DOCSLIB.ORG

Comprehension of Verb Inflection in German-Speaking Children

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Universität Potsdam Oda-Christina Brandt-Kobele Comprehension of verb inflection in German-speaking children Spektrum Patholinguistik – Schriften | 6 Spektrum Patholinguistik – Schriften | 6 Spektrum Patholinguistik – Schriften | 6 Oda-Christina Brandt-Kobele Comprehension of verb inflection in German-speaking children Universitätsverlag Potsdam Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.dnb.de/ abrufbar. Universitätsverlag Potsdam 2014 http://verlag.ub.uni-potsdam.de/ Am Neuen Palais 10, 14469 Potsdam Tel.: +49 (0)331 977 2533 / Fax: 2292 E-Mail: [email protected] Die Schriftenreihe Spektrum Patholinguistik – Schriften wird herausgegeben vom Verband für Patholinguistik e. V. ISSN (print) 1869-3822 ISSN (online) 1869-3830 Zugl.: Potsdam, Univ., Diss., 2012 Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Barbara Höhle Prof. Dr. Isabell Wartenburger Datum der mündlichen Prüfung: 20.07.2012 Umschlagfotos: Paul Sapiano, http://www.flickr.com/photos/peasap/518956588/ Mikko Luntiala, http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikko_luntiala/4720244099/ Das Manuskript ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Online veröffentlicht auf dem Publikationsserver der Universität Potsdam URL http://pub.ub.uni-potsdam.de/volltexte/2014/6204/ URN urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-62046 http://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-62046 Zugleich gedruckt erschienen im Universitätsverlag Potsdam ISBN 978-3-86956-216-2 for Greg Acknowledgements This dissertation would not have been possible without the sup- port of many people to whom I would like to express my sincere gratitude. First and foremost, I would like to thank Prof. Barbara Höhle, my supervisor. Her advice and guidance as well as her teaching and her own work have helped, influenced and inspired me. I thank for her accepting me as her doctoral student and giving me the chance to work and learn in the stimulating and fruitful environment of the Language Acquisition Group at the Univer- sity of Potsdam. I am very grateful for her continuous support throughout the years. I am very grateful to Prof. Isabell Wartenburger for accepting to serve on my dissertation commitree. The empirical research in this thesis would have been impos- sible to conduct without the help of numerous people. I thank the student assistants who helped me conduct and run the ex- periments: Katja Hummel, Caroline Magister and Maja Stegen- wallner, and I thank all children who participated in the experi- ments and to their parents for making it possible to conduct the research we are interested in. A special thanks goes out to my friends and colleagues Sil- vana Poltrock and Frauke Berger for their support in preparing and running the experiments, as well for inspiring and motivat- ing discussions on the findings. I cannot thank Tom Fritzsche enough for his help and support on all aspects of experimental work throughout the years. He gracefully shared his compre- hensive knowledge about eye tracking, ‘R’, data analysis, sta- tistical analysis and so much more. Working and traveling with you all has been a great experience that I am very thankful for. Many thanks go also to my friends and colleagues Hans Trukenbrod, Susan Ott, Heike Herrmann and Ulrike Frank for support and friendship throughout the years. viii Acknowledgements Over the course of the past few years, many people have gen- erously taken their time to discuss various aspects related to this dissertation. I want to thank the organizers and participants of the IASCL 2008 in Edinburgh, the RASCAL 2009 conference in Groningen, the DSGF 2009 conference in Osnabrück, and the IASCL 2011 in Montreal, for the chance to present and discuss my work presented in this thesis. A special thanks goes to Ana-Teresa Perez-Leroux, Petra Hen- driks, Bart Hollebrandse, Irina Sekerina, Anja Müller and An- gela Grimm. I gratefully acknowledge the financial support I have re- ceived from the collaborative research project CHLASC (Char- acterizing Human Language by Structural Complexity) which pro- vided a part of the funding for this research. It has been an enormous privilege to the able to spend the past few years doing what I like most. I want to thank my fam- ily, my parents and my sisters, for their unfailing love and sup- port throughout the years. Finally, words are not enough to express my love and grati- tude to Greg. I thank you so much for your continuous support regarding all aspects of my work and my life. I thank you for helpful and stimulating discussions, for proof-reading earlier versions of this thesis, for help on LATEX, but most importantly for keeping up my spirits and encouraging me to go on. This is for you and