 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
161
identical element that occupies the position of the subject in the insert sentence and any notional position in the
matrix sentence. The insert sentence is usually an expanded one. By the semi-complexing process, the insert
sentence drops out its subject-identical constituent and is transformed into a semi-predicative post-positional
attribute to the antecedent element in the matrix sentence. E.g.:
The waves sent out fine spray. + The waves rolled over the dam. > The waves rolling over the dam sent out
fine spray. I came in late for the supper. + The supper was served in the dining-room. > I came in late for the
supper served in the dining-room.
The analogy between post-positional attributes (especially of a detached type) and attributive subordinate
clauses has always been pointed out in grammar books of various destination. The common pre-positional
attribute is devoid of a similar half-predicative character and is not to be considered as forming a semi-
composite construction with the dominant predicative unit. Cf:.
The bored family switched off the TV.-The family, bored, switched off the TV.
As for the possible detachment of the defining element (construction) in pre-position, this use is rather to be
analysed as adverbial, not attributive, the circumstantial semantic component prevailing over the attributive one
in this case. Cf,:
Bored, the family switched off the TV. > As the family was bored, it switched off the TV.
Naturally, the existence of some intermediary types cannot be excluded, which should be exposed in due
course by the corresponding contextual observation.
As is seen, the base syntactic material for producing attributively complicated semi-composites is similar to
the derivation base of position-sharing semi-composites. The essential difference between the constructions,
though, lies in the character of joining their clausal parts: while the process of overlapping deprives the
position-sharing expansion of any self-dependent existence, however potential it might be, the process of linear
expansion with the attributive complication preserves the autonomous functional role of the semi-clause. The
formal test of it is the possibility of inserting into the construction a relative conjunctive plus the necessary
verbal element, changing the attributive semi-clause into the related attributive pleni-clause. E.g.:
This is a novel translated from the French. > This is a novel which has been translated from the French.
This test resembles a reconstruction, since an attributive complication in many respects resembles a reduced
clause. The position-sharing expansion does not admit of this kind of procedure: the very process of
overlapping puts it out of the question. The other factor of difference is the obligatory status of the position-
sharing expansion (even in constructions of "free" object sharing) against the optional status of the auributive
complicator.
The attributive semi-clause may contain in its head position a present participle, a past participle and an
adjective. The present participial attributive semi-clause corresponds to the attributive subordinate clause with a
verbal predicate in the active. E.g.:
We found ory ground at the base of a tree looking toward the sun. > We found dry ground at the base of a
tree that looked toward the sun.
Naturally, the present participial semi-clause of the attributive type cannot express an event prior to the
event of the dominant clause. So, an attributive clause of complete predicative character expressing such an
event has no parallel in a participial attributive semi-clause. E.g.:
The squad that picked me up could have been scouts.> (*) The squad picking me up...
The past participial attributive semi-clause corresponds to the passive attributive subordinate clause. E.g.:
You can never rely on the information received from that office. > You can never rely on the information
which is received from that office.
The adjectival attributive semi-clause corresponds to the nominal attributive subordinate clause. E.g.:
We admired the lilies white against the blue water. > We admired the lilies which were white against the
blue water.
Semi-complex sentences of participial attributive complication formed by introducer constructions resemble
subject-sharing semi-complex sentences. Cf:.
There is a river flawing through the town. > There is a river which flows through the town. This is John
speaking. > This is John who is speaking.
Still closer to the subject-sharing semi-composite sentence stands the peculiar introduccr or demonstrative
construction whose attributive semi-clause has a finite verb predicate. This specific semi-complex sentence,
formed much on the pattern of common subject overlapping, is called the "apo-koinou" construction (Greek
"with acommon element"). E.g.: