Marking the functions of a sentence: 'She may like it'





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







4















I am reading Cambridge Grammar of English Language (CaGEL) all over again, though not cover to cover.



One page no. 215, I came across




The major functions in the structure of the clause are the predicator (P), complements of the predicator (C), and adjuncts (A), as illustrated in:



He [C] always [A] reads [P] the paper [C] before breakfast [A].




But during the end of that particular chapter, it also says like this:




In clauses containing an auxiliary verb, such as She may like it, some grammars analyse auxiliary + lexical verb as forming a 'verb group' unit realising (in our terms) a single P function. Under the analysis presented in this book, may is the predicator of the main clause, and like that of a subordinate clause functioning as complement of may. The contrast between these two analyses is discussed in Ch. 14, §4.2. In this chapter we will for the most part avoid the issue by concentrating on examples without auxiliary verbs.




Now what if I need to mark the functions of the sentence below using P C and A, how will you do it? I mean according to the concepts the book follows




She may like it.











share|improve this question































    4















    I am reading Cambridge Grammar of English Language (CaGEL) all over again, though not cover to cover.



    One page no. 215, I came across




    The major functions in the structure of the clause are the predicator (P), complements of the predicator (C), and adjuncts (A), as illustrated in:



    He [C] always [A] reads [P] the paper [C] before breakfast [A].




    But during the end of that particular chapter, it also says like this:




    In clauses containing an auxiliary verb, such as She may like it, some grammars analyse auxiliary + lexical verb as forming a 'verb group' unit realising (in our terms) a single P function. Under the analysis presented in this book, may is the predicator of the main clause, and like that of a subordinate clause functioning as complement of may. The contrast between these two analyses is discussed in Ch. 14, §4.2. In this chapter we will for the most part avoid the issue by concentrating on examples without auxiliary verbs.




    Now what if I need to mark the functions of the sentence below using P C and A, how will you do it? I mean according to the concepts the book follows




    She may like it.











    share|improve this question



























      4












      4








      4








      I am reading Cambridge Grammar of English Language (CaGEL) all over again, though not cover to cover.



      One page no. 215, I came across




      The major functions in the structure of the clause are the predicator (P), complements of the predicator (C), and adjuncts (A), as illustrated in:



      He [C] always [A] reads [P] the paper [C] before breakfast [A].




      But during the end of that particular chapter, it also says like this:




      In clauses containing an auxiliary verb, such as She may like it, some grammars analyse auxiliary + lexical verb as forming a 'verb group' unit realising (in our terms) a single P function. Under the analysis presented in this book, may is the predicator of the main clause, and like that of a subordinate clause functioning as complement of may. The contrast between these two analyses is discussed in Ch. 14, §4.2. In this chapter we will for the most part avoid the issue by concentrating on examples without auxiliary verbs.




      Now what if I need to mark the functions of the sentence below using P C and A, how will you do it? I mean according to the concepts the book follows




      She may like it.











      share|improve this question
















      I am reading Cambridge Grammar of English Language (CaGEL) all over again, though not cover to cover.



      One page no. 215, I came across




      The major functions in the structure of the clause are the predicator (P), complements of the predicator (C), and adjuncts (A), as illustrated in:



      He [C] always [A] reads [P] the paper [C] before breakfast [A].




      But during the end of that particular chapter, it also says like this:




      In clauses containing an auxiliary verb, such as She may like it, some grammars analyse auxiliary + lexical verb as forming a 'verb group' unit realising (in our terms) a single P function. Under the analysis presented in this book, may is the predicator of the main clause, and like that of a subordinate clause functioning as complement of may. The contrast between these two analyses is discussed in Ch. 14, §4.2. In this chapter we will for the most part avoid the issue by concentrating on examples without auxiliary verbs.




      Now what if I need to mark the functions of the sentence below using P C and A, how will you do it? I mean according to the concepts the book follows




      She may like it.








      clauses subordinate-clauses subjects complements functions






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 10 hours ago









      Araucaria

      24.1k34096




      24.1k34096










      asked 14 hours ago









      Man_From_IndiaMan_From_India

      8,91452163




      8,91452163






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5















          She may [ like it ].