Carl, who always remind me of what matters most. Abstract Previous studies on the acquisition of verb inflection in nor- mally developing children have revealed an astonishing pat- tern: children use correctly inflected verbs in their own speech but fail to make use of verb inflections when comprehending sentences uttered by others. Thus, a three-year old might well be able to say something like The cat sleeps on the bed, but fails to understand that the same sentence, when uttered by another person, refers to only one sleeping cat but not more than one. The previous studies that have examined children’s compre- hension of verb inflections have employed a variant of a picture selection task in which the child was asked to explicitly indicate (via pointing) what semantic meaning she had inferred from the test sentence. Recent research on other linguistic structures, such as pronouns or focus particles, has indicated that earlier comprehension abilities can be found when methods are used that do not require an explicit reaction, like preferential looking tasks. This dissertation aimed to examine whether children are truly not able to understand the connection the the verb form and the meaning of the sentence subject until the age of five years or whether earlier comprehension can be found when a different measure, preferential looking, is used. Additionally, children’s processing of subject-ver agreement violations was examined. The three experiments of this thesis that examined chil- dren’s comprehension of verb inflections revealed the follow- ing: German-speaking three- to four-year old children looked more to a picture showing one actor when hearing a sentence with a singular inflected verb but only when their eye gaze was tracked and they did not have to perform a picture selection task. When they were asked to point to the matching picture, they performed at chance-level. This pattern indicates asym- metries in children’s language performance even within the re- ceptive modality. x Abstract The fourth experiment examined sensitivity to subject-verb agreement violations and did not reveal evidence for sensitiv- ity toward agreement violations in three- and four-year old chil- dren, but only found that children’s looking patterns were influ- enced by the grammatical violations at the age of five. The results from these experiments are discussed in relation to the existence of a production-comprehension asymmetry in the use of verb inflections and children’s underlying grammat- ical knowledge. Zusammenfassung Experimentelle Studien zum Erwerb der Verbflexion bei sprachunauffälligen Kindern haben ein überraschendes Muster aufgezeigt. Kinder im Alter von drei und vier Jahren ver- wenden Verbflexionsendungen anscheinend korrekt in ihrer eigenen Sprachproduktion, aber sie scheinen unfähig zu sein, Verbflexionen in den Äußerungen anderer zu verstehen. Ein Kind ist also problemlos in der Lage ‚Sie schläft auf dem Bett‘ zu sagen, wenn es die Position von z.B. einer Katze beschreiben möchte. Gleichzeitig scheint es nicht zu verstehen, dass sich ein Satz wie ‚Sie schläft auf dem Bett‘ auf nur eine schlafende Katze und nicht mehrere bezieht. Das Verständnis von Sätzen, in denen der einzige Hin- weis auf die Anzahl der Handelnden (den Numerus des Subjekts) die Verbflexion ist, wurde bislang nur mit ‚Zeige- Experimenten‘ untersucht. In solchen Sprachtests soll das Kind durch eine Zeigegeste auf eines von zwei vorgegebenen Bildern explizit anzeigen wie es den vorgegebenen Satz verstanden hat. Aktuelle Studien, die das Verständnis von sprachlichen El- ementen wie Pronomen und Fokuspartikeln bei Kindern un- tersucht haben, lassen erkennen, dass die Testmethodik einen erheblichen Einfluss auf die kindlichen Sprachverständnis- fähigkeiten zu haben scheint. Wenn man Methoden verwen- det, die keine explizite Reaktion von Seiten der Kinder ver- langen, findet man korrektes Verständnis schon bei jüngeren Kindern. Das Ziel dieser Dissertation war es zu untersuchen, ob drei- und vierjährige Kinder tatsächlich nicht in der Lage sind die Beziehung zwischen Verbform (Art der Verbflexion) und Subjektbedeutung (Numerus des Subjekts) zu verstehen oder ob man korrektes Sprachverständnis in jüngeren Populationen finden kann, wenn eine alternative Testmethode, die Messung der Augenbewegungen, verwendet wird. Zusätzlich wurde un- tersucht ob Kinder im gleichen Alter Verletzungen der Subjekt- Verb-Kongruenz in auditiv präsentierten Sätzen entdecken. xii Zusammenfassung Drei Experimente dieser Dissertation, die das kindliche Sprachverständnis in Bezug auf Verbflexion untersucht haben bringen folgendes Muster zum Vorschein: Deutsch-sprachige Kinder im Alter von drei bis vier Jahren schauten mehr zu einem Bild, auf dem nur ein Akteur zu se- hen war, wenn sie einen
Recommended publications
  • Who, Whom, Whoever, and Whomever

