1. That-complement clauses The board recommended [that they should vote against the a.
that they should vote against the a. Intransitive prepositional verbs like: admit (of), ask
Extraposition and it-insertion
Extraposition moves a complement clause to the end of the
complex sentence and obligatorily substitutes it for the
displaced complement clause. The inserted pronoun it is a
formal subject, anticipating the real extraposed Subject or
Object:
[That I knew very little about that report] is obvious.
It is obvious [that I knew very little about that report].
gr. Su logical Subject
The complement clause may be extraposed from the
subject position, the direct object or the prepositional
object position.
Extraposition from subject position
[That they are good students] is obvious.
Subject.
It is obvious [that they are good students].
gr. Su logical Subject.
Extraposition from DO position:
He regrets [that he missed the concert] very much.
DO
He regrets it very much [that he missed the concert].
gr. DO logical DO
Extraposition from PO position:
We are sure [that it is a boy].
PO
We are sure of it [that it is a boy].
gr. PO logical PO
Extraposition from direct object or prepositional object
position is less frequent than that from Su position. The
result of extraposition is a sentence with two subjects, two
direct objects or two prepositional objects, one
grammatical (expressed by the pronoun it) and the other
one logical (realized by the complement clause).
Syntactic functions
That-complements functioning as Direct Objects
a. The following transitive verbs take a clausal DO
introduced by the conjunction that: admit, arrange,
assume, believe, consider, forget, imagine, maintain,
mean, mind, know, object, prove, pretend, realize, reckon,
recollect, remember, suppose, suspect, think, understand:
I gathered [(that) they were not expected to eat with us].
c. Nouns, mostly from the same semantic area with the
offer].
b. That-complement clauses function as Direct Objects for
ditransitive verbs in the main clause:
Ditransitive verbs that take a to-IO are mostly
communication verbs: tell, read, write, permit, allow,
promise, suggest, indicate, confess, declare, describe,
demonstrate, explain:
He confessed to me [that he was extremely alarmed].
Su Verb IO clausal DO.
They guaranteed him [that he would be given an award].
Su Verb IO clausal DO.
I explained to him [that I was trying to write a book].
Su Verb IO clausal DO.
Such complex sentences with a complement clause
functioning as DO may be passivized:
They suggested to us [that it might be better to wait].
(active)
[That it might be better to wait] was suggested to us.
(passive)
Then the clausal subject may be extraposed:
It was suggested to us [that it might be better to wait].
gr. Su logical Subject
c.In addition, there are transitive verbs that take a DO and
a personal PO: blame sb. for sth., to request sth. of sb.,
require sth. from sb., etc. With such verbs extraposition of
the that-complement clause is obligatory in order to
produce a grammatically correct complex sentence:
Police blamed [that there had been a bomb attack] on the
extremists.
He blamed it on the extremists [that there had been a bomb
attack].
That-complements as Prepositional Objects
There are many verbs and adjectives that are followed by
POs expressed by a prepositional phrase or by a that-
complement clause:
He complained [PP of unfair treatment].
PO
He complained of [that he had been treated unfairly].
PO
When the Prepositional Object is expressed by a that-
complement clause, the preposition is obligatorily deleted.
The complement clause functions as a PO for the following
types of verbs or adjectives with obligatory preposition:
(for), answer (for), brag (of, about), decide (on), insist (on,
upon), rejoice (at, over), marvel (at), see (to), worry
(about), wonder (at, about), vote (for):
He bragged [PP about his police contacts].
PO
He bragged [that he had contacts with the police].
PO
b. Prepositional transitive verbs: advise NP of, accuse NP
of, assure NP of, congratulate NP on, forewarn NP of,
instruct, NP in, inform NP of, notify NP of, persuade NP
of, convince NP of, and warn sb. of.:
He convinced them of his loyalty.
DO PO
He convinced them [that he was loyal].
DO PO
c. Intransitive verbs with two obligatory prepositional
Objects: argue with sb. about sth., agree with sb. on/about
sth., pray to sb. for sth., etc.
I agree with him about his decision.
PO PO
I agree with him [that the law is behind the times].
PO PO
d. Prepositional adjectives: afraid (of), ashamed (of),
amazed (at), annoyed (at), aware (of), angry (about),
certain (of) concerned (about), confident (in), conscious
(of), delighted (at), happy (about), irritated (at), hopeful
(of), indicative (of), sorry (for), sure (of), surprised (at),
thankful (for), etc.
She became conscious [PP of his tactics].
PO
She became conscious [ that he had changed his tactics].