          Traditionally "may like" has been taken as a constituent (and commonly called 'the verb’). There was a lot of argument about this in the 70s, and many have come round to the view that the auxiliary verbs are special cases of catenative verbs. This is discussed at considerable length in CGEL (pp. 1209-1220, see tree on p1218).



          Thus the bracketed subordinate clause serves as catenative complement of "may", which is P in the matrix clause, while "like" is P in the catenative complement clause. "It" is of course direct object of "like".






          share|improve this answer































            4














            A CaGEL analysis would be like this:




            • She [C] may [P] like it [C]


            Or to make it clearer:




            • She [C]


            • may [P]


            • like it [C]



            Of course, the last Complement, like it, is itself a clause with its own internal structure. The structure is:




            • like [P]


            • it [C]





            It is interesting to note that, from what we can see of the OP's excerpts, CaGEL have missed out the function Predicate here. This is interesting because the function of Predicate is a major function within the CaGEL clause system. The term Predicate means Head of the clause.



            However, if they had put an extra layer of functions in then it would be difficult to show that the Subject is an external Complement of the verb. Their analysis of a clause in the book would have looked like this, where [R] is the function of Predicate:




            • The dog [C] bit me [R]


            This would have been problematic, because according to their analysis, although it is external to the verb phrase, the phrase the dog (the subject) is a Complement of the Predicator. In other words, it is a Complement of the verb. It is not a Complement of the Predicate or verb phrase.






            share|improve this answer


























            • I don't think they omitted anything. The predicator is the head of a clause.

              – BillJ
              10 hours ago











            • @BillJ The Predicator is the ulimate head of the clause, but the Predicate is the Head.

              – Araucaria
              10 hours ago











            • You're complicating things unnecessarily. The analysis of the OPs example is very simple. It's my understanding that the OP seemed to be concerned about "may like" being (or not being) P. I explained that in my answer. I don't have my copy of CGEL to hand, but aren't they analysing the clause at word level?

              – BillJ
              10 hours ago






            • 1





              @BillJ OP is quite well versed in his CamGEL, I believe. As you show in your answer, it can´t be at word level as in most sentences these functions are carried out by phrases. (Even in CamGEL´s analysis of this sentence, the subject would be an NP with an N as Head, no?) Anyhow, given OP´s seriousness about the grammar, I thought that might be an interesting observation for them :-)

              – Araucaria
              10 hours ago






            • 1





              Well, maybe! I've now got my copy to hand. The example on p215 [1] seems clear enough to me. Its purpose is to show the complements and adjuncts in a typical clause, i.e. the constituents below VP level.

              – BillJ
              10 hours ago














            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "481"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f205583%2fmarking-the-functions-of-a-sentence-she-may-like-it%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            5















            She may [ like it ].




            Traditionally "may like" has been taken as a constituent (and commonly called 'the verb’). There was a lot of argument about this in the 70s, and many have come round to the view that the auxiliary verbs are special cases of catenative verbs. This is discussed at considerable length in CGEL (pp. 1209-1220, see tree on p1218).



            Thus the bracketed subordinate clause serves as catenative complement of "may", which is P in the matrix clause, while "like" is P in the catenative complement clause. "It" is of course direct object of "like".






            share|improve this answer




























              5















              She may [ like it ].




              Traditionally "may like" has been taken as a constituent (and commonly called 'the verb’). There was a lot of argument about this in the 70s, and many have come round to the view that the auxiliary verbs are special cases of catenative verbs. This is discussed at considerable length in CGEL (pp. 1209-1220, see tree on p1218).



              Thus the bracketed subordinate clause serves as catenative complement of "may", which is P in the matrix clause, while "like" is P in the catenative complement clause. "It" is of course direct object of "like".






              share|improve this answer


























                5












                5








                5








                She may [ like it ].




                Traditionally "may like" has been taken as a constituent (and commonly called 'the verb’). There was a lot of argument about this in the 70s, and many have come round to the view that the auxiliary verbs are special cases of catenative verbs. This is discussed at considerable length in CGEL (pp. 1209-1220, see tree on p1218).



                Thus the bracketed subordinate clause serves as catenative complement of "may", which is P in the matrix clause, while "like" is P in the catenative complement clause. "It" is of course direct object of "like".






                share|improve this answer














                She may [ like it ].




                Traditionally "may like" has been taken as a constituent (and commonly called 'the verb’). There was a lot of argument about this in the 70s, and many have come round to the view that the auxiliary verbs are special cases of catenative verbs. This is discussed at considerable length in CGEL (pp. 1209-1220, see tree on p1218).



                Thus the bracketed subordinate clause serves as catenative complement of "may", which is P in the matrix clause, while "like" is P in the catenative complement clause. "It" is of course direct object of "like".







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 13 hours ago









                BillJBillJ

                7,0621819




                7,0621819

























                    4














                    A CaGEL analysis would be like this:




                    • She [C] may [P] like it [C]


                    Or to make it clearer:




                    • She [C]


                    • may [P]


                    • like it [C]



                    Of course, the last Complement, like it, is itself a clause with its own internal structure. The structure is:




                    • like [P]


                    • it [C]





                    It is interesting to note that, from what we can see of the OP's excerpts, CaGEL have missed out the function Predicate here. This is interesting because the function of Predicate is a major function within the CaGEL clause system. The term Predicate means Head of the clause.



                    However, if they had put an extra layer of functions in then it would be difficult to show that the Subject is an external Complement of the verb. Their analysis of a clause in the book would have looked like this, where [R] is the function of Predicate:




                    • The dog [C] bit me [R]


                    This would have been problematic, because according to their analysis, although it is external to the verb phrase, the phrase the dog (the subject) is a Complement of the Predicator. In other words, it is a Complement of the verb. It is not a Complement of the Predicate or verb phrase.






                    share|improve this answer


























                    • I don't think they omitted anything. The predicator is the head of a clause.

                      – BillJ
                      10 hours ago











                    • @BillJ The Predicator is the ulimate head of the clause, but the Predicate is the Head.

                      – Araucaria
                      10 hours ago











                    • You're complicating things unnecessarily. The analysis of the OPs example is very simple. It's my understanding that the OP seemed to be concerned about "may like" being (or not being) P. I explained that in my answer. I don't have my copy of CGEL to hand, but aren't they analysing the clause at word level?

                      – BillJ
                      10 hours ago






                    • 1





                      @BillJ OP is quite well versed in his CamGEL, I believe. As you show in your answer, it can´t be at word level as in most sentences these functions are carried out by phrases. (Even in CamGEL´s analysis of this sentence, the subject would be an NP with an N as Head, no?) Anyhow, given OP´s seriousness about the grammar, I thought that might be an interesting observation for them :-)

                      – Araucaria
                      10 hours ago






                    • 1





                      Well, maybe! I've now got my copy to hand. The example on p215 [1] seems clear enough to me. Its purpose is to show the complements and adjuncts in a typical clause, i.e. the constituents below VP level.

                      – BillJ
                      10 hours ago


















                    4














                    A CaGEL analysis would be like this:




                    • She [C] may [P] like it [C]


                    Or to make it clearer:




                    • She [C]


                    • may [P]


                    • like it [C]



                    Of course, the last Complement, like it, is itself a clause with its own internal structure. The structure is:




                    • like [P]


                    • it [C]





                    It is interesting to note that, from what we can see of the OP's excerpts, CaGEL have missed out the function Predicate here. This is interesting because the function of Predicate is a major function within the CaGEL clause system. The term Predicate means Head of the clause.



                    However, if they had put an extra layer of functions in then it would be difficult to show that the Subject is an external Complement of the verb. Their analysis of a clause in the book would have looked like this, where [R] is the function of Predicate:




                    • The dog [C] bit me [R]


                    This would have been problematic, because according to their analysis, although it is external to the verb phrase, the phrase the dog (the subject) is a Complement of the Predicator. In other words, it is a Complement of the verb. It is not a Complement of the Predicate or verb phrase.






                    share|improve this answer


























                    • I don't think they omitted anything. The predicator is the head of a clause.

                      – BillJ
                      10 hours ago











                    • @BillJ The Predicator is the ulimate head of the clause, but the Predicate is the Head.

                      – Araucaria
                      10 hours ago











                    • You're complicating things unnecessarily. The analysis of the OPs example is very simple. It's my understanding that the OP seemed to be concerned about "may like" being (or not being) P. I explained that in my answer. I don't have my copy of CGEL to hand, but aren't they analysing the clause at word level?

                      – BillJ
                      10 hours ago






                    • 1





                      @BillJ OP is quite well versed in his CamGEL, I believe. As you show in your answer, it can´t be at word level as in most sentences these functions are carried out by phrases. (Even in CamGEL´s analysis of this sentence, the subject would be an NP with an N as Head, no?) Anyhow, given OP´s seriousness about the grammar, I thought that might be an interesting observation for them :-)

                      – Araucaria
                      10 hours ago






                    • 1





                      Well, maybe! I've now got my copy to hand. The example on p215 [1] seems clear enough to me. Its purpose is to show the complements and adjuncts in a typical clause, i.e. the constituents below VP level.

                      – BillJ
                      10 hours ago
















                    4












                    4








                    4







                    A CaGEL analysis would be like this:




                    • She [C] may [P] like it [C]


                    Or to make it clearer:




                    • She [C]


                    • may [P]


                    • like it [C]



                    Of course, the last Complement, like it, is itself a clause with its own internal structure. The structure is:




                    • like [P]


                    • it [C]





                    It is interesting to note that, from what we can see of the OP's excerpts, CaGEL have missed out the function Predicate here. This is interesting because the function of Predicate is a major function within the CaGEL clause system. The term Predicate means Head of the clause.



                    However, if they had put an extra layer of functions in then it would be difficult to show that the Subject is an external Complement of the verb. Their analysis of a clause in the book would have looked like this, where [R] is the function of Predicate:




                    • The dog [C] bit me [R]


                    This would have been problematic, because according to their analysis, although it is external to the verb phrase, the phrase the dog (the subject) is a Complement of the Predicator. In other words, it is a Complement of the verb. It is not a Complement of the Predicate or verb phrase.






                    share|improve this answer















                    A CaGEL analysis would be like this:




                    • She [C] may [P] like it [C]


                    Or to make it clearer:




                    • She [C]


                    • may [P]


                    • like it [C]



                    Of course, the last Complement, like it, is itself a clause with its own internal structure. The structure is:




                    • like [P]


                    • it [C]





                    It is interesting to note that, from what we can see of the OP's excerpts, CaGEL have missed out the function Predicate here. This is interesting because the function of Predicate is a major function within the CaGEL clause system. The term Predicate means Head of the clause.



                    However, if they had put an extra layer of functions in then it would be difficult to show that the Subject is an external Complement of the verb. Their analysis of a clause in the book would have looked like this, where [R] is the function of Predicate:




                    • The dog [C] bit me [R]


                    This would have been problematic, because according to their analysis, although it is external to the verb phrase, the phrase the dog (the subject) is a Complement of the Predicator. In other words, it is a Complement of the verb. It is not a Complement of the Predicate or verb phrase.







                    share|improve this answer














                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer








                    edited 10 hours ago

























                    answered 10 hours ago









                    AraucariaAraucaria

                    24.1k34096




                    24.1k34096













                    • I don't think they omitted anything. The predicator is the head of a clause.

                      – BillJ
                      10 hours ago











                    • @BillJ The Predicator is the ulimate head of the clause, but the Predicate is the Head.

                      – Araucaria
                      10 hours ago











                    • You're complicating things unnecessarily. The analysis of the OPs example is very simple. It's my understanding that the OP seemed to be concerned about "may like" being (or not being) P. I explained that in my answer. I don't have my copy of CGEL to hand, but aren't they analysing the clause at word level?

                      – BillJ
                      10 hours ago






                    • 1





                      @BillJ OP is quite well versed in his CamGEL, I believe. As you show in your answer, it can´t be at word level as in most sentences these functions are carried out by phrases. (Even in CamGEL´s analysis of this sentence, the subject would be an NP with an N as Head, no?) Anyhow, given OP´s seriousness about the grammar, I thought that might be an interesting observation for them :-)

                      – Araucaria
                      10 hours ago






                    • 1





                      Well, maybe! I've now got my copy to hand. The example on p215 [1] seems clear enough to me. Its purpose is to show the complements and adjuncts in a typical clause, i.e. the constituents below VP level.

                      – BillJ
                      10 hours ago





















                    • I don't think they omitted anything. The predicator is the head of a clause.

                      – BillJ
                      10 hours ago











                    • @BillJ The Predicator is the ulimate head of the clause, but the Predicate is the Head.

                      – Araucaria
                      10 hours ago











                    • You're complicating things unnecessarily. The analysis of the OPs example is very simple. It's my understanding that the OP seemed to be concerned about "may like" being (or not being) P. I explained that in my answer. I don't have my copy of CGEL to hand, but aren't they analysing the clause at word level?

                      – BillJ
                      10 hours ago






                    • 1





                      @BillJ OP is quite well versed in his CamGEL, I believe. As you show in your answer, it can´t be at word level as in most sentences these functions are carried out by phrases. (Even in CamGEL´s analysis of this sentence, the subject would be an NP with an N as Head, no?) Anyhow, given OP´s seriousness about the grammar, I thought that might be an interesting observation for them :-)

                      – Araucaria
                      10 hours ago






                    • 1





                      Well, maybe! I've now got my copy to hand. The example on p215 [1] seems clear enough to me. Its purpose is to show the complements and adjuncts in a typical clause, i.e. the constituents below VP level.

                      – BillJ
                      10 hours ago



















                    I don't think they omitted anything. The predicator is the head of a clause.

                    – BillJ
                    10 hours ago





                    I don't think they omitted anything. The predicator is the head of a clause.

                    – BillJ
                    10 hours ago













                    @BillJ The Predicator is the ulimate head of the clause, but the Predicate is the Head.

                    – Araucaria
                    10 hours ago





                    @BillJ The Predicator is the ulimate head of the clause, but the Predicate is the Head.

                    – Araucaria
                    10 hours ago













                    You're complicating things unnecessarily. The analysis of the OPs example is very simple. It's my understanding that the OP seemed to be concerned about "may like" being (or not being) P. I explained that in my answer. I don't have my copy of CGEL to hand, but aren't they analysing the clause at word level?

                    – BillJ
                    10 hours ago





                    You're complicating things unnecessarily. The analysis of the OPs example is very simple. It's my understanding that the OP seemed to be concerned about "may like" being (or not being) P. I explained that in my answer. I don't have my copy of CGEL to hand, but aren't they analysing the clause at word level?

                    – BillJ
                    10 hours ago




                    1




                    1





                    @BillJ OP is quite well versed in his CamGEL, I believe. As you show in your answer, it can´t be at word level as in most sentences these functions are carried out by phrases. (Even in CamGEL´s analysis of this sentence, the subject would be an NP with an N as Head, no?) Anyhow, given OP´s seriousness about the grammar, I thought that might be an interesting observation for them :-)

                    – Araucaria
                    10 hours ago





                    @BillJ OP is quite well versed in his CamGEL, I believe. As you show in your answer, it can´t be at word level as in most sentences these functions are carried out by phrases. (Even in CamGEL´s analysis of this sentence, the subject would be an NP with an N as Head, no?) Anyhow, given OP´s seriousness about the grammar, I thought that might be an interesting observation for them :-)

                    – Araucaria
                    10 hours ago




                    1




                    1





                    Well, maybe! I've now got my copy to hand. The example on p215 [1] seems clear enough to me. Its purpose is to show the complements and adjuncts in a typical clause, i.e. the constituents below VP level.

                    – BillJ
                    10 hours ago







                    Well, maybe! I've now got my copy to hand. The example on p215 [1] seems clear enough to me. Its purpose is to show the complements and adjuncts in a typical clause, i.e. the constituents below VP level.

                    – BillJ
                    10 hours ago




















                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f205583%2fmarking-the-functions-of-a-sentence-she-may-like-it%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    GameSpot

                    日野市

                    Tu-95轟炸機