NN (window glass; university team). In noun phrases with postposed adjuncts the following units may be the adjuncts: prepositional groups; adjectives and adjective phrases; verbs in the form of participles and verb phrases in which participles are the heads; verbs in the form of the infinitive and verb phrases in which the infinitive is the head; infinitival and gerundial predicative phrases; noun phrases; conjunctional groups; adverbs; numerals;subordinate clauses. The patterns noun phrases with postposed adjuncts are: NpN (the title of the book); NpNP (the title of the new book); NpIn (the saving of him); NpV-ing (my reason for coming); NpV-ingP (my reason for coming here). In principle any preposition can be part of a postposed adjunct. Special investigations have shown, however, that the preposition of covers 70% of all occurrences. Postposed adjuncts with adjectives are relatively rare, in this position the occurrence of adjective phrases is much more common: NA (the people present); NAP (a country rich in coal). It should be stressed here that only a limited number of adjectives can be used as postposed adjuncts. They are: the adjective present; adjectives with the suffixes -ible, -able, some adjectives with the prefix a- (afraid, alive). Postposed adjuncts with verbs in various forms are represented by the following types: NV-en (the person addressed); NV-ing (the children shouting); NV-enP (the work done by him); NV-ingP (the children shouting in the yard); NtoV (the work to do); NtoVD (the work to do quickly). Postposed adjuncts consisting of predicative phrases are of two kinds: they may have as a head either the infinitive or the ing-form. As a rule, they are introduced by the preposition for (the so-called for-phrases). Here are some of the most frequent patterns: NforNtoV (a book for Tom to read); NforN’sV-ing or NforNV-ing (the reason for Tom’s coming; the reason for Tom coming). Each part of the adjunct may get considerably expanded (the reason for poor Tom’s coming late;a poem for this little boy to learn by heart). Postposed adjuncts in which nouns are the heads or introduced by the conjunction as are not very frequent in Modern English. They are: NNP (a child the same age); NasN (his life as an artist); NasNP (his life as an opera singer). Postposed adjuncts with adverbs are rarely used: ND (Jim’s speech yesterday). Postposed adjuncts with numerals are confined in English only to quantitative numerals (page three, room ten). b. Verb PhrasesVerb phrases take a central position among all types of phrases in Modern English. They display a great variety of structure and are capable of combining with one another. Therefore they make up syntactical constructions of considerable depth, and complexity. Prof. L. S. Barkhudarov suggested that verb phrases should be classified according to the lexico-grammatical nature of the verb being the head of the phrase. As is known, all English verbs fall into two large classes: transitive and intransitive verbs. It is also known that many verbs can be used in either meaning but this is quite irrelevant for syntax because in any given sentence one and the same verb is either transitive or intransitive. Under the classification suggested by Prof. L. S. Barkhudarov English verb phrases fall into the following main classes: phrases the head of which is either a transitive or an intransitive verb; phrases the head of which necessarily belongs to a definite subclass of verbs (transitive or intransitive). The adjuncts in verb phrases, accordingly, fall into two types: adjuncts capable of combining with verbs of either class called extensions; adjuncts capable of combining with verbs of only a definite class (transitive or intransitive) called complements. The adjuncts of a transitive verb are called object complements, those of an intransitive verb qualifying complements. The following adjuncts can be found in verb phrases with extensions: adverbs and adverb phrases; adjectives and adjective phrases; prepositional groups; noun phrases without prepositions; pronouns; verbs in the form of the infinitive; participle I and participle II;conjunctional groups; predicative phrases;subordinate clauses: VD (runs quickly); VDP (runs very quickly); VA (stood, angry); VAP (stood, red with anger); VpN (returns to the country);VNP arrived last week); VIa (lives there); VIself. washing himself); VtoT (came to help); VtoVP (came to help me); VV-ing (came laughing); VV-en (came, frightened); VbN (acting as judge); VbA (speaking whenever possible); Vb toV (rising so as to see); VforNtoV (stood for John to pass); VpN’sV-ing (left without John’s, noticing). (For verb phrases with complements see: ?. ?. . , p? 89 -110) ?. Adjective Phrases Adjective phrases have a comparatively low frequency of occurrence, if the head of the phrase is an adjective in the positive degree, the adjunct may be: an adverb; a prepositional group; a noun; a noun phrase; a verb in the form of the gerund or the infinitive; a predicative phrase and a subordinate clause: DA (incredibly beautiful); ApNP (good for young children); AN (worth the trouble); AV-ingP (busy doing sums); AtoV (ready to go); AforNtoV (easy for John to read). Things are somewhat different with adjectives in the comparative and superlative degrees. Adjectives in the comparative degree usually combine with adjuncts introduced by the conjunction than (Tom is older than George). They also combine with adverbs and adverbial pronouns, such as far, still, much (far greater, much better, still greater). Adjectives in the superlative degree may have a proposed adjunct like by far or a postposed adjunct – a prepositional group introduced by the prepositions of and in. d. Adverb Phrases In adverb phrases the adjuncts may stand both in preposition and in postposition. Proposed adjuncts are adverbs and adverbial pronouns (except enough), and with the adverbs before, later, earlier, ago nouns or noun phrases. Postposed adjuncts are the pro-adverb enough, prepositional groups (p+N,etc. ), nouns and noun phrases: DD (rather well); IdD (so nicely); ND (years later); NPD (six days ago); D+enough (well enough); DpN (high in the air). e. Pronoun PhrasesOnly indefinite, negative and demonstrative pronouns can be heads of pronoun phrases. They take the following adjuncts: prepositional groups (p+N; p+In, p+NP); adjectives or adjective phrases; verbs in the form of the infinitive or verb phrases with the infinitive as the head;infinitival predicative phrases and subordinate clauses. The adjunct is always placed in postposition: In pN (some of the workers); In pIn (some of us); InA (something strange); IntoV (nothing to do); In forNtoV (Nobody for Tom to see). 5. Coordinative phrases. Co-ordinate phrases are characterized by the following features: all its members have a similar function in the sentence; their structure is not binary. As to the morphological peculiarities of the constituents of a coordinate phrase, it should be stressed here that this point is of no relevance for syntax. (So, for example, in the sentence – Celia was pretty and a good companion – pretty and a good companion are the constituents of one and the same coordinate phrase irrespective of their being essentially different as regards their morphological nature: pretty is an adjective, good companion is a noun phrase. ) Coordinate phrases fall into two groups: 1)Syndetic coordinate phrases. The syntactical connection between the I? is expressed with the help of conjunctions. If the conjunction is continuous, the coordinate phrase is said to be simple. If the conjunction is discontinuous, the phrase is said to be correlative (E. g. It was the sound of a gramophone, harsh and loud, He has both luck and talent. ) 2)Asyndetic coordinate phrases. The syntactical connection between the parts of the phrase is expressed only with the help of intonation. (E. g. He was hot, dusty, tired out. The good lady her mother now interposed. ) 6. Predicative phrases Predicative phrases fall into three groups: infinitival predicative phrases (for John to come); gerundial predicative phrases (John’s coming); absolute predicative phrases (all things considered). Predicative phrases have a binary structure, they are made up of only two I?. They have much in common with sentences, but the I? of a predicative phrase should not be termed subject and predicate. It should be noted here that the subjectival member of a predicative phrase and the subject of a sentence always refer to different persons or things. (E. g. He stood up for me to sit down. He is proud of his friend having won a prize. The lesson being over, we went home. ) Infinitival predicative phrasesThe subjectival member of an infinitival predicative phrase is a noun. a noun phrase or a pronoun, the latter in the form of the objective case. The predicatival member of an infinitival predicative phrase is any form of the infinitive with or without words subordinate to it. The phrase is preceded by the preposition for: forN/P/toV/P/ (for John to go there); forI toV/P/ (for something to happen); forI toV/?/ (for him to come late). Gerundial predicative phrasesThe subjectival member of a gerundial predicative phrase is a noun or a noun phrase with or without the morpheme ‘s; a possessive pronoun in the conjoint form or a personal pronoun in the objective case form and other pronouns. The predicatival member of a gerundial predicative phrase is any form of the gerund with or without words subordinate to it: NP’sV-ingP (young John’s coming late); NPV-ing P: (young John coming late); I’sV-ingP (his coming late); ImV-ing P (him coming late). Absolute predicative phrasesThe subjectival member of an absolute predicative phrase is a noun or a noun phrase, a personal pronoun in the nominative case or another type of pro-noun. The predicatival member of an absolute predicative phrase is a verb in the form of the participle or the infinitive, or a verb phrase with these forms as a head, or non-verbal parts of speech: adjectives, adverbs, prepositional groups:NPV-ingP (his voice trembling with excitement); InV-ingP (it rising slowly); NPV-enP ( his thirst gone); NPtoV? (the expenses to be paid); In toVP (each to be defined); NPAP (his face very pale); NPD (breakfast over); NPpNP (hat in hand); NPpIm (her back to him); NPNP (his shot a failure). Instances are not few when absolute predicative phrases are introduced by the prepositions with or without. (He looked at Mr. Micawber attentively, with his whole face breathing short and quick in every feature. I left the room without anybody noticing it) How to cite Basic Syntactic Notions, Essay examples