PO
That-complements as Subjects
That-complement clauses function as Subjects when the
main clause contains the following:
a. Intransitives like: seem, appear, happen, turn out, matter,
come about, etc. (all allow that deletion):
It seemed [(that) she had forgotten about the
appointment].
b. Predicative adjectives like: likely, unlikely, certain,
uncertain, true, sure, possible, probable, well known, etc.:
It is unlikely [that you would get your own office].
Some of these adjectives express the speaker’s point of
view: doubtful, odd, fair, fine, fantastic, funny, fortunate,
good, bad, helpful, important, impossible, inconvenient,
incredible, crucial, essential, lucky, natural, alarming,
astonishing, surprising, splendid, queer, etc.
It was odd [that she still lived at home].
predicates above can also be used in this pattern: problem,
thing, fact, idea, surprise, miracle, party, (no) wonder,
mystery, etc.
It’s a wonder [that she managed to come].
d. Subject that-clauses also occur with bisentential verbs,
i.e. verbs that have both the Subject and the Direct Object
expressed by a that-complement clause: prove, show,
imply.
[That they reached an agreement] proves [that they
understood the task].
Subject Direct Object
That complements as Predicatives
That-clauses may also function as predicatives, when the
subject in the main clause is a [+abstract] NP: fact, idea,
reason, claim, trouble, etc.:
The trouble is [that it is getting a bit expensive now].
My feeling is [that it would work very well].
That complements as Attributes
That-clauses may also function as attributes for [+abstract]
nouns (fact, evidence, problem, feeling) in the main clause:
We saw evidence [that a real effort was made to promote
tourism].
I had a feeling [that he was right].
The omission of the conjunction that
That is a purely syntactic word showing embedding.
Unlike other subordinating conjunctions (though, if), that
has virtually no meaning, occasionally being deleted.
Omission of that is typical of relaxed speech in informal
English. It makes no difference to the meaning of the
sentence whether that is present or not:
It is obvious [that he did it].
It is obvious [he did it].
In formal English, however, the conjunction that is always
preserved:
They estimate [that there will be 1.000 people affected by
the flood].
Deletion does not take place when the complement clause
is separated from the main clause by some intervening
material:
They maintain [that they were not responsible].
main clause complement clause.
They maintain, you want me to believe, that they were
not responsible.
main clause intervening material complement clause.
2. The Syntactic Functions of the Infinitive
Complement Clauses
The Infinitive complement may fulfill the same syntactic
functions as the NP (Su, DO, PO, Attribute, Predicative).
The infinitival clause may function as the Subject of the
main clause. When it is part of the Predicate Phrase, the
infinitive complement may fulfill the syntactic functions
of DO, PO, Predicative or Adverbial Modifier of Purpose
or Result.
Tough Movement Constructions
The infinitive complement functioning as Subject gives
rise to an interesting construction as in the following:
a. It is tough [to park cars in Manhattan].
b. Cars are tough [to park in Manhattan].
a. It is difficult for John [to give a kiss to Mary].
b. Mary is difficult for John [to give a kiss to].
In these examples, the main clause contains an adjectival
predicative (tough, difficult) and the infinitive functions as
its subject. The DO cars and the IO Mary from the
infinitival construction in examples (a) are moved out of
the infinitive clause into the Subject position of the main
clause. This type of construction which appears as a result
of the movement of an object (DO, IO or PO) from the
infinitive construction into the Subject position in the main
clause is called tough movement construction. The label
of this construction comes from the adjective tough, used
in the classical example given above.
However, there are instances when Tough Movement does
not apply. Thus in the following example the Object (old
country) cannot be moved to Subject position in the main
clause:
It is exciting for Frank [for his children to talk about the
old country].
*The old country is exciting for Frank for his children to
talk about.
The question is how we can account for the
ungrammaticality of the above example. The difference
lies in the fact that the infinitive (to talk) has a subject (his
children), while in the previous examples the infinitives (to
park, to give) do not have a subject.
In other words, infinitives with a preserved subject do not
allow tough movement.
Other adjectives and nouns that allow the movement of a
non-subject NP out of the infinitive complement clause
into the Subject position of the main clause are:
adjectives: easy, impossible, difficult, hard, simple, The leaves [that are falling] are yellow. -> the
dangerous, unhealthy, boring, (un)interesting, For all these constructions we can derive the falling leaves.
entertaining, amusing, gratifying, tough; nouns: pleasure, corresponding Nominative + Verb constructions if we The leaves [that have fallen] are yellow. -> the
delight, joy, a pain in the neck, etc. passivise the main clause or if we apply SSR and BE fallen leaves.
deletion: The subject of the participial clause may be preserved or
3. Raising constructions 6. Nominative + Present Participle is the result of SOR, deleted.
deletion of progressive be and passivisation of the main When the participial clause has its own subject, distinct
The movement of the Subject of the complement clause
verb: from that of the main clause, the construction is known as
into the position of the DO of the main clause is called
They saw [that Bill was running]. the Absolute Participial construction; this is rather formal,
Subject to Object Raising (abbreviated as SOR).
