Sapparis, I recal our discussion on phrases being one thing, but functioning as something different. You asserted that this is false.

However, I knew I had read in more than one place that this is in fact so. Can you explain what you meant by your answer (as I’m sure I just misconstrued it), because here is another example I just found, which shows that I was correct:

The train from Montreal arrived four hours late.

The intransitive verb “arrived” takes no direct object, and the noun phrase “four hours late” acts as an adverb describing when the train arrived.

What say you

Thanks

Saparris, I recall our discussion on phrases being one thing, but functioning as something different. You asserted that this is false.

I don’t recall exactly what I said regarding this issue, but words and phrases can’t be two parts of speech in the same sentence.
Now, about your sentence:

The train from Montreal arrived four hours late.

...four hours late is not a noun clause. It’s adverbial. Late modifies arrived, and tells you that the train arrived late, and four hours tells you how late.

Compare the sentence with “The train from Montreal arrived very late.”

I don’t recall exactly what I said regarding this issue, but words and phrases can’t be two parts of speech in the same sentence.
Now, about your sentence:

The train from Montreal arrived four hours late.

...four hours late is not a noun clause. It’s adverbial. Late modifies arrived, and tells you that the train arrived late, and four hours tells you how late.

Compare the sentence with “The train from Montreal arrived very late.”

I completely agree. The site from which I retrieved this is one to which I’ve often referred, a site I considered credible and accurate, until now! (Jeeze, sometimes a sentence runs a whole lot smoother if it is not subject to restructuring in order to prevent a preposition ending a clause).

Question 1:

So you are saying that late is the head of the adverb phrase?

Question 2:

So you are saying this then (I’ve just made up what is in blue). I hope this is what you mean, because this is how I formerly understood how phrases were classified, until I was misinformed by this so called grammar site:

A phrase can only be one part of speech, this being indicated by whatever part of speech the head of the phrase is.

So you are saying that late is the head of the adverb phrase?

I suppose so. What else could it be, since everything else withing the phrase refers back to late?

Compare these two definitions:

A phrase can only be one part of speech, this being indicated by whatever part of speech the head of the phrase is. [yours]
A phrase is a syntactic structure having syntactic properties derived from its head. [from a site on grammar and syntax]

To me, they say essentially the same thing.

My point is that a word or phrase cannot be both subject and object, or adjective and noun, in the same sentence. If you are comfortable with identifying a phrase by its head, then that should work for you (as long as you bear in mind that there are things called headless phrases).

I recognize the words headless phrase after reading them on Wikipedia, but I have no knowlege of them.

I don’t usually identify a phrase by looking for its head. I think I do it the same way as you and most others do: I just read that phrase and establish what it modifies in the clause. Then, it is usually easy. But we both know of grammar’s subjective nature at times. But hey, what would life be like without challenges?

Well, we would probably be wrinkle free…

Oh, and please answer my new post: Sentence analysis-very tricky. I’m interested to see how much of it I have right!

Cheers

A headless phrase is easy. It’s something like “He enjoys rubbing shoulders with the rich and famous.”

Check the other thread in about five minites.