Basic Syntactic Notions Free Essays

string(75) " sentence that we arrive at after dividing it into two \(the first step\)\." S Y N T A X LECTURE 6 BASIC SYNTACTIC NOTIONS 1. Some approaches to the study of syntactic units. The central role of syntax within theoretical linguistics became clear only in the 20th century, which some scholars call the â€Å"century of syntactic theory† as far as linguistics is concerned. We will write a custom essay sample on Basic Syntactic Notions or any similar topic only for you Order Now Nowadays theoretical approaches to the discipline of syntax are numerous and extremely diverse. One school of thought treats syntax as a branch of biology, since it conceives of syntax as the study of linguistic knowledge as embodied in the human mind. Other linguists regard syntax to be the study of an abstract formal system. Yet others consider syntax to be a taxonomical device to reach broad generalizations across languages. One more school of thought approaches syntactic phenomena from the philosophical point of view proceeding from the idea that reality consists of things, their qualities and relationships. Hence, the subdivision of words by the parts of speech and the treatment of syntactic problems as philisophic processes. The hypothesis of generative grammar is that language is a structure of the human mind. The goal of generative grammar is to make a complete model of this inner language (known as i-language). This model could be used to describe all human language and to predict the grammaticality of any given utterance (that is, to predict whether the utterance would sound correct to native speakers of the language). This approach to language was pioneered by Noam Comsky. Most generative theories (although not all of them) assume that syntax is based upon the constituent structure of sentences. Generative grammars are among the theories that focus primarily on the form of a sentence, rather than its communicative function. Among the many generative theories of linguistics, the Chomskyan theories are: Transformational Grammar (TG) (Original theory of generative syntax laid out by Chomsky in Syntactic Structures in 1957 ; Government and binding theory (GB) (revised theory in the tradition of TG developed mainly by Chomsky in the 1970s and 1980s); Minimalist program (MP) (a reworking of the theory out of the GB framework published by Chomsky in 1995) Categorial grammar is an approach that attributes the syntactic structure not to rules of grammar, but to the properties of the syntactic categories themselves. For example, rather than asserting that sentences are constructed by a rule that combines a noun phrase (NP) and a verb phrase (VP) (e. g. the phrase structure rule S NP VP), in categorial grammar, such principles are embedded in the category of the head word itself. So the syntactic category for an intransitive verb is a complex formula representing the fact that the verb acts as a functor which requires an NP as an input and produces a sentence level structure as an output. This complex category is regarded as † a category that searches to the left for a NP (the element on the left) and outputs a sentence (the element on the right)†. The category of transitive verb is defined as an element that requires two NPs (its subject and its direct object) to form a sentence. Dependency grammar regards structure as determined by the relations (such as grammatical relations) between a word (a head) and its dependents, rather than being based in constituent structure. For example, syntactic structure is described in terms of whether a particular noun is the subject or agent of the verb, rather than describing the relations in terms of phrases. Stochastic/probabilistic grammars/network theories These are theoretical approaches to syntax based upon probability theory. They are known as stochastic grammars. One common implementation of such an approach makes use of a neural network or connectionism. Some theories based within this approach are: Optimality theory and Stochastic context-free grammar. Functionalist grammars are functionalist theories, which (though focused upon form) are driven by explanation based upon the function of a sentence (i. e. its communicative function). Some typical functionalist theories include: Funtionalist grammar; Prague Linguistic Circle; Systemic functional grammar; Cognitive grammar; Construction grammar; Role and reference grammar; Emergent grammar Constructional Syntax. Constructional analysis of syntactic units was initiated by Prof. G. Pocheptsov (1971). The analysis deals with the constructional significance/insignificance of a part of the sentence for the whole syntactic unit. The theory is based on the obligatory or optional environment of syntactic elements. For example, the element him in the sentence / saw him there yesterday is constructionally significant because it is impossible to omit it. At the same time the elements there and yesterday are constructionally insignificant – they can be omitted without destroying the whole structure. Communicative Syntax. It is primarily concerned with the analysis of utterances from the point of their communicative value and informative structure. It deals with the actual division of the utterance – the theme and rheme analysis. Both the theme and the rheme constitute the informative structure of utterances. Pragmatic approach to the study of syntactic units can briefly be described as the study of the way language is used in particular contexts to achieve particular goals. Speech Act Theory was first introduced by John Austin. The notion of a speech act presupposes that an utterance can be said with different intentions or purposes and therefore can influence the speaker and situation in different ways: I just state the fact; Textlinguistics studies the text as a syntactic unit, its main features and peculiarities, different ways of its analysis. Discourse analysis focuses on the study of language use with reference to the social and psychological factors that influence communication. 2. Some concrete methods of syntactic analysis. The most commonly applied concrete methods of syntactic analysis seem to be the IC and transformational procedures. The method of IC is based on the idea that sentences have a hierarchic structure consisting of a number of layers. It is assumed that parts of a sentence are combined with each other according to strict rules. If we want to know how a sentence is built we must separate its units or constituents. Hence the notion of immediate constituents /IC/. Immediate constituents are those parts of a sentence that we arrive at after dividing it into two (the first step). You read "Basic Syntactic Notions" in category "Essay examples" Those parts or IC may, in their turn, be divided into further parts until the actual place of each word in the structure of the sentence as a whole has been established. (e. g. The old man saw a black dog there. S – sentence P – phrase N- noun V – verb t – article p – preposition A – adjective D – adverb) The method of IC is very helpful in syntactical analysis. But it has certain limitations. Sentences in which the relations between words are considerably different despite identical surface structures get in the IC model quite similar interpretations. Compare the sentences: John is eager to please and John is easy to please. In the former the relations between John and eager are of a subjective character, while in the latter John and easy stand in an objective relation to each other. By applying the method of IC we cannot establish formally the existing difference. It is because the structures of these sentences are analyzed separatel y from the structures of other sentences. The tansformational method is aimed at overcoming the demerits of the method of IC. The Transformational grammar was first suggested by American scholar Zelling Harris as a method of analyzing sentences and was later elaborated by another American scholar Noam Chomsky as a synthetic method of ‘generating’ (constructing) sentenceswhich is why the theory is also called â€Å"generative grammar†. The fundamental ideas underlying this method are as follows. Every language has a very small number of sentence patterns called kernel or basic sentences. All the variety of sentences which can exist in that language are derived or generated from these kernel sentences