(progressive be) and is chiefly used in the written language:
Thus the Subject of the infinitival complement clause may
They saw Bill [running]. [The day being fine], we decided to go
be moved into the main clause, where it becomes either
Bill was seen [running]. swimming.
Subject or DO.
Nom. + Present Participle Subject Subject
The infinitive constructions based on SSR or SOR are
7. Nominative + Past Participle is derived by SOR,
involved in the production of eight patterns that have been
deletion of passive be and passivization of the verb in the Some participial clauses of this type have become
known to traditional grammarians for a long time.
main clause: idiomatic, however:
1. The Accusative + Infinitive construction is the direct
They found [that he was killed by a bomb]. [God willing], we shall succeed.
result of SOR:
(passive be) [Weather permitting], they will go on a trip.
He believes [Bill is honest].
They found him [to be killed by a bomb]. Very often, however, the participial clause occurs without
He believes Bill [to be honest].
He was found [killed by a bomb]. a subject. This is due to the fact that subject of the
Acc.+Infinitive
8. Nominative + Subject Complement results from SOR, subordinate clause is identical with the subject of the main
2. The Nominative + Infinitive construction may be
deletion of copulative be and passivization of the main clause:
derived in two ways. It is the direct result of SSR, when
verb: [Arriving there], they found the man dead.
the main clause contains an intransitive verb:
They considered [that he was a genius].
It seems [that he is honest].
(copulative be) 6. Relative clauses
He seems [to be honest].
They considered him [a genius].
Nom. + Infinitive
He was considered [a genius]. 1. Restrictive Relative Clauses (also known as Defining
The Nominative + Infinitive construction is also derived
Relative clauses) are clauses which delimit or identify the
by means of SOR and passivization of the transitive verb
4. Gerund clauses- Subject of the Gerund antecedent. They are used to identify a NP referent by
in the main clause:
providing further information to narrow down the
They believe [that Sam is honest].
ING complements as Subjects. reference:
They believe Sam [to be honest].
[A stranger’s sharing the trip with us] was bad enough. Any boy [who is lazy] must be punished.
Sam is believed [to be honest].
(Poss-ing) In the example above the identity of the NP referent any
Nom. + Infinitive
[Ann flirting with Tom] was a good thing. boy is rather vague, any boy or all boys could be punished;
In these infinitive constructions based on raising, TO BE
(Acc-ing) the relative clause restricts the number of boys to be
may be deleted. The deleted BE may be progressive,
[PRO Seeing him for the first time] is great fun. punished to only those who are lazy.
passive or copulative BE.
(PRO-ing) Non-restrictive Relative Clauses (or Appositive Relative
After SOR has applied, the following constructions are
Clauses) add supplementary information about an already
obtained by BE deletion:
All types of ing-complements can fulfill the syntactic identified antecedent:
3. The Accusative + Present Participle construction
function of Subject of the copulative predication in the John, [who is my brother], will be punished.
results from SOR and deletion of progressive BE:
main clause. The identity of the person who will be punished is already
She saw [that Bill was running].
given, it is John; the relative clause only gives some
(progressive be)
5. Differences between the participle and the gerund additional information about him he is my brother. The NP
She saw Bill [running].
referent has already been adequately identified, so the new
Acc. + Present Participle
The verbal and adjectival properties of the participle information is not needed for identification.
4. The Accusative + Past Participle construction results
Participles have verbal properties, i.e. they mark the 2. Relative clauses are linked to an antecedent NP in the
from SOR and deletion of passive BE:
progressive aspect in verbal predicates: main clause which may be expressed or not. That is why
They found out [that he was killed by a bomb].
Jane is/was/has/will is reading. from the viewpoint of their structure relative clauses are of
(passive be)
John has been/had been/will have been writing. two types: Dependent and Independent relative clauses.
They found him [killed by a bomb].
The participle has voice distinctions: Dependent relative clauses have expressed antecedents in
Acc. + Past Participle
They are following the thief. (active voice) the main clause (e.g. any boy, John). Both Restrictive and
5. The Accusative + Object Complement construction
The thief is being followed. (passive voice) Non-Restrictive Relative Clauses are dependent relative
results from SOR and the deletion of the copulative be:
Participles also display typical adjectival properties, i.e. clauses.
