 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
150
grammar books.
The unique role of the subjective anticipatory appositive construction, as has been stated elsewhere, consists
in the fact that it is used as a universal means of rheme identification in the actual division of the sentence.
8. Clauses of adverbial positions constitute a vast domain of syntax which falls into many subdivisions each
distinguishing its own field of specifications, complications, and difficulties of analysis. The structural
peculiarities and idiosyncrasies characterizing the numerous particular clause models making up the domain are
treated at length in grammatical manuals of various practical purposes; here our concern will be to discuss some
principal issues of their functional semantics and classification.
Speaking of the semantics of these clauses, it should be stressed that as far as the level of generalized
clausal meanings is concerned, semantics in question is of absolute syntactic relevance; accordingly, the
traditional identification of major adverbial clause models based on "semantic considerations" is linguistically
rational, practically helpful, and the many attempts to refute it in the light of the "newly advanced, objective,
consistently scientific" criteria have not resulted in creating a comprehensive system capable of competing with
the traditional one in its application to textual materials.
On the other hand, it would be a mistake to call in question the usefulness of the data obtained by the latest
investigations. Indeed, if their original negative purpose has failed, the very positive contribution of the said
research efforts to theoretical linguistics is not to be overlooked: it consists in having studied the actual
properties of the complicated clausal system of the sentence, above all the many-sided correlation between
structural forms and functional meanings in the making of the systemic status of each clausal entity that admits
of a description as a separate unit subtype.
Proceeding from the said insights, the whole system of adverbial clauses is to be divided into four groups.
The first group includes clauses of time and clauses of place. Their common semantic basis is to be defined
as "localization" - respectively, temporal and spatial. Both types of clauses are subject to two major
subdivisions, one concerning the local identification, the other concerning the range of functions.
Local identification is essentially determined by subordinators. According to the choice of connector,
clauses of time and place are divided into general and particularizing. The general local identification is
expressed by the non-marking conjunctions when and where. Taken by themselves, they do not introduce any
further specifications in the time or place correlations between the two local clausal events (i.e. principal and
subordinate). As for the particularizing local identification, it specifies the time and place correlations of the
two events localizing the subordinate one before the principal, parallel with the principal, after the principal,
and possibly expressing further subgra-dations of these correspondences.
With subordinate clauses of time the particularizing localization is expressed by such conjunctions as while,
as, since, before, after, until, as soon as, now that, no sooner than, etc. E.g.:
We lived here in London when the war ended. While the war was going on we lived in London. We had
lived in London all through the war until it ended. After the war ended our family moved to Glasgow. Etc.
With clauses of place proper
the particularizing localization is expressed but occasionally, mostly by the
prepositional conjunctive combinations from where (bookish equivalent - whence) and to where. E.g.:
The swimmers gathered where the beach formed a small promontory. The swimmers kept abreast of one
another from where they started.
For the most part, however, spatial specifications in the complex sentence are rendered not by place-clauses
proper, but by adverbial-appositive clauses. Cf;.
We decided not to go back to the place from where we started on our journey.
From the functional point of view, clauses of localization should be divided into "direct" (all the above
ones) and "transferred", the latter mostly touching on matters of reasoning. E.g.:
When you speak of the plain facts there can't be any question, of argument. But I can't agree with you where
the principles of logic are concerned.
A special variety of complex sentence with a time clause is presented by a construction in which the main
predicative information is expressed in the subordinate clause, the actual meaning of temporal localization
being rendered by the principal clause of the sentence. E.g.:
Alice was resting in bed when Humphrey returned. He brought his small charge into the room and presented
her to her "aunt" (D.E. Stevenson).
The context clearly shows that the genuine semantic accents in the first sentence of the cited passage is to be
exposed by the reverse arrangement of subordination: it is Humphrey's actions that are relevant to the
developing situation, not Alice's resting in bed: > Humphrey returned when Alice was resting in bed...