    Who, Whom, Whoever, and Whomever

    San José State University Writing Center www.sjsu.edu/writingcenter Written by Cassia Homann Who, Whom, Whoever, and Whomever People often do not know when to use the pronouns “who,” “whom,” “whoever,” and “whomever.” However, with a simple trick, they will always choose the correct pronoun. For this trick, use the following key: who = she, he, I, they whom = her, him, me, them Who In the following sentences, use the steps that are outlined to decide whether to use who or whom. Example Nicole is a girl (who/whom) likes to read. Step 1: Cover up the part of the sentence before “who/whom.” Nicole is a girl (who/whom) likes to read. Step 2: For the remaining part of the sentence, test with a pronoun using the above key. Replace “who” with “she”; replace “whom” with “her.” Who likes to read = She likes to read Whom likes to read = Her likes to read Step 3: Consider which one sounds correct. (Remember that the pronoun “she” is the subject of a sentence, and the pronoun “her” is part of the object of a sentence.) “She likes to read” is the correct wording. Step 4: Because “she” works, the correct pronoun to use is “who.” Nicole is a girl who likes to read. Who, Whom, Whoever, and Whomever, Fall 2012. Rev. Summer 2014. 1 of 4 Whom Example Elizabeth wrote a letter to someone (who/whom) she had never met. Step 1: Cover up the part of the sentence before “who/whom.” Elizabeth wrote a letter to someone (who/whom) she had never met.
  • Case Management and Staff Support Across NCI States

    Case Management and Staff Support Across NCI States

    What the 2018-19 NCI® Child Family Survey data tells us about Case Management and Staff Support Across NCI States This report tells us about: • What NCI tells us about case management and staff support • Why this is important What is NCI? Each year, NCI asks people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) and their families how they feel about their lives and the services they get. NCI uses surveys so that the same questions can be asked to people in all NCI states. Who answered questions to this survey? Questions for this survey are answered by a person who lives in the same house as a child who is getting services from the state. Most of the time, a parent answers these questions. Sometimes a sibling or someone who lives with the child and knows them well answers these questions. 2 How are data shown in this report? NCI asks questions about planning services and supports for children who get services from the state. In this report we see how family members of children getting services answered questions about planning services and supports. • In this report, when we say “you” we mean the person who is answering the question (most of the time, a parent). • In this report, when we say “child” we mean the child who is getting services from the state. 3 We use words and figures to show the number of yes and no answers we got. Some of our survey questions have more than a yes or no answer. They ask people to pick: “always,” “usually,” “sometimes,” or “seldom/never.” For this report, we count all “always” answers as yes.
  • The Function of Phrasal Verbs and Their Lexical Counterparts in Technical Manuals

    The Function of Phrasal Verbs and Their Lexical Counterparts in Technical Manuals

    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 1991 The function of phrasal verbs and their lexical counterparts in technical manuals Brock Brady Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Applied Linguistics Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Brady, Brock, "The function of phrasal verbs and their lexical counterparts in technical manuals" (1991). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 4181. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.6065 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Brock Brady for the Master of Arts in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (lESOL) presented March 29th, 1991. Title: The Function of Phrasal Verbs and their Lexical Counterparts in Technical Manuals APPROVED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE THESIS COMMITTEE: { e.!I :flette S. DeCarrico, Chair Marjorie Terdal Thomas Dieterich Sister Rita Rose Vistica This study investigates the use of phrasal verbs and their lexical counterparts (i.e. nouns with a lexical structure and meaning similar to corresponding phrasal verbs) in technical manuals from three perspectives: (1) that such two-word items might be more frequent in technical writing than in general texts; (2) that these two-word items might have particular functions in technical writing; and that (3) 2 frequencies of these items might vary according to the presumed expertise of the text's audience.
  • Grammar Worksheets: Who Or Whom?

    Grammar Worksheets: Who Or Whom?

    Grammar Worksheets: Who or Whom? http://www.grammar-worksheets.com People are so mystified (confused) about the use of who and whom that some of us are tempted to throw RXUKDQGVLQWKHDLUDQGVD\³LWMXVWGRHVQ¶WPDWWHU´%XWLWGRHVPDWWHU7KRVHZKRNQRZ DQGQRWMXVW English teachers), judge those who misuse it. Not using who and whom correctly can cost you, not just in schooOEXWDOVRLQOLIH/HW¶VJHWLWGRZQQRZ Who and Whom are Pronouns 7KDW¶VULJKW who and whom are pronouns. And if you recall, a pronoun is a word that takes the place of a noun. Sometimes we use pronouns instead of nouns. :HZRXOGQRWVD\³-HVVH GRHVQ¶WOLNHWKHSULQFLSDO0V7KRPDVZDVKLUHGDWKLVVFKRRO´7KHQDPHMs. Thomas LVDQRXQ)RUWKLVVHQWHQFHWRIORZZHZRXOGZULWH³-HVVHGRHVQ¶WOLNHWKHSULQFLSDOZKRZDV KLUHGDWKLVVFKRRO´ It All Depends on Case In English grammar, we have a term called case, which refers to pronouns. The case of a pronoun can be either subject or object, depending on its use in a sentence. Take a look at this table. Subject Object I me he him she her we us they them who whom The pronoun who is used as a subject; whom is used as an object. Who used correctly: Janice is the student who has read the most books. Whom used correctly: Janice is the student whom the teachers picked as outstanding. How Can I Determine Which One to Use? Break up the sentence into two parts. Janice is the student. She (Janice) has read the most books. Janice is the student. The teachers picked her (Janice) as outstanding. If you use I, he, she, we, or they, then the correct form is who. If you use me, him, her, us, or them, then the correct form is whom.
  • The Renewal of Intensifiers and Variations in Language Registers: a Case-Study of Very, Really, So and Totally Lucile Bordet

    The Renewal of Intensifiers and Variations in Language Registers: a Case-Study of Very, Really, So and Totally Lucile Bordet

    The renewal of intensifiers and variations in language registers: a case-study of very, really, so and totally Lucile Bordet To cite this version: Lucile Bordet. The renewal of intensifiers and variations in language registers: a case-study ofvery, really, so and totally. Intensity, intensification and intensifying modification across languages, Nov 2015, Vercelli, Italy. hal-01874168 HAL Id: hal-01874168 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01874168 Submitted on 16 Feb 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. The renewal of intensifiers and variations in language registers: a case- study of very, really, so and totally Lucile Bordet Université Jean Moulin - Lyon 3 CEL EA 1663 Abstract: This paper investigates the renewal of intensifiers in English. Intensifiers are popularised because of their intensifying potential but through frequency of use they lose their force. That is when the renewal process occurs and promotes new adverbs to the rank of intensifiers. This has consequences on language register. “Older” intensifiers are not entirely replaced by fresher intensifiers. They remain in use, but are assigned new functions in different contexts. My assumption is that intensifiers that have recently emerged tend to bear on parts of speech belonging to colloquial language, while older intensifiers modify parts of speech belonging mostly to the standard or formal registers.
  • 1 the Influence of Cognitive Factors on Category-Specific Phonology