I consider [that he is a genius].
they can function as a nominal modifiers (or attributes), Independent Relative clauses (also known as Free
(copulative be)
resulting from the reduction of relative clauses: Relative clauses) do not have an expressed antecedent. The
I consider him [a genius].
Acc. + Object Complement.
antecedent is understood to be some indefinite pronoun
(somebody, something) which can be omitted:
Something [that lay on the table] was the issue.
[What lay on the table] was the issue.
Give the book to somebody [who may ask for it].
Give the book to [who ever may ask for it].
3. Free relative clauses are introduced by the following
wh-words:
a. simple pronouns and adverbs who, what, when,
b. Ever-compounds (called indefinite relative
pronouns or adverbs whoever, whatever, whichever,
wherever, whenever, however).
Free relative clauses perform all the syntactic
functions of the NPs:
Subject [What they were asking] was that they should
be permissive.
DO I want to see [whoever deals with complaints].
IO He gave [whoever came to the door] a
winning smile.
Object of Prep. You should vote for [whichever candidate
you think best].
Predicative Home is [where your friends and family are].
Adverbial Go to the Opera [whenever you like].
1. Past tense
The simple past is used to refer to a situation set at a
definite time in the past.
(a) The event past is used with dynamic verb
senses to refer to a single definite event in the
past. The event may take place over an
extended period (e.g. The Normans invaded
England in 1066) or at a point in time (e.g. The
plane left at 9 a.m.). The definite time may be
conveyed by a previous or subsequent time
expression, in the linguistic context, for
instance by a time adverbial such as in 1066. It
may also be presupposed on the basis of
knowledge shared by speaker and hearer. Your
brother was at school with me presupposes as
common knowledge that a specific period of
time is spent at school.
(b) The habitual past is used with dynamic verb
senses to refer to past events that occurred
repeatedly.
We spent our holidays in Spain when we were children.
(c) The state past is used with stative verb senses
to refer to a single unbroken state of affairs in
the past.
I once liked reading novels.
The habitual and state meanings of the past can be
paraphrased by used to.
There are three special uses of the simple past.
(a) In indirect speech, the simple past in the
reporting verb may cause the verb in the
subordinate reported clause to be backshifted
into the simple past:
She said she knew you.
I thought you were in Paris
(b) The attitudinal past is optionally used to refer
more tentatively (and therefore more politely)
to a present state of mind.
Did you want to see me now?
I wondered whether you are/were free tomorrow.
(c) The hypothetical past is used in certain
subordinate clauses, especially if-clauses, to
convey what is contrary to the belief or
expectation of the speaker.
If you knew him, you wouldn’t say that.
If she asked me, I would help her.
I wish I had a memory like yours.
>> you don’t know me
>> she will not ask me
>> I do not have such a memory
2. The subjunctive
There are two forms of the subjunctive. They are
traditionally called the present and past subjunctive,
although the distinction relates more to mood than to tense.
The present subjunctive is expressed by the base form of
the verb. For the verb be, the subjunctive form be is distinct
from the indicative forms am, is, are. For the other verbs,
the subjunctive is distinctive only in the 3rd person
singular.
I insist that we reconsider the Council’s decisions –
indicative or subjunctive
I insist that the Council reconsider its decisions –
subjunctive
The past subjunctive (or were-subjunctive) survives only
in were as a past form of be. It is distinguishable from the
past indicative of be only in the 1st and 3rd persons singular.
If she was there, you would have heard about it – indicative
If she were there, you would have heard about it –
subjunctive
The indicative was is more common in less formal style.
Only were is acceptable in as it were (‘so to speak’). Were
is usual in if I were you.
Negation of the present subjunctive does not require an
operator.
I insist that we not reconsider the Council’s decision.
Present subjunctive
We distinguish two main uses of the present subjunctive.
*The mandative subjunctive is used in a that-clause after
an expression of such notions as demand,
recommendation, proposal, intention (e.g. we
insist/prefer/request that…; it is
necessary/desirable/imperative that…..; the
decision/requirement/resolution that….). This use is more
characteristic of AmE that BrE, but seems to be on the
increase in BrE. In BrE the alternatives are putative should
and the indicative.
The employees demanded that he resign – subjunctive
The employees demanded that he should resign – putative
should
The employees demanded that he resigns – indicative
*The formulaic (or optative) subjunctive is used in
certain set expressions:
God save the Queen! Suffice it to say that…..
Long live the King! Heaven forbid that….
Come what may Be that as it may….
The past subjunctive
The past subjunctive is hypothetical in meaning. It is used
in conditional and concessive clauses and in subordinate
clauses after wish, suppose.
I wish the journey were over.
If I were a rich man, I would….
Just suppose everyone were to act like you.