Question 2: False. The phrase in red modifies the whole of the phrase “This one modifies meeting, instead of the subject”, not just the subject “This one”. If it did the latter, it would have to use the reflexive pronoun: “making itself….”
Sorry, I know this is irrelevant to this post, but anway…
Just to confirm what you and Sapparis have taught me:
1)appositives are nouns renaming/restating other nouns/noun phrases, and the appositive can be modified too, by that clauses for example.
2)resumptive constructions repeat another word in a sentence. It can repeat just about any word in the preceding clause—-preps, verbs, etc. and they are used to help with flow, parallelism etc.
3)summitive constructions start with a word summing up the previous clause and follow it with a relative clause only
4)adjective and adverb phrases can be free modifiers-separated from the clause by commas-and can be placed anywhere in a sentence as long as it doesn’t create confusion.
If you could just confirm I have it right and I haven’t misconstrued your posts.
1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3. Yes, but the relative clause may be reduced.
4. Yes.
I would just like to add one comment. I dislike the journalistic habit of constantly using an appositive noun phrase or adjective phrase to begin a sentence. Often there is nothing grammatically wrong with this, but it is annoying when overdone. For example:
“A popular holiday destination, Spain has a warm and sunny climate. Not known for their sobriety, the young pleasure-seekers flock the beaches there.”
Sometimes, however, writers make the grammatical mistake of starting a sentence with a phrase that does not modify the following subject, and ought instead to be attached to the end of the previous sentence. Example:
“Spain has a warm and sunny climate. A popular holiday destination, large numbers of tourists go there.”
This should read:
“Spain has a warm and sunny climate, and is a popular holiday destination. Large numbers of tourists go there.”
It is amazing how often this type of mistake occurs!
Thanks. And yes, I see this error in newspapers, too!
You state that the relative clause in summative modifiers can be reduced. I suppose there is no problem with these then:
The World Cup trophy is iconic and prestigious, something (which) I truly desire.
Some men with wives believe monogomy is socially acceptable, a belief (which is) basterdising the notoion of a sole mate
Thanks for the confirmation. I never knew, till yesterday, that resumptive modifiers can repeat any word in the preceding clause and continue on; I thought nouns were the only ones that did this..
You state that the relative clause in summative modifiers can be reduced. I suppose there is no problem with these then:
The World Cup trophy is iconic and prestigious, something (which) I truly desire.
Some men with wives believe monogomy is socially acceptable, a belief (which is) basterdising the notoion of a sole mate
Yes, these are both OK, apart from a few spelling errors (highlighted in brown). But don’t you mean “polygamy” rather than “monogamy”? (And I presume that “sole mate” is a pun on “soulmate”!)
Monogamy is having only one husband, wife, or sexual partner at any one time. The word monogamy comes from the Greek word monos “μονός”, which means one or alone, and the Greek word gamos “γάμος”, which means marriage or union; while, polygamy (a Greek word meaning “the practice of multiple marriage”) is used in related ways in social anthropology, sociobiology, and sociology. Polygamy is a “form of marriage in which a person [has] more than one spouse.”
I’m simply curious. What is you motivation for wanting advice. Your writing is good, as is your general knowledge of grammar. Are you studying for something special?
Since I have bombarded you with an array of questions- which I must add you have answered both informatively and promptlly- I think this question is more than fair enough.
Basicaly, I’m a native speaker of the English language, but I have never really been taught Grammar. I’ve always been relatively proficient when it comes to writing, but in the past I had no idea about grammar.
So I thought I’d learn. Fisrtly, I was curious regarding when commas were to be used; I didn’t want to think they could be placed where ever one pleased. When sites discussed punctuation, they provided language, such as noun phrases, I was unfmiliar with. Therefore, I learned these terms. I also learned how to analyse a sentence as this can help when punctuating a sentence.
So this is really what brought me here
If I hadn’t begun to ask questions and learned grammar from internet sites, I would still be making small, trivial errors that most would not pick up on; but this doesn’t mean I should make these errors.
And as my learning has become more in-depth, I’ve become more attached to the language. And forums seemed to be the obvious next step as websites can only teach you so much.
I’ve been asking questions regarding modifying phrases on this forum, because few sites exlpain these. And I always see this style of writing in fiction books. So I craved to learn what and when a phrase can be attached to a sentence as I was envious of authors’ abilities to do this so nonchalantly.
I have asked questions on topics I haven’t quite grasped, or I have asked questions I here two differing answers to. So you have helped me immensly .
So I thank you for your time thus far!