    1 the Influence of Cognitive Factors on Category-Specific Phonology

    The Influence of Cognitive Factors on Category-Specific Phonology Jonathan Manker University of California, Berkeley A growing body of literature has documented an array of phonological patterns--- either static inventories or active rules--- which are sensitive to the grammatical category of the words they govern. Here I consider grammatical categories as including both syntactic classes such as nouns, verbs, and adjectives, and broad classes such as functional and content morphemes. A parallel body of literature has shown psycholinguistic and neurological differences in how different grammatical categories are treated. These independent observations in both the phonological and cognitive literature suggest a currently unexplored question: Are the observed category-specific phonological asymmetries the reflection of asymmetries in the mental organization or processing of these categories? A review of the literature reveals little solid evidence that there are either innate biases in category-specific phonology or that categories form neighborhoods that facilitate the spread of phonological patterns in the lexicon, when other possible factors, such as syntax and semantics, are considered. However, observations from the dual-stream model of speech perception suggest there may be emergent differences in how more predictable, functional categories are processed as opposed to less predictable, content categories. 1. Introduction In recent decades, linguists have begun to explore how many aspects of grammar interact with phonological patterns in language. In particular, studies coming from a wide range of approaches have documented and analyzed the effect of grammatical categories on sound patterns. Here I will use the term grammatical categories liberally to include classes based on syntactic function (nouns, verbs, adpositions, determiners, etc.), and the broader classes including content (nouns, verbs, adjectives) and functional morphemes (determiners, prepositions, inflectional affixes, etc.).
  • Comparative Study of Interrogative Pronouns ‘What’ and ‘Who’ in English and Uzbek Languages

    Comparative Study of Interrogative Pronouns ‘What’ and ‘Who’ in English and Uzbek Languages

    European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine ISSN 2515-8260 Volume 08, Issue 01, 2021 COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INTERROGATIVE PRONOUNS ‘WHAT’ AND ‘WHO’ IN ENGLISH AND UZBEK LANGUAGES Normamatova Dilfuza Turdikulovna Gulistan State University Gulistan, Uzbekistan e-mail: [email protected] Abstract This article reveals the interrogative aspect of question forms in English and Uzbek, including the characteristics of interrogative pronouns ‘Kim’/’Nima’ in Uzbek and ‘Who’/’What’ in English. ‘What’/‘Who’ and ‘Kim’/’Nima’ in two English and Uzbek languages by definition indicate meanings of both “interrogation”, and thus it is anticipated that the semantic characteristics of these forms will not differ significantly. When studying the semantic characteristics of both ‘who/kim’ and ‘what/nima’ are listener-oriented interrogative sentences with strong communicativity possess the commonality in English and Uzbek. It is analyzed, the status of interrogative words “Who’ and ‘What’ (WH-words) for interrogative interpretations in English and Uzbek, including the derivation of constituent questions evolves from a specific interplay of syntactic representations with pragmatics. The given examples in English and Uzbek to compare the interrogative pronouns in morphological usage verify the evident distinctions. However, one perceives many differences when examining the morphologic characteristics of interrogative pronouns ‘Who’ and “What’ in both English and Uzbek languages. In a cross-linguistic overview, we discuss the characteristic elements contributing to the derivation of interrogatives in Uzbek. It also replies in the article that WH-words can form a constitutive part not only of interrogative, but also of exclamative and declarative clauses. Based on this, characteristic of interrogatives in exclamation and rhetoric usage the question usage does not solicit an answer.
  • Relative Clauses