by derivation rules. Grammarians have made attempts at setting up a list of patterns that could be regarded as kernel sentences. It is interesting to point out that the number of these is essentially different in various books. Transformational grammar makes a fundamental distinction between two types of sentences: kernel sentences and transforms. The latter are derived from the former. Transformational grammar traces the derivational history of a sentence by establishing what is called its â€Å"depth structure†. It thus shows why sentences having similar surface structures convey different structural meanings. The differences in meaning can be formally explained applying the transformational method. Z. Harris set up the following list of kernel sentences: NV(John came); NVpN (John looked at Mary); NVN(John saw Mary); N is N (John is a teacher); N is p N (/John is in bed); N is D (John is here); N is A (John is angry) The above sentence â€Å"The old man saw a dog there† can be interpreted as the transform of the following three kernel sentences:The man saw a dog there. The man was old. The dog was black. (The man who was old saw a dog that was black. ( The old man saw a black dog there. The ambiguity of the sentence â€Å"Flying planes can be dangerous†, is easily explained by the following transformational procedure: To fly planes is dangerous. He can fly planes. ( Flying planes can be dangerous. Planes can be dangerous. Planes fly. ( Flying planes can be dangerous. Only by transformation can we explain why phrases of the N`sN type denote different relations as in John’s arrival and John’s trial, the former being a transform of the kernel sentence John arrives and the latter having a different derivational history: X triesJohn ( John is tried ( John’s trial. S. Porter reduces the number of kernel sentences to three: â€Å"All simple sentences belong to one of three types: A) The sun warms the earth; B) The sun is a star; C) The sun is bright; As an argument S. Porter adds: â€Å"Word order is changeless in A) and B), but not in C). Even in sober prose a man may say â€Å"Bright is the sun†. The sentences derived fromsuch kernel sentences are words or combination words added to the kernel ones in accordance with their combinability so as to make the communication as complete as the speaker wishes. Thus, the kernel sentence â€Å"Boys play† can be quite independent. But this sentence can be extended by realizing the combinability of the noun â€Å"boys† and the verb â€Å"play† into â€Å"The three noisy boys play boisterous upstairs†. We can develop the sentence into a still more extended one. But one should bear in mind that the rules of combinability have to be observed for the sentence to be valid. It should also be stressed that there are rules of grammatical and lexical combinability as well as stylistic ones. The combination of words will be ungrammatical if we put together â€Å"boys plays†, instead of â€Å"boys play† or â€Å"the fish shouted† instead of â€Å"the boy shouted†. 3 The Subject Matter of Syntax Words by themselves do not, as a rule, make up complete units of speech, in order to become such units, they must get combined with one another in the framework of linguistic items of a higher rank. These are the sentence and the phrase. As a whole, they make up the syntactical structure of a language. From the point of view of Structural Grammar syntax is the part of grammar that studies the laws in accordance with which words become phrases, and sentences. Hence, syntax is the part of grammar that investigates the syntactical structure of a language. It treats of both phrases and sentences which, though belonging to different levels of language structure, are closely connected with each other. The traditional definition of syntax was extended by Prof. L. S. Barkhudarov who states that syntax has also to investigate phenomena lying on a still higher level, namely the level on which sentences combine into groups of sentences. Considering the fact that syntax studies the way words and phrases are combined into phrases, sentences and texts some scholars define syntax as the science which studies the types of formal and semantic relations within word combinations, sentences, supra-phrasal unities and texts. The syntactic language level can be described with the help of special linguistic terms and notions: syntactic unit, syntactic form, syntactic meaning, syntactic function, syntactic position, and syntactic relations. Syntactic unit is always a combination that has at least two constituents. The basic syntactic units are a word-group, a clause, a sentence, and a text. Their main features are: they are hierarchical units (the units of a lower level serve the building material for the units of a higher level); as all language units the syntactic units are of two-fold nature (the content side – the syntactic meaning of a syntactic unit- being opposed to the expression side -the syntactic form of a syntactic unit); they are of communicative and non-communicative nature (word-groups and clauses are of non-communicative nature while sentences and texts are of communicative nature. Syntactic meaning is the way in which separate word meanings are combined to produce meaningful word-groups and sentences. Syntactic form may be described as the distributional formula of the unit (pattern). John hits the ball – N1 + V + N2. Syntactic function is the function of a unit on the basis of which it is included to a larger unit: in the word-group a smart student the word ‘smart’ is in subordinate attributive relations to the head element. In traditional terms it is used to denote syntactic function of a unit within the sentence (subject, predicate, etc. ). Syntactic position is the position of an element. The order of constituents in syntactic units is of principal importance in analytical languages. The syntactic position of an element may determine its relationship with the other elements of the same unit: his broad back, a back district, to go back, to back sm. Syntactic relations are syntagmatic relations observed between syntactic units. They can be of three types -coordination, subordination and predication. 4 The Phrase Level and the Sentence Level Modern linguistics distinguishes between the phrase level and the sentence level. There exist many definitions of phrases, the difference between them being that one group of scholars hold that phrases consist of only notional words while their opponents think that the constituents of a phrase can be function words (prepositions, conjunctions, etc. ). Most definitions mention some negative feature characteristic of phrases. Prof. B. A. Ilyish, for instance, terms as phrase â€Å"every combination of two or more words which is a grammatical unit but is not an analytical form of some word. † Prof. L. S. Barkhudarov, on the other hand, defines a phrase as â€Å"a group of syntactically connected notional words being part of a sentence but not being the sentence itself. † We have already mentioned how difficult it is to draw a rigid demarcation line between phrases and analytical forms. As to the borderline between phrases and sentences, it is much easier to establish. The most important feature of a sentence as distinct from a phrase is its intonation. The structure of a phrase is of a very wide and abstract character. While singling out particular types of phrases we do not take into account the lexical meanings of the words or their morphological features. (So, for example, all the groups of words, that follow, can be classed as phrases of the V+N type: writes a letter, has seen the friend, has been giving lessons, having completed the work, etc. ) Since phrases are only parts of sentences, we must assume that there exists a higher level with its own peculiar structure. It is called the sentence level. Irrespective of its linear character (a succession in time or space of morphemes, words, phrases), the sentence has a hierarchic structure. That means that the parts of a sentence are not independent, they can exist as such only in their mutual interrelation. The interdependence of the parts of a sentence is not necessarily reflected in their linear succession. 5. Types of Syntactical Relations; Means of Expression The relations between words within phrases and sentences are not uniform. It is one of the most important tasks of syntax to single out and to define the types of syntactical relations. The universally recognized types of syntactic relations are: subordination, coordination and predication. Subordination is the type of syntactical relation under which the function of one part of the phrase coincides with the function of the phrase as a whole. The leading part is called the head of the phrase while the part having a function different from that of the head is called the adjunct of the phrase. Apart from the purely semantic criterion it is quite possible to establish which word is the head by applying the formal procedure of substitution (e. g. â€Å" A young man entered the room†. In this sentence the whole group a young man performs the function of the subject. We may replace the group by the word man: â€Å"A man entered the room†. Hence, the word man is the head of the phrase and young – the adjunct. ) While performing the substitution procedure one should not change the syntactical relations within the sentence as a whole(e. g. He is a young man. He is a man. He is young /wrong/). Coordination is the type of syntactical relation under which he syntactical function of the whole group coincides with that of its parts. Coordination can also be established by applying the substitution test (Thus, in the sentence â€Å"Boys and girls studied at that school†, the group boys and girls performs the function of the subject. The same function can be performed by either of the words making up the group: â€Å"Boys and girls studied at that school†. â€Å"Boys studied at that school†, â€Å"Girls studied at that school†). Coordinative relations are found in phrases with coordinative conjunctions /but, neither†¦nor/ and also in groups like the poet Byron, my brother the teacher(e. g. The poet Byron lived in Greece. – The poet lived in Greece. – Byron lived in Greece; My brother the teacher got married last year. – My brother got married last year. – The teacher got married last year). Predication is the type of syntactical relation under which the syntactical function of the group as a whole is different from the functions of each of its components /IC/. The most typical predicative relation is that between the subject and the predicate. This is most distinctly seen in complex sentences such as: â€Å"I hate†¦talking loudly†; â€Å"I knew he had come† None of the IC of the subordinate clauses can be replaced by the clause as a whole. It is impossible to say â€Å"I knew he† or â€Å"I knew had come†. The types of syntactic bonds just described are generally recognized, though not all scholars use the terms given above to designate them. However, these types of syntactic bonds can fail to explain the relation between, for instance, the main predication and the inserted elements in the sentences (â€Å"The boy, as it were, left the house†. â€Å" Interestingly and fortunately for him nobody saw him†). That is why some grammarians consider it also necessary to single out other types of syntactic relation to cover the cases in question. The number and types of syntactic bonds added to the above given ones varies from author to author and we are not going to dwell on them here. Instead, we shall confine ourselves to presenting the system of syntactic bonds worked out by Prof. Smirnitskiy which will serve as an example. According to him there are four types of syntactic relations in English: 1) the attributive bond characterized by A. I. Smirnitskiy as the closest kind of syntactic relations (we deal with the attributive bond in attributive word combinations or between the attributive subordinate clause and its head in the main clause); 2) the completive bond connecting the predicate and all kinds of objects, objective subordinate clauses. Adverbial subordinate clauses are also said to be connected with the main clause with the help of this kind of bond; 3) the copulative bond connecting homogeneous parts of a sentence, or independent clauses in a compound sentence. Parenthesis(or insertions) of all kinds are also regarded as syntactic phenomena introduced into the sentence with the help of this kind of syntactic bond; 4) the predicative bond, which is described as the loosest of all syntactic bonds, establishes the relations between the subject and the predicate. Every language has its peculiar grammatical means that signal different syntactical relations. Like morphemes indicating various forms of words, these may be called syntactical forms for they express syntactical relations. The relations between words in a phrase or a sentence are diverse and multiple. In syntactical analyses we normally avoid mentioning relations which can be ascribed to the lexical meanings of the words (e. g. In the phrases his singing and his hat the semantic relations between the words are different (doer- process, possession) but syntactically we have one and the same relation (subordination). Modern English makes use of the following syntactical means of expressing syntagmatic relations: Word-order. It is with the help of word-order that we make out the syntactical relations between the words in the following groups: a young man; to read a book; stone wall; Peter sees Mary; etc. Word order may indicate not only that the words stand in some kind of relation to one another but also what kind of relation it is. The forms of the words. This linguistic device has more than often been underestimated by scholars writing on the grammar of English. In the opinion of Prof. A. I. Smirnitskiy, it is just due to their scarcity that the forms of the words acquire an important role in the structure of the sentence or phrase. The importance of the morphological forms can be clearly seen if we compare the following two groups of which only the former is a sentence: He likes them – Him like they. Function words. By these we mean prepositions and conjunctions which show different relations between words (e. g. the poet Byron – the poet after Byron; a poor man – poor and proud). Intonation. Intonation may perform different functions: it helps to distinguish between a phrase and a sentence, it may also indicate different relations between words. LECTURE 7 THE PHRASE 1. Syntactical Classification of Phrases In accordance with the character of syntactic relations existing between the parts of a phrase, these are divided into three large classes: subordinative phrases, coordinative phrases, predicative phrases. This division is based on the definition under which a phrase is understood as a combination of two. or more notional words standing in some syntactical relation to one another’ and being . art of a sentence. 2. Formal Relations within a Phrase. The inner relations between the parts of a phrase are expressed formally in some way or other. No uniform classification of these formal devices has not been established so far. Still, the following types of formal syntactical means have been outlined so far: Agreement by which grammarians understand the phenomenon of two or more words having similar morphological forms due to their being connected syntactically. As a rule, the subordinate element adapts its form to that of the word it is subordinated to. Agreement is found in noun phrases with demonstrative pronouns: (this book – these books that house – those houses. ) As to the agreement between the subject and the predicate, it is of a less formal character (e. g. The United States is a country situated in North America. Our group are fond of sports. ) In this respect English is less formal than, say, Russian. In English the subject and the predicate agree with each other semantically rather than formally. This type of connection is called correspondence. Government by which grammarians understand he phenomenon of one of the words in a phrase having some grammatical form conditioned by the word it is subordinate to Government is very common in Russian where even prepositions can require that the nouns following them should stand in a certain case form. As a syntactical device government is rather rare in Modern English. We find it in combinations of the V+In type in which the verb requires that the personal pronoun s hould have the form of the objective case. The same can be said of p + In and p + whom (see him, invite us, to me, about whom, etc). Adjoining and enclosure. The absence of both agreement and government, termed adjoining, is the most characteristic feature of the syntactical structure of Modern English. Adverbs, for example, are said to be adjoined to verbs and adjectives. Strictly speaking it is not only the actual position of the adjective that helps the hearer or reader to understand what word is modified by the adverb, but in many cases some semantic features have also to be taken into account, for the adverb may be considerably far from the word it is connected with. Modern English makes extensive use of another means of expressing syntactical relations. It is called en enclosure. A very illustrative example of enclosure is found in word groups like a. fine day, where the article is separated from the noun permitting other words to become syntactically connected with the noun. In this way any word, word group and even whole sentences may become adjuncts of the noun (e. g. The above statement; a big-circulation newspaper; a take-it-or-leave-it tone). 3. 