P.s. Sorry for spelling errors and the likes. I’m writing this while I work
Thanks for the response. My own background in language is in the teaching of literature and composition, along with the study of Latin and Spanish in high school and college. While in graduate school, I also took a number of courses in linguistics as electives. The study of foreign languages gave me a good understanding of grammatical principles, which I later was able to use in teaching composition to college freshmen (most of whom are woefully inadequate in their understanding of how language is structured).
After I left teaching, I spent about 18 years in marketing and public relations, both of which require good writing skills. Additionally, I have done a good bit of freelance writing for corporate video presentations and marketing brochures.
I am an avid reader of fiction, but I also enjoy reading non-fiction, especially books on cognitive science as it relates to language and creativity. I am of the opinion that language is a reflection of thinking, and that good speakers and writers are somehow better thinkers.
I applaud your efforts and will be happy to help when I can. I am not a grammarian in the true sense of the term, but I do think that understanding language makes one capable of using it more effectively, sometimes even magically.
The American poet, Wallace Stevens, said, “Poetry is a destructive force…It can kill a man.” It hasn’t killed me yet, but it sometimes makes me shiver.
Interesting, I too am in marketing. I have a degree in marketing and currently work for adidas NZ. However, I’m thinking I will eventually head back to Uni and study Post Graduate, a course that will help me compete with the more experienced.
You appear to have an extensive background in English, and congratulations for being multilingual!
And I, too, enjoy reading both fiction and non-fiction books. I’m currently reading Shantaram; I’m sure you have heard of this book.
I’ve been on other forums in the past, but I have to say that I receive the best answers here. The analysis of participles seem to be beyond many others, along with the various modifiers we have discussed.
So my desire to punctuate sentences correctly has unearthed a hungry determination to learn further about grammar-syntax etc. I look foward to many more discussions.
As an aside, I thought I’d share with you my pet peeve
People who don’t have an independent clause preceding a colon.
I’m glad that you’re finding the forum helpful. I enjoy it myself (although I spend too much time here). I am in real estate, however, and my schedule is flexible, unless I’m showing houses or on other appointments.
As you are probably aware, Adidas opened a very large warehousing and distribution center in Spartanburg, SC, where I live. I have worked with a couple of transferees from Portland already. Maybe one day you’ll get a chance to visit.
On pet peeves: I’ll try to keep peeving you. Consider it my fee for advice and consultation.
If you are not too busy, I have another couple of questions, which I really would like to know the answers to. They may seem stupid, but here goes…
1)When can the past participle not be used in a phrase? Obviously it cannot when the tense is to be present, but other than that, is there an instance it cannot?
2)Also, ‘walked’ this is a past participle. Can it be used as a participle phrase even though I can’t see it funtioning adjectivally?
Walked into the closet, I began to tie the rope to the hook attached to the ceiling. (sorry for the horrible example!). Is this phrase o.k.? Or can some past participles not function adjectically and can merely be used as part of a verb phrase?
3)Also, in dictionaries, they often label a work like ‘terrified’ as an adjective. But I thought you said that this is a past participle nd it can function as an adjective. So shouldn’t they label it past participle instead of adjective?
These are silly questions I’ve been too ashamed to ask!
And no, i didn’t hear that adidas opened up a new warehouse. This is probably the only bit of expansion I’ve heard of lately, with the crisis. We seem to be tightening up a lot! Real estate, aye, you seem to be ticking everything off the list!
This will take a little pondering. I’ll get back to you, even if it’s to comment on someone else’s comment. . I have an appointment in an hour and have some preparation to do.
When can the past participle not be used in a phrase?
I can’t think of a time when it couldn’t be used—except, of course, when it shouldn’t be, as in “a terrifying experience.”
“Walked” is a past participle. Can it be used as a participle phrase even though I can’t see it functioning adjectivally?
Walked by the executioner to the gallows, the convicted criminal kept his eyes on the noose.
Terrified
Obviously, terrified is formed from a verb. Whether it is considered a part of the verb, a past participle, or an adjective depends on how it’s used.
The wicked witch terrified the children (verb)
The children were terrified by the wicked witch (verb in passive voice, which is formed by the verb to be + the past participle)
The children felt terrified (adjective or participle used as adjective?) I say both.
There were three terrified children in the cellar (adjective or participle used as adjective?) It’s probably more adjectival here because of its position. It loses its “verbishness” when it precedes the nouns that it modifies.
“Terrified” is different from the pure adjectives “black” or “long” in that it retains some verbal qualities. You can say “terrified by lightning,” but not “black by lightening” (even though things can be black because of lightning).