    Relative Clauses

    ENGLISH GRAMMAR Relative Clauses RELATIVE CLAUSES INTRODUCTION There are two types of relative clauses: 1. Defining relative clauses 2. Non-defining relative clauses DEFINING RELATIVE CLAUSES These describe the preceding noun in such a way to distinguish it from other nouns of the same class. A clause of this kind is essential to clear understanding of the noun. The boy who was playing is my brother. Defining Relative Pronouns SUBJECT OBJECT POSSESSIVE For people Who Whom/Who Whose That That For things Which Which Whose That That Of which Defining Relative Clauses: people A. Subject: who or that Who is normally used: The man who robbed you has been arrested. The girls who serve in the shop are the owner’s daughters. But that is a possible alternative after all, everyone, everybody, no one, nobody and those: Everyone who/that knew him liked him. Nobody who/that watched the match will ever forget it. B. Object of a verb: whom, who or that The object form is whom, but it is considered very formal. In spoken English we normally use who or that (that being more usual than who), and it is still more common to omit the object pronoun altogether: The man whom I saw told me to come back today. The man who I saw told me to come back today. The man that I saw told me to come back today. The man I saw told me to come back today. C. With a preposition: whom or that In formal English the preposition is placed before the relative pronoun, which must then be put into the form whom: The man to whom I spoke… In informal speech, however, it is more usual to move the preposition to the end of the clause.
  • The Post-Syntactic Morphology of the Albanian Pre-Posed Article: Evidence for Distributed Morphology

    The Post-Syntactic Morphology of the Albanian Pre-Posed Article: Evidence for Distributed Morphology

    The Post-Syntactic Morphology of the Albanian Pre-Posed Article: Evidence for Distributed Morphology Jochen Trommer Institut f¨urSemantische Informationsverarbeitung Universit¨atOsnabr¨uck D-49069 Osnabr¨uck Abstract The so-called "preposed article" (PA) is a functional morpheme that plays a central role in the morphosyntax of Albanian DPs but is poorly understood theoretically. In this paper I present an analysis of PAs morphology along the lines of Distributed Morphology (DM; Halle and Marantz, 1993). PA is taken to be a post-syntactically inserted agreement morpheme. It is argued that a correct account of the in- sertion contexts of PA and of its allomorphy presupposes reference to surface syntactic configurations thus supporting the conceptual frame- work of DM. The claim that PA is in certain instances a constitutive element of word formation (cf. e.g. Buchholz and Fiedler, 1987) is rejected. 1 Some Basic Empirical Facts 1.1 Occurrence The Albanian Preposed Article (PA) mainly occurs in two contexts1. It marks a dative DP as possessor of a complex DP and it occurs with most adjectives used attributively or predicatively: 1Besides other noun-modifying functional words (possessive pronouns, ordinal numbers, etc.) it also occurs with certain relative pronouns and nouns. For a more complete overview see (Buchholz and Fiedler, 1987, pg. 199) 1 (1) a. klas-a e kapitalist¨e-ve class-def PA capitalists-dat `The class of capitalists' b. vajz-a e bukur girl-def PA nice `the nice girl' c. vajz-a ¨esht¨e e bukur girl-def is PA nice `the girl is nice' While it functions as a grammatical marker in its first use, since it occurs with possessors perfectly regularly , and constitutes the only overt difference between dative verb complements and possessors, (2) a.
  • Chapter 5 Syntax Summary of Sentence, Clause and Group Sentence Structure

    Chapter 5 Syntax Summary of Sentence, Clause and Group Sentence Structure

    Chapter 5 Syntax Summary of sentence, clause and group Sentence structure Proposition (Pp) – the structural name for the independent clause. Link – logical (Ll) – a coordinate or correlative conjunction etc. that connects two ic. dialogic (Ld) – a polar conjunction that serves as, or begins, a response to a question. Speaker’s Attitude (Sa) – an adverb or relative clause that comments on the independent clause. Topic (T) – a prepositional group that anticipates the Subject of the independent clause. Vocative (V) – a noun that calls, or addresses, the Subject of the independent clause. Tag Question (Q) – X/v + S/pn, or informal marker, that changes the speech function of the ic. False Start (F) – an incomplete Proposition prior to the Pp/ic. Hesitation Filler (H) – a verbalized hesitation before, or during, a Pp/ic. Feedback (D) – a word or sound, without semantic content, that indicates the decoder is listening. Discourse Marker (M) – a formulaic word that carries a boundary marking speech act etc. Clause class Independent clause (ic) – complete in itself as Pp/ic, includes a finite P/v. Relative clause (rc) – begins with a relative conjunction, and includes a finite P/v. Subordinate clause (sc) – begins with a subordinate conjunction, and includes a finite P/v. Non-finite clause (nfc) – includes, and often begins with, a non-finite P/vb. Alpha-beta clause complexes (ααββ) – two interdependent clauses; the beta begins with a beta conjunction Clause structure Subject (S) – the first participant in the nucleus realized by n, pn, ng (including ajg), rc, or nfc. Predicate (P) – the second event in the nucleus realized by v, vb, vg in ic, rc, sc, nfc Complement (Co/d/s/p/a) – the third positioned goal in nucleus realized by n, pn, aj, ajg, ng, pg, rc, nfc.
  • Download and Print Interrogative and Relative Pronouns

    Download and Print Interrogative and Relative Pronouns

    GRAMMAR WHO, WHOM, WHOSE: INTERROGATIVE AND RELATIVE PRONOUNS Who, whom, and whose function as interrogative pronouns and relative pronouns. Like personal pronouns, interrogative and relative pronouns change form according to how they function in a question or in a clause. (See handout on Personal Pronouns). Forms/Cases Who = nominative form; functions as subject Whom = objective form; functions as object Whose = possessive form; indicates ownership As Interrogative Pronouns They are used to introduce a question. e.g., Who is on first base? Who = subject, nominative form Whom did you call? Whom = object, objective form Whose foot is on first base? Whose = possessive, possessive form As Relative Pronouns They are used to introduce a dependent clause that refers to a noun or personal pronoun in the main clause. e.g., You will meet the teacher who will share an office with you. Who is the subject of the clause and relates to teacher. (...she will share an office) The student chose the TA who she knew would help her the most. Who is the subject of the clause and relates to TA. (...she knew he would help her) You will see the advisor whom you met last week. Whom is the object of the clause and relates to advisor (...you met him...) You will meet the student whose favorite class is Business Communication. Whose indicates ownership or possession and relates to student. NOTE: Do not use who’s, the contraction for who is, for the possessive whose. How to Troubleshoot In your mind, substitute a she or her, or a he or him, for the who or the whom.
  • Chapter Iv Research Finding Ii Types of Free and Bound

    Chapter Iv Research Finding Ii Types of Free and Bound

    98 CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDING II TYPES OF FREE AND BOUND MORPHEMES USED IN THE NEWS COLUMN OF THE JAKARTA POST ON TUESDAY EDITION VOL.31 APRIL 8, 2014 4.1 Theory of types of free morphemes and bound morphemes 4.1.1. Types of free morphemes Free morphemes are the morphemes that can stand alone as a word. According to George Yule (2006 : 63), he stated that free morphemes is the morphemes that can stand by themselves as single word, for example; cat, open, tour, in, them, because, when, etc. The morphemes can generally be identified as the set of separate english word forms such as basic nouns, adjectives, verbs, etc. There are two types of free morphemes, are they open class words and close class words. According to George Yule (2006 : 64), he stated that free morphemes divided into two categories, that are lexical morphemes and functional morphemes. These free morpheme are called lexical morphemes, such as nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs. some example are: girl (noun), man (noun), house (noun), tiger(noun), sad (adjective), long (adjective), open (verb), look (verb), follow (verb), break (verb). We can add new lexical morphemes to the language rather easily, so they are treated as an ‘open’ class of words. Other types of free morphemes are called functional morphemes, for example; and, but, when, because, on, near, above, in, the, that, it, them. This set consists largely of the funtional words in the language such as conjunctions, prepositions, articles, and pronouns. Because we almost never add new functional morpheme to the language, they are described as a ‘closed’ class of words.