0. Jespersen ‘s Theory of Ranks A very interesting syntactical theory, known as the theory of three ranks. was elaborated by O. Jespersen. According to this theory, there is a certain analogy between the distribution of words into parts of speech and their interrelations in actual speech. Analysing the word group extremely hot weather 0. Jespersen points out that the chief word is defined by another word which in its turn may be defined by a third word, etc. â€Å"We are thus†, he writes, â€Å"led to establish different â€Å"ranks† of words according to their mutual relations as defined defining. † In his example weather is called_the primary, hot – the secondary, extremely – the tertiary In this way one can establish the rank of a word in respect of the other words it is connected with. . Subordinative phrases: noun phrases; verb phrases; adjective phrases; adverb phrases; pronoun phrases. .Subordinative phrases are distinctly different from co-ordinative and predicative phrases. In these phrases we always find parts winch are unequal as regards their syntactical status. The word wh ose function coincides with the function of the whole_phrase is called the head, and the dependent or subordinate word is called the adjunct. Unlike coordinative phrases subordinative phrases are always binary in structure. That means that irrespective of the actual number of words making up a subordinative phrase it always falls into two immediate constituents. So, for example, the phrase continued to refuse to meet demands for higher wages, at the initial stage of division into I? falls into two parts: continued and to refuse to meet demands for higher wages. What was the adjunct during the first division, in its turn, falls into the next I?: to refuse and to meet demands for higher wages; the latter also consists of two parts: to meet and demands for higher wages, and so on. The principles of classification of subordinative phrases may be various. They may be classified depending on the part of speech the head of the phrase belongs to. Under this classification the following types of phrases are distinguished: noun phrases, verb phrases, adjective phrases, adverb phrases, pronoun phrases. The second classification takes into account whether the I? of the phrase consist of one or more than one. notional words. If each I? of the phrase has only one notional_word, the phrase is called simple. If at least one of the I? has_two or more notional_words, the phrase is called complex. We can also distinguish, in this connection, between complex phrases with an expanded head and complex phrases with an expanded adjunct , and, finally, there may be phrases in which both the head and the adjunct are expanded. (e. g. The reception of the delegation by the President (a complex phrase with an expanded head) Saw the father of the youth (a complex phrase with an expanded adjunct); The reception of the delegation by the President of the state (a complex phrase in which both the head and the adjunct are expanded). Subordinative phrases may additionally be divided into continuous and discontinuous. This division takes into account the fact whether the I? of the phrase are found in succession or whether they are separated by some word which does not belong to this phrase. (e. g. Slowly, Old Jolyon got up out of the chair – a discontinuous phrase). a. Noun Phrases Noun_phrases are subordinatiye phrases in which the,head is a noun. As regards the mutual positions of the head and its adjunct linguists distinguish noun phrases with preposed adjuncts and noun phrases with postposed adjuncts. In noun phrases with preposed adjuncts the latter can be expressed by the following classes of words: adjectives, pronouns, numerals, verbs in the form of participle I or participle II, nouns having the ‘s morpheme or without it. To use symbols, these phrases have the following structures: AN (white snow; thick books); laN (this room; his friend); QN (three windows; the second lesson); V-ingN (shouting boys; melting ice); V-enN (written works; corrected mistakes); N’sN (Mary’s book; a week’s delay); NN (window glass; university team). In noun phrases with postposed adjuncts the following units may be the adjuncts: prepositional groups; adjectives and adjective phrases; verbs in the form of participles and verb phrases in which participles are the heads; verbs in the form of the infinitive and verb phrases in which the infinitive is the head; infinitival and gerundial predicative phrases; noun phrases; conjunctional groups; adverbs; numerals;subordinate clauses. The patterns noun phrases with postposed adjuncts are: NpN (the title of the book); NpNP (the title of the new book); NpIn (the saving of him); NpV-ing (my reason for coming); NpV-ingP (my reason for coming here). In principle any preposition can be part of a postposed adjunct. Special investigations have shown, however, that the preposition of covers 70% of all occurrences. Postposed adjuncts with adjectives are relatively rare, in this position the occurrence of adjective phrases is much more common: NA (the people present); NAP (a country rich in coal). It should be stressed here that only a limited number of adjectives can be used as postposed adjuncts. They are: the adjective present; adjectives with the suffixes -ible, -able, some adjectives with the prefix a- (afraid, alive). Postposed adjuncts with verbs in various forms are represented by the following types: NV-en (the person addressed); NV-ing (the children shouting); NV-enP (the work done by him); NV-ingP (the children shouting in the yard); NtoV (the work to do); NtoVD (the work to do quickly). Postposed adjuncts consisting of predicative phrases are of two kinds: they may have as a head either the infinitive or the ing-form. As a rule, they are introduced by the preposition for (the so-called for-phrases). Here are some of the most frequent patterns: NforNtoV (a book for Tom to read); NforN’sV-ing or NforNV-ing (the reason for Tom’s coming; the reason for Tom coming). Each part of the adjunct may get considerably expanded (the reason for poor Tom’s coming late;a poem for this little boy to learn by heart). Postposed adjuncts in which nouns are the heads or introduced by the conjunction as are not very frequent in Modern English. They are: NNP (a child the same age); NasN (his life as an artist); NasNP (his life as an opera singer). Postposed adjuncts with adverbs are rarely used: ND (Jim’s speech yesterday). Postposed adjuncts with numerals are confined in English only to quantitative numerals (page three, room ten). b. Verb PhrasesVerb phrases take a central position among all types of phrases in Modern English. They display a great variety of structure and are capable of combining with one another. Therefore they make up syntactical constructions of considerable depth, and complexity. Prof. L. S. Barkhudarov suggested that verb phrases should be classified according to the lexico-grammatical nature of the verb being the head of the phrase. As is known, all English verbs fall into two large classes: transitive and intransitive verbs. It is also known that many verbs can be used in either meaning but this is quite irrelevant for syntax because in any given sentence one and the same verb is either transitive or intransitive. Under the classification suggested by Prof. L. S. Barkhudarov English verb phrases fall into the following main classes: phrases the head of which is either a transitive or an intransitive verb; phrases the head of which necessarily belongs to a definite subclass of verbs (transitive or intransitive). The adjuncts in verb phrases, accordingly, fall into two types: adjuncts capable of combining with verbs of either class called extensions; adjuncts capable of combining with verbs of only a definite class (transitive or intransitive) called complements. The adjuncts of a transitive verb are called object complements, those of an intransitive verb qualifying complements. The following adjuncts can be found in verb phrases with extensions: adverbs and adverb phrases; adjectives and adjective phrases; prepositional groups; noun phrases without prepositions; pronouns; verbs in the form of the infinitive; participle I and participle II;conjunctional groups; predicative phrases;subordinate clauses: VD (runs quickly); VDP (runs very quickly); VA (stood, angry); VAP (stood, red with anger); VpN (returns to the country);VNP arrived last week); VIa (lives there); VIself. washing himself); VtoT (came to help); VtoVP (came to help me); VV-ing (came laughing); VV-en (came, frightened); VbN (acting as judge); VbA (speaking whenever possible); Vb toV (rising so as to see); VforNtoV (stood for John to pass); VpN’sV-ing (left without John’s, noticing). (For verb phrases with complements see: ?. ?. . , p? 89 -110) ?. Adjective Phrases Adjective phrases have a comparatively low frequency of occurrence, if the head of the phrase is an adjective in the positive degree, the adjunct may be: an adverb; a prepositional group; a noun; a noun phrase; a verb in the form of the gerund or the infinitive; a predicative phrase and a subordinate clause: DA (incredibly beautiful); ApNP (good for young children); AN (worth the trouble); AV-ingP (busy doing sums); AtoV (ready to go); AforNtoV (easy for John to read). Things are somewhat different with adjectives in the comparative and superlative degrees. Adjectives in the comparative degree usually combine with adjuncts introduced by the conjunction than (Tom is older than George). They also combine with adverbs and adverbial pronouns, such as far, still, much (far greater, much better, still greater). Adjectives in the superlative degree may have a proposed adjunct like by far or a postposed adjunct – a prepositional group introduced by the prepositions of and in. d. Adverb Phrases In adverb phrases the adjuncts may stand both in preposition and in postposition. Proposed adjuncts are adverbs and adverbial pronouns (except enough), and with the adverbs before, later, earlier, ago nouns or noun phrases. Postposed adjuncts are the pro-adverb enough, prepositional groups (p+N,etc. ), nouns and noun phrases: DD (rather well); IdD (so nicely); ND (years later); NPD (six days ago); D+enough (well enough); DpN (high in the air). e. Pronoun PhrasesOnly indefinite, negative and demonstrative pronouns can be heads of pronoun phrases. They take the following adjuncts: prepositional groups (p+N; p+In, p+NP); adjectives or adjective phrases; verbs in the form of the infinitive or verb phrases with the infinitive as the head;infinitival predicative phrases and subordinate clauses. The adjunct is always placed in postposition: In pN (some of the workers); In pIn (some of us); InA (something strange); IntoV (nothing to do); In forNtoV (Nobody for Tom to see). 