Results 1 to 10 of 10

    • Join Date: Apr 2009
    • Posts: 2
    #1

    Non-finites

    I am slightly confused about how to analyze "driving" in:

    "The Police stopped a man driving erratically, only to find he was blind."

    I would say it is a present participle acting as a predicator in a participial clause which functions as a postmodifier in a nominal phrase (the headword being man).

    But I was told another option is possible:
    "driving" being a predicator in a participial clause functioning as an object complement.

    The latter explanation seems odd to me.. So my question is which one is correct.. or rather, are they both acceptable?

  1. Soup's Avatar
    VIP Member
    English Teacher
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • China

    • Join Date: Sep 2007
    • Posts: 5,882
    #2

    Re: Non-finites

    Hi lunchbox!


    • The Police stopped a man [who was] driving erratically, only to find he was blind.


    It's a reduced relative clause:
    a man who was driving = a man driving


    • Join Date: Apr 2009
    • Posts: 2
    #3

    Re: Non-finites

    so... :P a relative clause modifies a noun? so it is a postmodifier in a nominal phrase?

  2. Soup's Avatar
    VIP Member
    English Teacher
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • China

    • Join Date: Sep 2007
    • Posts: 5,882
    #4

    Re: Non-finites

    Hi lunchbox!

    Sentence
    The Police stopped a man ... only to find he was blind.

    Phrase
    a man (who was) driving erratically

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Japan

    • Join Date: Jan 2009
    • Posts: 1,507
    #5

    Re: Non-finites

    Quote Originally Posted by lunchbox! View Post
    so... :P a relative clause modifies a noun? so it is a postmodifier in a nominal phrase?
    Yes!


    • Join Date: Jul 2006
    • Posts: 2,886
    #6

    Re: Non-finites

    Is it an example of whiz deletion?

    ...(who was) driving...

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Japan

    • Join Date: Jan 2009
    • Posts: 1,507
    #7

    Re: Non-finites

    That sounds like a horrible neologism for a reduced relative!

  3. Soup's Avatar
    VIP Member
    English Teacher
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • China

    • Join Date: Sep 2007
    • Posts: 5,882
    #8

    Re: Non-finites

    Quote Originally Posted by philo2009 View Post
    That sounds like a horrible neologism for a reduced relative!
    Well, that made my day.


    • Join Date: Jul 2006
    • Posts: 2,886
    #9

    Re: Non-finites

    Quote Originally Posted by Soup View Post
    Well, that made my day.
    Biber uses this term in his book published in '92:
    http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogu...sbn=0521425565

  4. Soup's Avatar
    VIP Member
    English Teacher
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • China

    • Join Date: Sep 2007
    • Posts: 5,882
    #10

    Re: Non-finites

    Quote Originally Posted by svartnik View Post
    Biber uses this term in his book published in '92:
    http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogu...sbn=0521425565
    I wasn't questioning the term. It was philo's interpretation that made my day.

    Whiz is a euphemism for urinate: to take a whiz (See here), which obviously is not the meaning intended by WHIZ, an acronym meaning WH + is/are/was/were deletion; e.g., a man who was driving => a man driving.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •