§ 487. The position of an attribute depends both on the head-word and on the attribute. If the head-word is a pronoun, the attribute is, as a rule, postpositive.

E. g. I can't tell you anything important yet.

A noun has mostly prepositive attributes, but some attrib­utes are regularly postpositive.

a) Prepositional phrases.

E. g. Men of good will, the idea of going there, an old friend of mine.

b) Infinitives, infinitival and participial constructions.

E. g. I've no wish to see him to-night. This is a book read and enjoyed by young and old, a book for you to read.

c) Adjectives in -able, -ible.

E. g. The happiest man imaginable, a decision fully justifiable.

In certain set expressions like from time immemorial, court martial, knight errant the position of the attribute was influenced by French.

§ 488. In postposition attributes often acquire what we might call a 'semi-predicative' connotation.

E. g. something important  something (which is) im­portant.

A man in lov e a man (who is) in love.

A book enjoyed  a book (which is) enjoyed.

A decision justifiable  a decision (which is) jus­tifiable.

This is probably the reason why words whose main function is that of predicative complements are sometimes used as postpositive attributes.

E.g. Barbara asleep was a symbol. (Galsworthy).

I'll stand up to any man a l i v e. (Shaw).

§ 489. If there are two or more prepositive attributes to one and the same noun their order is dependent upon a number of factors which appear to be semantic and stylistic rather than grammatical.

a) The general principle is that we tend to place closest to the head-word that attribute which is most closely connected with the noun and to which the greatest importance is attached in the given context.

E. g. steady dangerous eyes; a short killing remark.

b) The general naturally comes before the specific as in a slow laborious process, a nice good-natured smile.

c) There is a tangible tendency to follow a definite rhythmi­cal pattern by placing a shorter adjective before the longer one. That rude ignorant man.

§ 490. Though the sequence of the attributes modifying one noun is in most cases influenced by several of the above-mentioned factors concurrently, we may speak of certain rules or rather tendencies of their arrangement in accordance with their meanings. The table presently to be given shows these rules.

Attributes denoting

deter­mina­tives

other pro­per­ties

age

size

form

colour

nationality

mate­rial

pur­pose

noun

E. g. A beautiful Persian shawl.

A round marble table.

An old red brick house, etc.

§ 491. As to the position of the other parts of the sentence, see the combinability of the corresponding parts of speech.

THE COMPOSITE SENTENCE

§ 492. Composite sentences, as we know (§ 403), divide into compound and complex sentences. The difference between them is not only in the relations of coordination or subordina­tion, as usually stated. It is also important to know what is coordinated or subordinated. In compound sentences the whole clauses are coordinated, together with their predications.

In complex sentences a clause is mostly subordinated not to the whole principal clause but to some word in it which may be regarded as its head-word. In I know where he lives the subordinate clause is an adjunct of the objective verb know. In I know the place where he lives the subordinate clause is the adjunct of the noun place. In The important thing is where he lives the subordinate clause is an adjunct of the link-verb is. The only exception is the subordinate clause in a sen­tence like Where he lives is unknown in which it functions as the subject.

§ 493. These peculiarities of compound and complex sentences may account for the difference in their treatment. The clauses of compound sentences are often regarded as in­dependent. ¹ Some linguists are even of the opinion that compound sentences are merely sequences of simple sentences, combinations of sentences. The clauses of a complex sen­tence, on the contrary, are often treated as forming a unity, a simple sentence in which some part is replaced by a clause. Such extreme views are, to our mind, not quite justified, especially if we take into consideration that the border lines between coordination (parataxis) and subordination (hypotaxis are fluid. A clause may be introduced by a typical subordinat­ing conjunction and yet its connection with the principal clause is so loose that it can hardly be regarded as a subordinate clause at all.

Cf. I met John, who told me(= and he told me) the big news.

Or, conversely, a coordinating conjunction may express relations typical of subordination.

E. g. You must interfere now; for (cf. because) they are getting quite beyond me. (Shaw).

^{________________________________}

¹ See, for instance, the following definition: "A compound sentence contains two or more independent propositions'' (G. Curme, op. cit., p. 161)

§ 494. As already noted (§ 399), the demarcation line be­tween a compound sentence and a combination of sentences, as well as that between compound words and combinations of words, is somewhat vague. Yet, the majority of compound words and compound sentences are established in the language system as definite units with definite structures. Besides, a similar vagueness can be observed with regard to the demar­cation line between complex sentences and combinations of sentences.

E. g. They are not people, but types. W h i с h makes it difficult for the actors to present them convincingly. (D. W.).

Though coordinating conjunctions may be found to con­nect independent sentences, they are in an overwhelming majority of cases used to connect clauses.

As to the asyndetical connection of clauses, it is found both in compound and in complex sentences. In either case the relations between the clauses resemble those expressed by the corresponding conjunctions.

E. g. They had a little quarrel, he soon forgot. (London). Here the asyndeton might be replaced by which or but.

Semantically the clauses of a compound sentence are usually connected more closely than independent sentences. These relations may be reduced to a few typical cases that can be listed.

The order of clauses within a compound sentence is often more rigid than in complex sentences. He came at six and we had dinner together. (the place of the coordinate clauses cannot be changed without impairing the sense of the sentence).

Cf. If she wanted to do anything better she must have a great deal more. (Dreiser). She must have a great deal more if she wanted to do anything better.

Especially close is the connection of the coordinate clauses in a case like this.

He expected no answer, and a dull one would have been reproved. (Dreiser).

The prop-word one is an additional link between the clauses.

§ 495. Though there is some similarity in the function and combinability of subordinate clauses and parts of the sentence, which is justly used as a criterion for the classification of clauses, we must not identify clauses and parts of simple sen­tences.

Apart from their having predications, clauses differ from parts of the simple sentence in some other respects, too.

a) Very often it is not the clause itself but the conjunction that defines its function and combinability. He speaks the truth may be a simple sentence, a coordinate or a subordinate clause, depending on the conjunction; and he speaks the truth is normally a coordinate clause, when he speaks the truth is often a subordinate clause of time, if he speaks the truth is mostly a subordinate clause of condition, etc.

Thus a conjunction is often a definite marker of a clause, which distinguishes such clauses from most English words having no markers. That probably accounts for the fact that clauses with such markers have a greater freedom of distribu­tion than most parts of a simple sentence.

b) There is often no correlation between clauses and parts of simple sentences. I know that he is ill is correlated with

I know that. I am afraid that he is ill is not correlated with

* I am afraid that. I hope that he is well is not correlated with

* I hope that, etc.

The most important part of the sentence, the predicate, has no correlative type of clause.

Certain clauses have, as a matter of fact, no counterparts among the parts of the sentence.

E. g. I am a diplomat, aren't I? (Hemingway).

THE COMPOUND SENTENCE

§ 496. The clauses of compound sentences are of equal! rank, but usually the clause preceding the conjunction is regarded as the initial clause to which the other clause is related. These relations are mostly determined by the con­junction and are accordingly copulative, adversative, dis­junctive, causal, resultative¹ (see 'Conjunctions').

As to clauses linked asyndetically, their relations are likewise of different nature, though, for the most part, copu­lative or causal-resultative, as in.

His eyes were bloodshot and heavy, his face a deadly white... (Dickens).

Next day his knee was badly swollen, his walking tour was obviously over. (Galsworthy).