Forum newsfeeds
Forum Newsfeeds


Sites for Teachers

Sites for Teachers


Go Back   UsingEnglish.com ESL Forum > Learning English > Ask a Teacher

Notices

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 17-May-2005, 09:21
Casiopea's Avatar
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,997
Current Location: China
First Language: English
Member Type: Other
Thanks: 0
Thanked 39 Times in 39 Posts
Casiopea is on a distinguished road
Default Re: slight difference in meaing?

Thanks.

Omitting the relative (that) and its verb (are) serves to reduce an adjective clause to an adjective phrase, yes. Below, "rules" is modified by the relative clause (RC) 'that are provided'. That RC functions as an adjective, and it's the length of that utterance that's in play here. Shorter is more efficient:

The rules that are provided - Adjective Clause
The rules provided - Adjective phrase

'that are' is redundant. Participles modify nouns, so why the need for a semantically redundant subject (that) and a dummy verb (are) is probably what the speaker picks up on.

Example
[1] We have to talk to the guy who is sitting at that desk.
[2] We have to talk to the guy sitting at that desk.

"the guy who is sitting at that desk" - relative clause

Note, 'the guy' functions as the object of the preposition 'to', and the prepositional phrase 'to the guy' functions as the object of the verb 'talk'. The relative pronoun 'who' functions as the subject of the verb 'is'. Omit the subject and you have to omit the verb. They're pair.

Reducing RCs to phrases is nothing spectacular. The relative, in being tied semantically to the object, is redundant meaning-wise. Its sole function is structural: in English every clause must have a subject and a verb. Take out that subject and the verb goes with it, leaving a phrase.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 17-May-2005, 11:17
Steven D's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: U.S.A.
Posts: 835
First Language: English
Member Type: English Teacher
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Steven D is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: slight difference in meaing?

Thank you for your replies, Casio.

Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 18-May-2005, 04:26
Steven D's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: U.S.A.
Posts: 835
First Language: English
Member Type: English Teacher
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Steven D is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: slight difference in meaing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Casiopea
Thanks.

Note, 'the guy' functions as the object of the preposition 'to', and the prepositional phrase 'to the guy' functions as the object of the verb 'talk'. The relative pronoun 'who' functions as the subject of the verb 'is'. Omit the subject and you have to omit the verb. They're pair.

Reducing RCs to phrases is nothing spectacular. The relative, in being tied semantically to the object, is redundant meaning-wise. Its sole function is structural: in English every clause must have a subject and a verb. Take out that subject and the verb goes with it, leaving a phrase.
Yes, it's a regular occurrence. Yes, it's structural, and, therefore, the intonation falls. I like to take note of how grammar is connected to pronunciation.

Given that words fly by much more rapidly than grammar does, I might wonder how often RCs are reduced when they can be. I think, for the most part, they are reduced when it's possible. However, I think the relative and the verb "be" are left in sometimes when they could be left out. Where can we get complete RC reduction statistics?



Thanks for the RC abbreviation. I've always said and thought "relative clause".

Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 18-May-2005, 09:55
Casiopea's Avatar
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,997
Current Location: China
First Language: English
Member Type: Other
Thanks: 0
Thanked 39 Times in 39 Posts
Casiopea is on a distinguished road
Default Re: slight difference in meaing?

You're welcome, X Mode.

Quote:
Originally Posted by X Mode
. . . , I think the relative and the verb "be" are left in sometimes when they could be left out. Where can we get complete RC reduction statistics?
Well, hmm. You could start here: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/125949.html It's a paper on English RCs Constructions. It has a section on reduced relatives. If that's too daunting of a chore--it can be--try searching online under 'reduced relatives'.

You could also gather a few examples and look at the patterns. For example,

[1] I saw the man who was in the cab.
[2] I saw the man in the cab. (ambiguous when read, but not so when spoken aloud, i.e., I saw. . .the man in the cab).
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 18-May-2005, 11:18
Steven D's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: U.S.A.
Posts: 835
First Language: English
Member Type: English Teacher
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Steven D is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: slight difference in meaing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Casiopea
You're welcome, X Mode.



Well, hmm. You could start here: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/125949.html It's a paper on English RCs Constructions. It has a section on reduced relatives. If that's too daunting of a chore--it can be--try searching online under 'reduced relatives'.

You could also gather a few examples and look at the patterns. For example,

[1] I saw the man who was in the cab.
[2] I saw the man in the cab. (ambiguous when read, but not so when spoken aloud, i.e., I saw. . .the man in the cab).
Thanks.

Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 19-May-2005, 08:43
Casiopea's Avatar
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,997
Current Location: China
First Language: English
Member Type: Other
Thanks: 0
Thanked 39 Times in 39 Posts
Casiopea is on a distinguished road
Default Re: slight difference in meaing?

You're welcome.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
slight, difference, meaing

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is there any difference? james_chew_84 Ask a Teacher 1 14-Jan-2005 09:08
making the difference Anonymous Ask a Teacher 1 13-Oct-2004 15:47
time difference whl626 Ask a Teacher 1 14-Jan-2004 09:20
the difference between Past & P.P. in the meaning Anonymous Ask a Teacher 1 03-Feb-2003 15:06


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 13:54.


vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0
Copyright © 2002 - 2008 UsingEnglish.com