H&P's English Grammar

download H&P's English Grammar

If you can't read please download the document

description

A partial book summary

Transcript of H&P's English Grammar

A Student's Introduction to English Grammar : English Synchronic Linguistics

CHAPTER 8 : NEGATION AND RELATED PHENOMENA

Negative and positive clauses

The system in which positive and negative contrast is called polarity. This is why we can assert a clause the characteristic of having either a positive polarity or a negative one. Semantically, a pair of negative and positive clauses cannot both be true, nor both be false. One has to be true. Syntactically, positive is the default polarity for all canonical clauses are positive. Positive and negative clauses are different at several levels : 1) After a negative clause, one can add a constituent introduced by not even such as in I haven't read your book, not even the introduction. 2) When adding a related clause of the same polarity, the positive pair may be linked by the connective adjunct so (I have read your book, and so have my students). The negative pair may be linked by the connective adjuncts neither or nor (I haven't read your book, and neither have my students). 3) The confirmatory tag (truncated interrogative clause) can help find out which is the polarity of the clause to which it is attached for their polarity is its reverse : positive clause + negative tag (they have laughed, haven't they?) or negative clause + positive tag (you didn't kill her, did you?).

/!\ one should not mix up reversed polarity tags and constant polarity tags such as in So they've read my book, have they? Amazing! /!\

Subclausal Negation

Subclausal negation is the case where a negative element does not make the clause in which it is contained negative. We firstly find subclausal negation in affixal negation (except when it is the n't clinging to auxiliary verbs) such as in dislike or homeless. This subclausal negation does not influence the polarity of the clause as the previously mentionned tests can prove it. Furthermore, there are other cases of subclausal negation where the polarity might be less obvious and one should use the tests. It is, for instance, the case when not modifies an adverb or an NP instead of a verb such as in : This is a not uncommon mistake.

Clausal Negation

Within clausal negation, one should distinguish verbal (marked by negative inflection on the verb or by its modification with not) and non-verbal negation.

Grammatically speaking, verbal negation requires the insertion of the dummy auxiliary do under these certain conditions : 1) In clauses with a primary verb form (she didn't reject his offer). 2) In imperative clauses (Don't reject his offer). Inflectional negation is admissible as well under these conditions. Elsewhere, neither do nor negative inflection can occur such as in subjunctive clauses : It is vital that we not be disturbed.

/!\ When not is the only option, it comes before the verb and where bot not and inflectional verb-form are allowed, it is only a matter of style. /!\

Let's now focus on non-verbal clausal negation : it is marked by not modifying a constituent other than a verb or by negative words that are not used for verbal negation : nothing, never, few, and so on. Not can modify lots of non-verbal elements (Not even Tom liked it) but not all of them (Not Tom liked it). The other markers of non-verbal clausal negation form two different groups : the absolute negators (no, none, nobody, no one, nothing, nowhere, neither, nor, never) that can have equivalents in verbal negation and the approximate negators (few, little, rarely, seldom, barely, hardly, scarcely) which are semantically approximate but still follow the pattern of the absolute negators with regard to the tests.

Non-affirmative items

Polarity-sensitive words or larger expressions occur readily in clauses of one polarity and not of the other. Regarding the polarity with which they occur freely and with less restrictions, they will have either a positive orientation or a negative orientation. The majority of polarity-sensitive items have negative orientation and we'll focus on them. Non-affirmative items are subject to the restriction that they cannot occur in clauses that are both positive and declarative such as any in I have any objections to make. Other samples of these are : at all, any, either, ever, yet, and so on. Besides negatives and interrogatives, other constructions accept non-affirmatives. These constructions all have semantic affinities with negation such as in She was too taken aback to say anything. Thanks to too, we understand that she did not say anything.

