Conjunctions

Coordinators

  • Link words, phrases or clauses on an equal footing

  • Subparts can switch order w/o changing the meaning

  • and, but, nor, or

I’m not going to tidy my room and I’m not going to take out the trash (clauses)

Jack and Jill went up the hill (phrases, NPs, can switch to Jill and Jack)

It’s either under the sink or in the cellar (phrases, PP)

  • Different categories: Constituents of different categories can form a coordination provided their functions are the same

The incident was off campus and relatively unimportant (PP and AdjP, both have the same function, complement verb to Be)

It will arrive Friday or over the weekend (NP, PP, both functioning as time adjuncts in the arrive clause)

He is a liberal and proud of it (NP, AdjP, both can serve as complements in this clause)

~~A liberal and proud of it would have voted the other way~~ (NP liberal allowed as the subject of would, the AdjP proud not)

  • Coordinations with “but” are limited to two

~~I love you but she hates me but I love her~~

  • With “and” or “or”, any number

  • and or or: precedes the last coordinator, or repeated before all:

For a Waldorf salad, you need celery, walnuts, apples, grapes and mayonnaise For a Waldorf salad, you need celery and walnuts, and apples and grapes and mayonnaise

NP’s

  • Just two with and: can use “both”

both Jack and Jill

  • Regardless how many, with or: can use “either”

either toast, hash browns, or pancakes

Subordinators

Meaningless words that that mark the beginnings of certain subordinate clauses.

Pure CGEL: These are not complementizers or subordinate conjunctions - both are mostly prepositions

That Subordinator

  • Can drop when the content clause immediately follows a verb

I thought that you didn’t really care

I thought you didn’t really care (content clause is the object)

  • Can’t leave it out when the content clause is the subject

That no one really liked him was well known ~~No one really liked him* was well known~~

  • Can left off but it mustn’t leave you with a clause beginning with a verb

It’s a car that I’m really happy with It’s a car I’m really happy with (that just links, the clause has a subject - I’m) It’s a car that appeals to me ~~It’s a car appeals to me~~ (that is the subject in the relative clause, ref to car)

Whether

  • Introduced closed interrogative content clause

I wondered whether anybody really cared Does anybody really care?

  • Can replace with “if”, slightly more informal

I wondered whether anybody would listen I wondered if anybody would listen

  • Can’t use if when the interrogative clause is the subject

Whether anybody was listening ~~If anybody was listening is the the key question~~

For sbr

  • Not the preposition for: the subordinate for

  • A subordinator that introduce infinitival clause

Jim arranged for us to be met at the airport

Subordinator vs. prepositions

after, although, because, before, if, lest, since, though, till, until, while etc

Are not subordinators. They are prepositions.
A preposition will add meaning.

I’m happy that you are here (that meaningless) I’m happy because you are here I’m happy although you are here

Caveat with That sbr

It’s a car that I’m really happy with It’s a car that appeals to me

NP + Relative Clause Structure

Sentence

NP

Relative Clause

It’s a car that I’m really happy with

a car

that I’m really happy with

It’s a car that appeals to me

a car

that appeals to me

Similarity:

  • In both cases, the relative clause modifies the NP head “car”.

  • Function in NP: postmodifier

  • Category: finite subordinate relative clause

  • Introduced by relativizer “that” referring to the head noun.

Internal Role of Head Noun Inside Relative Clause

Sentence

Role of “car” inside relative clause

that I’m really happy with

object of the preposition “with”

that appeals to me

subject of the verb “appeals”

Difference:

  • First clause → NP head = object of preposition

  • Second clause → NP head = subject of verb

Function vs. Category (CGEL perspective)

Aspect

that I’m really happy with

that appeals to me

Category (what it is)

finite subordinate relative clause

finite subordinate relative clause

Function (what it does)

postmodifier of NP head “car”

postmodifier of NP head “car”

Internal role of head noun

object of preposition

subject of verb

Explain sentence 1

  • In English, the relativizer “that” replaces the head noun in its original role inside the relative clause.

  • This is why we can write:

that I’m really happy with ___

  • The gap “___” in the relative clause is where the head noun would appear as object of the preposition.

  • The relativizer “that” links the NP head in the main clause to this gap.

Explain sentence 2

  • Here, the head noun “car” is the subject of the verb “appeals” inside the clause.

  • There is no object of a preposition in the clause that the head noun must fill.

  • The relativizer “that” just fills the subject slot.

CGEL Summary

Both relative clauses are finite subordinate relative clauses postmodifying the noun “car”, but in the first clause the head noun functions as object of a preposition, while in the second it functions as subject of the verb inside the relative clause.