5. Coordinative phrases. Co-ordinate phrases are characterized by the following features: all its members have a similar function in the sentence; their structure is not binary. As to the morphological peculiarities of the constituents of a coordinate phrase, it should be stressed here that this point is of no relevance for syntax. (So, for example, in the sentence – Celia was pretty and a good companion – pretty and a good companion are the constituents of one and the same coordinate phrase irrespective of their being essentially different as regards their morphological nature: pretty is an adjective, good companion is a noun phrase. ) Coordinate phrases fall into two groups: 1)Syndetic coordinate phrases. The syntactical connection between the I? is expressed with the help of conjunctions. If the conjunction is continuous, the coordinate phrase is said to be simple. If the conjunction is discontinuous, the phrase is said to be correlative (E. g. It was the sound of a gramophone, harsh and loud, He has both luck and talent. ) 2)Asyndetic coordinate phrases. The syntactical connection between the parts of the phrase is expressed only with the help of intonation. (E. g. He was hot, dusty, tired out. The good lady her mother now interposed. ) 6. Predicative phrases Predicative phrases fall into three groups: infinitival predicative phrases (for John to come); gerundial predicative phrases (John’s coming); absolute predicative phrases (all things considered). Predicative phrases have a binary structure, they are made up of only two I?. They have much in common with sentences, but the I? of a predicative phrase should not be termed subject and predicate. It should be noted here that the subjectival member of a predicative phrase and the subject of a sentence always refer to different persons or things. (E. g. He stood up for me to sit down. He is proud of his friend having won a prize. The lesson being over, we went home. ) Infinitival predicative phrasesThe subjectival member of an infinitival predicative phrase is a noun. a noun phrase or a pronoun, the latter in the form of the objective case. The predicatival member of an infinitival predicative phrase is any form of the infinitive with or without words subordinate to it. The phrase is preceded by the preposition for: forN/P/toV/P/ (for John to go there); forI toV/P/ (for something to happen); forI toV/?/ (for him to come late). Gerundial predicative phrasesThe subjectival member of a gerundial predicative phrase is a noun or a noun phrase with or without the morpheme ‘s; a possessive pronoun in the conjoint form or a personal pronoun in the objective case form and other pronouns. The predicatival member of a gerundial predicative phrase is any form of the gerund with or without words subordinate to it: NP’sV-ingP (young John’s coming late); NPV-ing P: (young John coming late); I’sV-ingP (his coming late); ImV-ing P (him coming late). Absolute predicative phrasesThe subjectival member of an absolute predicative phrase is a noun or a noun phrase, a personal pronoun in the nominative case or another type of pro-noun. The predicatival member of an absolute predicative phrase is a verb in the form of the participle or the infinitive, or a verb phrase with these forms as a head, or non-verbal parts of speech: adjectives, adverbs, prepositional groups:NPV-ingP (his voice trembling with excitement); InV-ingP (it rising slowly); NPV-enP ( his thirst gone); NPtoV? (the expenses to be paid); In toVP (each to be defined); NPAP (his face very pale); NPD (breakfast over); NPpNP (hat in hand); NPpIm (her back to him); NPNP (his shot a failure). Instances are not few when absolute predicative phrases are introduced by the prepositions with or without. (He looked at Mr. Micawber attentively, with his whole face breathing short and quick in every feature. I left the room without anybody noticing it) How to cite Basic Syntactic Notions, Essay examples

Ngfv, Jh Essay Example

Ngfv, Jh Paper Mara- All members should check into the team member chat room and make a post to show participation and give feedback to others comments. Erin- Everyone is expected to participate in the Learning Team Forum to discuss team decisions and individual assignments for group projects. Everyone is expected to submit their portions of assignments to the Learning Team Forum on time. If a conflict occurs team members will attempt to work it out together via forum, email, or telephone. Regan- Respect for the team members, prompt and courteous participation and communication is required. Kayla- to make sure all assignments are submitted in a timely fashion so reviews can be done and make sure everyone is communicating correctly and getting alone together to make sure this is a educational and laid back experience. Expectations for Time Management and Involvement (Participation, communication with the team, accessibility, etc. ) Carol-I think it is fair to expect each team member to check into the team forum no less than 4 day/week. Team members should submit their work by the deadlines the team has agreed upon and should answer all questions in a timely manner, especially the team leader. Mara- Within 48 hours of due date of project, all team member’s work will be submitted to be organized and put into presentation format by team leader. This ensures adequate time for the team leader to organize a good presentation. Erin- Each team member will post a progress report of their task prior to project due date. Exact date to be determined with each project. Each team member will post their task 2 days before the assignment is due to be submitted. This will allow the team leader time to assemble or summarize the assignment and post to team members for final agreement one day prior to final submission. Each team member will post a message in the team forum if availability listed above changes. If urgent, contact team leader by phone. Regan- Team members will agree on deadlines for assignments, check the Team forum at least daily and communicate. If there is a problem that impacts delivery let the team know ASAP. Failure to meet deadlines could result in exclusion from the team assignment. Kayla- I think all team members should communicate accordingly even on weeks we do not have assignments to prepare for those assignments. Ensuring Fair and Even Contribution and Collaboration We will write a custom essay sample on Ngfv, Jh specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Ngfv, Jh specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Ngfv, Jh specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer What strategy will you use to ensure that all team members are contributing and collaborating appropriately? Describe the communication strategy you will use if a team member is not contributing and collaborating effectively. How will the team manage conflicts between team members? Carol-I think the team lead should have the authority to assign each team member a portion of the assignment. This will enable everyone to know which part of the assignment everyone else is working on. If a team member is having difficulty with their portion of the assignment he/she should ask for help early enough to get the assignment completed on time. The main issue usually arise when team members do not communicate with each other. This lack of communication is detrimental to the entire team’s moral and adds undue stress to the other team members. Therefore, if a team member is not communicating, does not submit his/her work in a manner consistent with team rules, that member’s name will not be added to the completed assignment. This decision will be made by the rest of the entire team after numerous attempts from the team lead to contact the team member. If an issue arises that the team cannot resolve the facilitator will be asked for direction on how to handle the problem. When the completed team project is submitted to the CWE and Plagiarism checker before submitting to the assignments tab, if a portion is found to be plagiarized or contain numerous errors the team member will be asked to revise this portion. If he/she does not the team lead will revise and the team member’s name will not be added to the completed project. Regan- Team members will agree on deadlines for assignments, check the Team forum at least daily and communicate. If there is a problem that impacts delivery let the team know ASAP. Failure to meet deadlines could result in exclusion from the team assignment. Kayla- Each team assignment should be split up correctly and evenly. If there is someone who needs help we as a team should help them. Special Considerations What do you, as a team, agree will make this team experience different from past team experiences? Carol-COMMUNICATION! In previous classes when communication broke down the team struggled to complete assignments by due dates. If every team member communicates with the rest of the team we will be successful. Should emergencies arise and team members are unable to complete their portion they should submit what they have and someone else will complete the task. Also be supportive of each other, especially the team lead. Erin- Establishment of this team charter with its expectations and deadlines clearly defined will be most valuable. Our main focus is to work together, communicate as often as possible and to respect each other’s idea, to ask questions and provide assistance as needed. Completing all individual tasks well before the project due date to allow team leader time for editing. Regan- Have one member proof and edit. Kayla- Great coordinator.

Free Essays on Marketing Mix Paper

Marketing Mix Paper According to the textbook Contemporary Marketing Wired (1998) by J. Boone and S. Kurtz, the concept of marketing is defined as follows; â€Å" Marketing is the process of planning and executing the conception, pricing, promotion, and distribution of ideas, goods, services, organizations, and events to create and maintain relationships that will satisfy individual and organizational objectives." To bring this conceptual goal to fruition marketers have essentially four variables to use when crafting marketing strategies and writing a marketing plan. They are price, promotion, product and distribution (also called placement). They are sometimes referred to as the 4P's and all marketing decisions generally fall into one of the four controllable categories. The term â€Å"marketing mix† or 4 P’s, became popular in 1964 by Neil H. Borden whose original marketing ingredients included product planning, pricing, branding, distribution channels, personal selling, advertising, promotions, packaging, display, servicing, physical handling, and fact finding analysis.(1964). This was later grouped into the four categories previously mentioned. The marketing mix is the parameters that the marketer or marketing manager can control (subject to the external and internal constraints of the marketing environment at large). The marketers goal is to always make decisions that focus each of the 4 P’s on the consumers in the target market in order to generate perceived value and create a favorable customer response. The term â€Å"product† in the marketing mix alludes to not only tangible physical products but services as well. Product decisions are also encompassed in this category and include: brand name, functionality, quality, styling, safety, packaging, warranty, repairs and support, and accessories and services. The term â€Å"price† in the 4 P’s refers too much more than assigning a single cost to a produc... Free Essays on Marketing Mix Paper Free Essays on Marketing Mix Paper Marketing Mix Paper According to the textbook Contemporary Marketing Wired (1998) by J. Boone and S. Kurtz, the concept of marketing is defined as follows; â€Å" Marketing is the process of planning and executing the conception, pricing, promotion, and distribution of ideas, goods, services, organizations, and events to create and maintain relationships that will satisfy individual and organizational objectives." To bring this conceptual goal to fruition marketers have essentially four variables to use when crafting marketing strategies and writing a marketing plan. They are price, promotion, product and distribution (also called placement). They are sometimes referred to as the 4P's and all marketing decisions generally fall into one of the four controllable categories. The term â€Å"marketing mix† or 4 P’s, became popular in 1964 by Neil H. Borden whose original marketing ingredients included product planning, pricing, branding, distribution channels, personal selling, advertising, promotions, packaging, display, servicing, physical handling, and fact finding analysis.(1964). This was later grouped into the four categories previously mentioned. The marketing mix is the parameters that the marketer or marketing manager can control (subject to the external and internal constraints of the marketing environment at large). The marketers goal is to always make decisions that focus each of the 4 P’s on the consumers in the target market in order to generate perceived value and create a favorable customer response. The term â€Å"product† in the marketing mix alludes to not only tangible physical products but services as well. Product decisions are also encompassed in this category and include: brand name, functionality, quality, styling, safety, packaging, warranty, repairs and support, and accessories and services. The term â€Å"price† in the 4 P’s refers too much more than assigning a single cost to a produc...

30 Famous Bilingual French Quotes

30 Famous Bilingual French Quotes French quotes are a fun and interesting way to learn some French vocabulary. The quotes below are short, famous, and easy to memorize. The quotations are grouped in sections according to their content so that you can find just the right saying to impress your family, friends, and colleagues- French or American- with your command of this Romance language. Each Fench quote is followed by its English translation as well as the person who made the statement. Right and Wrong Truth, like beauty, may be in the eye of the beholder, but in French, there are many ways to say that you think- actually know- that you are right and others are wrong. Prouver que jai raison serait accorder que je puis avoir tort.Proving that I am right would be admitting that I could be wrong.- Pierre Augustin Caron de Beaumarchais Il ny a pas de verità ©s moyennes.​There are no half-truths.- Georges Bernanos On nest point toujours une bà ªte pour lavoir à ©tà © quelquefois.Being a fool sometimes does not make one a fool all the time.- Denis Diderot Thought and Existence Widely regarded as the father of modern philosophy, Renà © Descartes uttered four famous words- I think, therefore I am.- which are even briefer in Latin, the language he used to create the dictum: Cogito, ergo sum. Descartes motivated humans to begin thinking about the meaning of thought and existence, but other French notables also had interesting things to say on the subject. Je pense, donc, je suis.I think, therefore, I am.-  Renà © Descartes Imaginer cest choisir.To imagine is to choose.- Jean Giono Le monde a commencà © sans lhomme et il sachà ¨vera sans lui.The world began without man and it will end without him.- Claude Là ©vi-Strauss La Raison cest la folie du plus fort. La raison du moins fort cest de la folie.​Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason of those less strong is madness.- Eugà ¨ne Ionesco Dans une grande à ¢me tout est grand.In a great mind everything is great.- Blaise Pascal Books and Art As one of the countries that helped usher in the  Renaissance  centuries ago, France has also produced many thinkers who have commented on great books and great art. Le livre est lopium de lOccident.Books are the opium of the West.- Anatole France LÅ“uvre dart, cest une idà ©e quon exagà ¨re.A work of art is an idea that someone exaggerates.- Andrà © Gide Les livres sont des amis froids et sà »rs.Books are cold and certain friends.-​  Victor Hugo Le monde est un livre dont chaque pas nous ouvre une page.The world is a book- with each step we open a page.  - Alphonse de Lamartine Un peuple malheureux fait les grands artistes.An unhappy nation makes great artists.- Alfred de Musset Les chefs-dÅ“uvre ne sont jamais que des tentatives heureuses.Masterpieces are never anything else but happy attempts.- George Sand Écrire, cest une faà §on de parler sans à ªtre interrompu.​Writing is a way to talk without being interrupted.- Jules Renard Liberty, Equality, Fraternity Liberty, equality, fraternity is the national French motto. The words marked the  end of absolute monarchy  and  the birth of the sovereign nation  in 1792, after the French Revolution. Not surprisingly, many French thinkers have had plenty to say on the subject. Les Franà §ais sont des veaux.French people are calves.- Charles de Gaulle On nous apprend vivre quand la vie est passà ©e.They teach us to live when life is past.- Michel de Montaigne La libertà © est pour la Science ce que lair est pour lanimal.Liberty is to science what air is to animals.- Henri Poincarà © Tous pour un, un pour tous.All for one, one for all.  -  Alexandre Dumas Un homme seul est toujours en mauvaise compagnie.A lone man is always in poor company.- Paul Valà ©ry Miscellaneous Thoughts Many French sayings dont fit neatly into any single category, but they are thought-provoking, nevertheless. Je me sers danimaux pour instruire les hommes.I use animals to teach men.-  Jean de La Fontaine La science na pas de patrie.Science has no homeland.- Louis Pasteur Tout commence en mystique et finit en politique.Everything begins mystically and ends politically.- Charles Pà ©guy Plus loffenseur mest cher, plus je ressens linjure.The more dearly I hold the offender, the more strongly I feel the insult.- Jean Racine Être adulte, cest à ªtre seul.To be an adult is to be alone.- Jean Rostand On ne voit bien quavec le coeur.We see well only with the heart.- Antoine de Saint-Exupà ©ry Lenfer, cest les autres.Hell is other people.- Jean-Paul Sartre vaillant coeur rien dimpossible.For a valiant heart nothing is impossible.- Jacques Coeur Dis-moi ce que tu manges, je te dirai ce que  tu es.Tell me what you eat and Ill tell you what you are.- Anthelme Brillat-Savarin Va, je ne te hais point.Go, I dont hate you.- Pierre Corneille​

Research Narrative Sir Isaac Newton Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Research Narrative Sir Isaac Newton - Essay Example To begin my search, I went to the Internet and entered 'Sir Isaac Newton' into Google. As was to be expected, the number of entries was enormous. I began by looking at Wikipedia and a short biography by Alfred Hall. In reading these two web site entries, I became interested in Newton's religious views and how these compared to his scientific understanding. Newton lived in an age of considerable discord between the church and science and it seemed like a topic worthy of further research. Though the information I had gained from Wikipedia and the biography were helpful, they were simply web sites and the information's accuracy may be questionable. There was also simply not enough information on his religious views to be very helpful. I planned my next phase of research to be focused on finding credible resources that dealt with Newton's seemingly contradictory religious and scientific views of the universe. I again went to Google.com and entered 'Isaac Newton religion'. Again, there were a vast number of entries. I went to the web site Newton.org and found some writings by a professor of History of Science and Technology at University of King's College in Halifax, Nova Scotia. In one of his writings he comments on some recently discovered writings of Newton and says, "Leaving behind four million words on theology, Newton was one of the greatest lay theologians of his age. A study of Newton's theology and prophetic views illuminates the life of this great thinker and helps us understand his science" (Snobelen b.). These words directed me towards the newly discovered works of Newton and the site provided several links to articles. In reviewing the links from the web site, I decided to look for articles that were focused on the topic and were from reliable sources. I would restrict my searches to journals, university papers, and edited material that had been professionally reviewed. I was looking for fact and not opinion. I wanted articles that quoted Newton or gave some factual basis for the information they offered. I reviewed a 1999 article that appeared in the British Journal of History and Science. It was a lengthy article that spoke about Newton's dual nature of science and religion. The author claimed that Newton was a devout Christian that believed the church should be reformed and returned to its roots. Yet, we only have recently discovered that Newton was very religious. Why had he not made this known during his lifetime According to Haynes writing in the Religion of the Bible and the Religion of the Pulpit Compared, published in 1747 in London, "...it was fear of persecution and pressures from orthodoxy that stilled Newton's tongue, weakened his zeal and prevented him from leading this return to primitive Christianity" (qtd. in Snoleben a. 391). This was evidence that was written in the age of Newton that suggested he was under pressure from the church to not create a controversy. I had found and verified that Newton was a religious scientist and wanted to find out more specifically what his viewpoint of the universe and creation was. On the Isaac-Newton.org website I found a link to the Newton Project Canada. This was a web site sponsored by King's College in Canada that had made Newton's private manuscripts available to the public. At the Newton Project, there were numerous original works by Newton available. I found

Brand Evaluation of Paul Smith Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Brand Evaluation of Paul Smith - Assignment Example brand value, brand position, and brand image. Moreover, to present comprehensive outlook of the brand’s successiveness, the paper has also implied the multidimensional approach of brand evaluation. Subsequently, the discussion of the paper initiated to suggest few strategic measures to eradicate the shortcomings of the brand. Table of Contents Executive Summary 2 1.0. Introduction 4 2.0. Brand Evaluation of â€Å"Paul Smith† 5 2.1. Brand Value 6 2.2. Brand Image 7 2.3. Brand Positioning 9 2.4. Multidimensional Evaluation 10 2.4.1. Branding Vision of Paul Smith 12 2.4.2. Organisational Culture 13 2.4.3. Brand Objectives 13 2.4.4. Audit Brand Sphere 14 2.4.5. Brand Essence 14 2.4.6. Internal Implementation 15 2.4.7. Brand Resourcing 15 3.0. Conclusion 16 4.0. Recommendations 17 References 18 1.0. Introduction Evidences reveal that the concept of branding has changed drastically from that of the past. In the present era, brands are perceived to be assets. According to the Oxford American Dictionary, brand can be defined as â€Å"a trade mark, goods of a particular make†¦.† (Clifton & Ahmad, 2009). According to many marketers and analysts, it is also referred as â€Å"a promise of satisfaction† which exists between the manufacturers, sellers, performers, and the consumers and environment at large in an unwritten form. While brand is termed as an intangible property, branding is recognised as a multidimensional process through which a marketer continuously strives to improve its products and/or services to develop the trust relationship with the customers. Thereby, brand emerges to be one of the crucial components of businesses in the highly competitive environment of the 21st century. With all its virtues, a well-developed brand rewards numerous advantages to an organisation. It reinforces a superior reputation of an organisation, assures quality-performance from its end and above all, builds customer loyalty besides their stimulate d confidence on the product and/or services. This in turn facilitates shareholder values rewarding the organisation better growth and strength (Healey, 2008). Realising all these aspects of brands numerous companies have initiated to enhance their brand value, brand image and brand reputation in their targeted markets, e.g. Marks & Spencer, Wal-Mart, Gucci, D & G, and others. On the similar context, Paul Smith can also be recognised as a brand. However, in the modern context, few brands can be identified as successful while few others can be recognised as inefficient and less beneficial to the organisations. With this concern, the paper will intend to discuss the various features of branding initiatives adopted by Paul Smith. The objective of the paper is to critically examine the brand, â€Å"Paul Smith† in order to identify its successiveness in the international market. Perpetually, the paper will aim to document the various branding strategies adopted and benefits gained by the organisation, through an extensive research. 2.0. Brand Evaluation of â€Å"Paul Smith† Paul Smith is recognised as a marketer of fashion wears and accessories to the international customers of the fashion industry. The first initiation was taken by Sir Paul Smith, the owner of the organisation in 1970. However, for the first time he showcased his designs as menswear collection in Paris in the year 1976 with his own name. This initiative made the young marketer famous in the region and also rewarded the recognition