/!\ Prescriptive Grammar Note : there are non-standard varieties of English that use negative items in place of what we called non-affirmative items in clauses with verbal negation. Let's take the Rolling Stones' I can't get no satisfaction. Negation is marked in more than one place and this is called negative concord. It is non-standard but not illogical! /!\

Scope of Negation

The scope of negation is the part of the sentence that the negative applies to semantically. In Not many people believed him, negation has scope over many. In Many people didn't believe him, many has scope over negation. Very often, a negative elements has scope over what follows but is within the scope of the preceding elements. However, there might be cases where this distinction is attributable to specific features of the elements such as the difference between You needn't tell anyone about it (negation has scope over need) and You musn't tell anyone about it (must has scope over negation).

CHAPTER 9 : CLAUSE TYPE : ASKING, EXCLAIMING AND DIRECTING

Clause type and speech acts :

Here's is a typical (but no one-to-one) correspondence between certain clause types and the speech acts they allow to perform. As already said, one should be careful not too mix up things such as the clause type imperative and the speech act issuing a directive. For instance, this imperative does not express a directive : Turn up late and you'll be fired. One has to keep in mind that clause type is one of the major factors determining the speech act but it is not the only one! Another important point to make is the fact that we'll keep talking about clause types for in complex cases, sentences types are unlikely to be found. That's why we'll discuss mainly main clauses in this chapter and focus on closed and open interrogatives, exclamatives and imperatives (for declaratives are the default ones and lack the others' properties).

Interrogatives and questions :

A closed question has just two answers (yes or no) like Is Lily here? whereas an open question has open-ended set of answers like Which course did Nora miss? One has to draw a distinction between an answer and a response; a response being whatever someone says as a result of being asked some question (for instance : I'm not sure // Why do you ask?).

The form of closed interrogatives is marked by the subject-auxiliary inversion such as in Is it raining?. However, inversion is not restricted to closed interrogatives and is also found with certain elements in clause-initial position such as in I used to drink too much and so did everyone. Let's now focus on something else : intonation. A closed question can be signalled with a rise in the intonation without being interrogative clauses! The example You're sure you can't afford it? Proves that intonation overrides clause type in determining what kind of speech act is performed. There are two kinds of closed questions : the polar and the alternative questions. The polar question (where an answer is derivable directly from the question itself, while the other is its polar opposite, its negative counterpart) can be shown with this example : Did he read her note?. The alternative question contains a coordination of elements linked by or and the answers derive from the separate coordinated elements. Take for instance : Is the meeting today, tomorrow, or next Monday?. The or coordinates two closed interrogative clauses expressing a single alternative question. From time to time, the distinction is very subtile and is marked by intonation : e.g. : Do you want me to give it to mum / or dad \? (alternative question) and Do you want me to give it to mum or dad? (polar question). A special case of the closed interrogative is the the interrogative tag. They are closed interrogatives reduced to an auxiliary verb and a pronoun subject. The rest is implicit and recoverable from the preceding clause such as in We still aren't drunk, are we?.

The form of open interrogatives is marked by the presence of one (or more) of the following interrogative words : who; whom; whose; what; which; when; where; why; how. The combination of an interrogative word with another word forms an interrogative phrase which can have different functions in the clause. The important syntactic distinction to draw is between subjects and non-subjects. These last ones being usually fronted in these type of clause; that is : they are placed before the subject. Let's now focus on case. The choice of case (be it nominative, accusative or genitive form) depends on function and style level. With regard to who, as subject of a finite clause, it appears in the nominative. As object of verb, in both cases are found with variation of formality. Open interrogatives are used to express open questions with open-ended answers (derivable from the questions by replacing the interrogative phrases by appropriate non-interrogative ones : replacement phrases). The appropriate replacement depends on the interrogative phrase and on the interrogative word.

In all the questions considered so far,we've been dealing with information questions (whose answers are statements). But direction questions exist as well and their answers are directives as in Shall I open the door? -Yes, please do. One distinctive type of information question is the echo question, uttered in response to the stimulus such as in He invited Arthur He invited who? They serve to check a stimulus that wasn't clearly perceived or expected. They can be closed or open and are often polar.

Exclamatives : exclamative clauses are marked by an exclamative phrase containing what or how. Again, the main distinction at the level of function has to be drawn between subject and non-subject. An exclamatory subject occupies its normal position (What drunken people are hanging out here) whereas an exclamative non-subject is always fronted (How creepy you are!). Exclamatory meaning can be conveyed by something else than exclamative clause type : the hell, the fuck, and so on can also convey that meaning such as in What the fuck are you doing? Get the hell out of here (respectively interrogative and imperative clause types). Exclamative what has the syntax of an adjective, it occurs in NP's with a following head. Exclamative what is concerned with quality or degree such as in What a tasty beer we drank! Exclamatory how is always an adverb such as in How stupid she looks!

Imperatives and directives :

The form of imperative clauses are marked by the following features : the 2nd person subject is omissible, the verb is in the plain form and auxiliary do is required in verbal negation even with be! Obviously, most imperatives have a 2nd person subject overtly expressed as you or implicitly. There exists a 3rd person subject as well such as in Everybody put your hands up in the air. But still, it's not far from the 2nd person subject. However, there also is a 1st person plural, marked by the use of the verb let such as in Let's go drinking. As noticed, the specialised let (that is to say, the one used for this kind of imperative) allows reduction to 's for the pronoun us.

Now, what are the different uses of the imperative? They characteristically issue directives, which involves an important set of speech acts (orders, requests, instructions, advice, invitations, permissions). Distinguishing them is complex but can be done through tone, voice and linguistic devices such as please and kindly. Imperatives can also be used to express wishes in situations regarded as not being under your control such as in Sleep well. Eventually, imperatives can be used as conditions in coordination constructions with a conditional interpretation where the second element embodies the consequence of the condition such as in Get drunk without eating and you'll throw up. Eventhough imperative is often used to utter directives, there are other ways to make someone's intentions clear. Interrogatives can fulfill this role such as in Will you finish this glass. Declaratives can also utter directives such as in I beg you to drink from the bottle or in I want you to remain silent.

Minor clause types

There are a few clauses that don't belong to the different clause types mentionned previously in this chapter. They involve fixed formulae or fragmentary structures such as Long live the Queen. So be it. No pain, no gain.

CHAPTER 10 : SUBORDINATION AND CONTENT CLAUSES

Subordinate clauses

Subordination is a relation between a clause (called subordinate) and some element outside of it part of another structure. Subordinate clauses function as dependent in clause within some larger construction. The next higher clause is the 'matrix' clause. In the sentence Bill said Mary wanted to know how long I've loved you, the matrix clause of how long I've loved you is to know how long I've loved you. Again, the matrix clause of to know how I've loved you is Mary wanted to know how long I've loved you. Eventually, the matrix clause of Mary wanted to know how long I've loved you is the whole sentence, that is to say, Bill said Mary wanted to know how long I've loved you.

Subordination can be marked in different ways (marking being internal to the clause). It can be marked by a subordinator (I agree that Sue is the best candidate). It can also be marked by missing constituents such as a subject or an object (This is the book I was looking at). Finally, they are also marked by verb forms (gerund participle and past participle) which unambiguously signal non finite clauses (I made a mistake in having another beer).

Clause type in content clauses

There are three major subclasses of finite subordinate clauses.

- Relative clauses : introduced by relative element (pronoun, determinative) which has an antecedent and they may have a missing constituent.

- Comparative clauses : they are introduced by than or as and may have no subject; there's always a missing constituent.

-Content clauses : they can be declaratives, interrogatives (be it closed or open) or exclamatives but never imperatives.

Declarative content clauses

Their most specific feature is the subordinator that. It can be obligatory as in That we were wrong needs to be demonstrated, optional as in I think I'm gonna be sad and even inadmissible as in Who do you think that remains. There are three factors affecting omission in case of optional that. The first is register (likely to be omitted in informal style). The second is function (it is not likely to be omitted in a structure such as The idea that...). The third factor is frequency + 'modalisation' of construction (it is likely to be omitted in short structures with usual verbs such as in I knew he was wrong).

The different functions of declarative content clauses are : subject (That they refused is insane), extraposed subject (It didn't surprise us that they refused), internal complement of verb (I realise that you feel insulted), complement of noun (He can't deny the fact that he was drunk), complement of adjective (I'm glad that you could come), complement of preposition (You can go provided that you are careful), provided being considered as a preposition here.

Let's now have a look at the mandative content clauses : a mandative content clause can be seen as a report of a directive speech act. It is licensed by a verb/adjective/noun that can have 'deontic' meaning such as demand, insist, desire, suggest, essential, crucial, vital, indispensable, mandatory, and so on. Let's take 3 examples of different mandatives. The first is the subjunctive use of the plain form of the verb be such as in It is essential that he be told immediately. The second is the special use of the modal auxiliary should (this one is more likely to be found in British English) such as in It is essential that he should be told immediately. The last one is the cover mandative such as in It is essential that he is told immediately (Note that nothing in the form of the content clause itself distinguishes the mandative use from ordinary non-mandative declaratives). Remember that with verbs other than be and with other subjects than the 3rd person singular, the subjunctive and the covert mandative have the same shape (still they have two different forms : plain form regarding the subjunctive clause and plain present for the covert mandative).

Interrogative content clauses

They are kinds of report/'are about' questions. They're usually not used by a speaker to ask questions and can often be glossed, paraphrased by the answer to the question. Take for instance I know what it's like to be dead. => I know the answer to the question What is it like to be dead?. Subordinate closed interrogatives are normally introduced by one of the interrogative subordinators whether or if followed by a basic subject-predicate order such as in He asked me whether I'd attend the meeting. Whether is obligatory (or preferred) with interrogative clause at front of the main clause (Whether you like it or not makes no difference to me), if interrogative is a predicate complement or an appositive (The question is whether guilt has been established beyond reasonable doubt), if interrogative clause is complement of preposition (This says nothing about whether the price is justified), if interrogative clause complements a noun (We discussed the question whether it was right), in alternative questions where or not directly follows the subordinator (I don't care whether you're ready or not).

Let's now focus on open interrogative content clauses. They are marked by wh- interrogative word and they include no auxiliary-preposing (and are thus different from main clause interrogatives when the interrogative is no subject) such as in It's obvious why she resigned. Let's now have a look at the several functions of interrogative content clauses : subject (What caused the delay remains unclear), extraposed subject (It remains unclear what cause the delay), internal complement (I asked them what progress they had made), complement of noun (The question whether it's legal was ignored), complement of adjective (I'm uncertain what we can do about it), complement of preposition (That depends on how much time we have). The range of functions is almost like that illustrated for declaratives. The difference is that prepositions are often optional such as in The question (of) whether it's legal was ignored.

Let's now turn to interrogatives as adjuncts. There is one construction where subordinate interrogatives appear in adjunct function. This construction is the exhaustive conditional construction. It uses an interrogative clause to express a set of conditions that exhaustively consider the possibilities. Here is an example of a closed one : He'll complain, whether we meet during the week or at the week-end. Here is an example of an open one : He'll complain, whatever you ask him to do. The interrogative expresses a question whose answers define an exhaustive set of conditions. Each possible answer represents a case. There's another variant of the exhaustive conditional construction where the adjunct has the form of a larger phrase headed by independently, irrespective, regardless, no matter such as in He'll complain, no matter what you ask him to do. Here, the interrogative clauses are complements.

Exclamative content clauses

Exclamative clauses, main or subordinate, are marked by an initial exclamative phrase (how/what). In main but not subordinate clauses, subject-auxiliary preposing is permitted if the exclamative phrase is in non-subject function. Take, for instance, How very kind you are!.

Exclamative content clauses function as complements only : subject (what a folly it was wasn't obvious), extraposed subject (it's incredible how much you drink), internal complement of verb (I'd forgotten what a fast drinker she is), complement of preposition (she was surprised a how ill he looked), complement of adjective (she was surprised how ill he looked). A few of its licensors are know, realise, notice, see, remember. Besides, there might exist some ambiguity between exclamative and interrogative content clauses such as in Do you remember how big it was? One has to be careful, thus.

CHAPTER 11 : RELATIVE CLAUSES

A relative clause is a special kind of subordinate clause whose primary function is as modifier to a noun or a nominal.

1. Relative clauses as modifiers of nouns

In the following example of a noun-modifying relative clause (The film which I needed isn't subtitled), the relative clause is introduced by a relative pronoun (which) whose interpretation is provided by its antecedent (film). The relation between a pronoun and its antecedent is called anaphora. It is a crucial property of relative clauses that they always contain an element- present or understood- that is anaphorically related to an antecedent from which it derives its interpretation. The R element is the constituent that is anaphorically related to the antecedent. There is a distinction to be drawn between wh and non-wh relative clauses. There doesn't have to be an overt pronoun to express the anaphorical link. The relative clauses that do contain an overt anaphorical link are called wh relatives. Those without overt link are the non-wh relatives. They come in two subtypes : one is introduced by the clause subordinator that (the that relative in The film that I needed) and the other is not (the bare relative in The film I needed). There is no relative pronoun in these last two cases but there's still a anaphorical link. The overt or covert R element linked to the head noun is called the relativised element. It can have different functions : subject (some friends who saw her), object (a key which she found), complement of preposition (those book which I referred to), adjunct of time (the day when you were born), adjunct of place (a place where you can drink), adjunct of reason (the reason why you're drunk). The R element can also be located within a content clause embedded inside the relative clause such as in A cigarette which he says she found. R is object of found and the found clause is a content clause functioning as complement of says.

We turn now to a more complex kind of relative construction found in the wh type only.

This is [the article from which they were quoting]. We need to distinguish between two concepts : the relative phrase (the constituent occupying initial position in the clause) and the relativised element (the element that is anaphorically related to the head noun, R). In our new case, the relative phrase does no longer only consist of the relativised element. Note that there is another version where less material is fronted, so that the relative phrase becomes a smaller constituent such as in This is the article which they were quoting from. From is here left on its own, stranded.

2. Integrated vs supplementary relatives

The supplementary relatives are more loosely attached. An example of the difference between integrated (Politicians who make crazy promises aren't trusted) and supplementary (Politicians, who make crazy promises, aren't trusted) relatives is provided here. Integrated and supplementary relatives differ in three aspects : intonation and punctuation, interpretation and syntax. Integrated relatives are integrated intonationally when supplementary are set apart in a separate intonation unit. In writing, this is reflected in the punctuation with supplementary relatives marked off by commas. The information expressed in an integrated relative is presented as an integral part of the larger message. In a supplementary relative, the information is seen as supplementary to that expressed in the rest of the sentence. It is additional, parenthetical, material. There is a special case (as in our example) where the relative clause serves to restrict the denotation of the head noun in the larger sentence. However, an integrated relative is not always restrictive (Martha has two sons she can rely on and hence is not unduly worried). Syntactically, there also are four differences : 1) supplementary relatives are often of the wh type. 2) Supplementary relatuves allow more more antecedents. Plus, they accept clauses and proper nouns without determiners (Max arrived late, which caused some delay). 3) In supplementary relatives, which appears as a pronoun but also as a determinative (This will keep us busy until Friday, by which time the boss will be back). 4) Integrated relatives function as dependent (modifier to be precise) within the construction containing them but supplementary are attached more loosely and may constitute a separate sentence as in A : Our rent is due next week.

B : Which is why we shouldn't be going out to dinner tonight.

3. Relative words in integrated and supplementary relative clauses

The major relative words in both constructions are who whom whose which when where why.

When, where and why indicate time, place and reason respectively. Let's now turn to the notion of gender as a grammatical term. The primary gender system in English is indeed based on sex (regarding 3rd person singular personal pronouns) but not all are (cross-linguistically as well as language-specifically). The secondary gender system of English on the contrast between personal and non personal. This applies to the interrogative and relative pronouns but, in the relative construction we are considering, the non-personal pronoun is different from the interrogative. See for instance :

PERSONAL : Interrogative : Who did you see? Relative : The person who annoys me most

IMPERSONAL : Interrogative : What did you see? Relative : The thing which annoys me

Let's now have a look at case and the distinction between nominative and accusative with the variable lexeme who. In addition to its nominative form who and its genitive form whose, it also has an accusative form whom. The nominative is required in subject and predicative complement function. The complement of a fronted preposition is normally accusative (the woman to whom he was engaged). Elsewhere, both are found with the accusative being more formal in style. Also, in integrated relatives, the choice between the cases is often avoided by use of non wh-construction as in this example : The applicants we interviewed. (neutral)

4. Fused relatives

This construction is more complex because the antecedent and the relativised relement are fused together. The following expression, for instance, is an NP whose head is fused with the first element in the relative clause. I've eaten what you gave me. What is head of the NP and object of gave in the relative clause. The relative words that occur in this kind of construction are : who, whom, what, which, where, when / whoever, whomever, whatever, whichever, wherever, whenever. (The second set, after the /, only occur in fused relative constructions, so does what). Who, whom and which occur in fused construction under very limited conditions (with verbs like choose, want, like, etc). What can also be a determinative. In What mistakes she made were very minor, what is determiner and mistakes is the head of the NP subject of were very minor. Also, what mistakes is the object of made in the relative clause. Mistakes has a role in both the subordinate clause and the matrix clause.

One should always beware of the overlap between fused relatives and interrogative content clauses. If we consider What she wrote is unclear, it is ambiguous whether this is an interrogative or a fused relative.

CHAPTER 12 : GRADE AND COMPARISON

1. Comparative and superlative grade

The inflectional system including plain, comparative and superlative forms applies to adjectives, determinatives and adverbs be it in a regular way (for instance the adjective : tall, taller, tallest or the adverb : soon, sooner, soonest) as well as in an irregular way (such as the determinative : many, more, most). In the case of the superlative, we are dealing with set comparison. The comparison here occurs between the members of some set with respect to their position on the scale denoted by the lexeme : one member/subset is located at a higher position than the others. In the case of the comparative, we are dealing with term comparison between a primary term and a secondary term such as in Max is taller than Tom. We can describe the meaning by using variables such as x and y. Max is x tall. Tom is y tall. X > Y.This will help us to distinguish this type of term comparison and that found in The aerial is taller than 100 feet. There is only one variable here. The aerial is x tall. X > 100 feet.

It also occurs that the secondary term is left unexpressed if it is recoverable from the context such as in Tom is quite tall, but [Max is taller]. One recovers Tom from the first clause. Comparative grade is also used in set comparison when the set has just two members (not more) such as in Kim is the taller of the two. Now, one should beware of the fact that there also exists a non-inflectional marking of comparative and superlative grade. They can be marked by more or most, rather than by inflection such as in useful, more useful, most useful.

2. More and most

More and most can be either inflectional forms of the determinatives many and much or they can be adverbs marking non-inflectional comparatives and superlatives of adjectives and adverbs. More as determinative is found in the following example : We don't have much time becoming We have more time than we need. More is here the comparative counterpart of plain many and much. It is functioning as a determiner in NP structure in our example. Correspondence between grades is complicated because much and many are non-affirmative items and this is why one won't say We have much time even if We don't have much time is completely correct. More as adverb is found in the following example : It's more expensive than I expected. It is a modifier of the adjective expensive and is a marker of the comparative grade. The big difference between more as determinative and as adverb is that there is no much or many in the plain grade version when it's used afterwards as an adverb. (It's expensive becoming It's more expensive than I expected). The same distinction applies to most. As a determinative we have He didn't make many mistakes becoming He made the most mistakes. As an adverb we have It's expensive becoming It's the most expensive of them all. However, we have an additional, a non-superlative sense of the adverb where it means extremely or very such as in I found her helpful becoming I found her most helpful. It does not mark superlative grade because there is no explicit comparison between members of a set.

3. Less and least

As more and most, they belong to the both the determinative (as inflectional forms of little) and the adverb (as degree modifiers) classes.

The determinative less is syntactically similar to its opposite more. However, one has to keep in mind that even though more is the comparative form of many (>< few) occuring with plurals and much (> She introduced me to her mother and she introduced me to her father. Let's now turn to non-equivalent main-clause and lower-level coordinations. There are some cases where pairs with lower-level and main-clause coordination are not logically equivalent. Consider : .One teacher was popular and patient (one person with two properties) becomes One teacher was popular and one teacher was patient (two teachers).

7. Joint vs distributive coordination

One special case where a lower-level coordination is not equal to a corresponding main-clause coordination is in joint coordination (Kim and Pat are a good pair), as opposed to the default distributive coordination (Kim and Pat are fine players). The property of being fine players applies separately to both of them whereas being a good pair applies to both jointly. Kim is good pair is not acceptable. Joint coordination has the following properties : it requires that each coordinate denote a member of a set, that the coordinates belong to the same syntactic category and it disallows correlative coordination.

8. Non-basic coordination

Basic coordination consists of a continuous sequence if coordinates (either bare or expanded by coordinators or, but, and or determinatives both, either, neither). Plus bare coordinates should be able to occur as constituents in non-coordination constructions. Let's now focus on kinds of coordinations departing from that pattern.

8.1 Expansion of coordinates by modifiers (violation of the second condition)

An expanded coordinate can contain a modifier as well as (or instead of) a marker such as in He felt [not angry but rather deeply disappointed]. The underlined expressions are modifiers of the bare coordinates in which they are located.

8.2 Gapped coordination (violation of the third condition)

The middle part of a non-initial coordinate can be omitted if it is recoverable from the corresponding part of the initial coordinate such as in Her son lives in Boston and her daughter __ in Brussels. The gap marked __ is understood by reference to the first coordinate. Here the coordination regards clauses, so the whole of it is undergoing coordination.

8.3 Right nonce-constituent coordination

As shown in We gave [Kim a book and Pat a CD], there are two distinctive properties at play here. Firstly, the coordinates don't form constituents in corresponding non-coordination constructions. For instance, Kim a book does not form a single constituent. (Nonce means on one single occasion. Outside of coordination, these wouldn't be form single constituents. They are linked together one on single occasion). Second, the coordinates are required to be syntactically parallel : the separate elements of each coordinate must have the same functions in corresponding non-coordination constructions. The first elements (Kim and Pat) are indirect objects and both second elements (a book and a CD) are direct objects.

8.4 Delayed right constituent coordination (violation of the third condition)

As seen in the following example : She [noticed but didn't comment on] his inconsistencies., there are two distinctive properties. Firstly, at least one of the coordinates does not form a constituent in a corresponding non-coordination construction. Second, The element on the right of the coordination is understood as related to each coordinate. The basic and normal coordination would have had She noticed his inconsistencies but didn't comment on them.

8.5 End-attachment coordination

As presented in the following example : Kim was included on the shortlist, but not Pat., the second coordinate (including the coordinator) is here not adjacent to the first but is attached at the end of the clause. The relation marked by the coordinator but is still expressed, but in the example, the constituent related by the coordinator don't make up a constituent.