Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum, A STUDENT’S INTRODUCTION TO ENGLISH GRAMMAR (Cambridge University Press, ). It contains exercises, and will provide a basis for introductions to grammar and courses on the structure of English not Rodney Huddleston, Geoffrey K. Pullum . The Cambridge grammar of the English language /. Rodney Huddleston, Geoffrey K. Pullum p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 0
|Published (Last):||27 April 2015|
|PDF File Size:||13.4 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.83 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
So the Cambridge Grammar’s editors note that sentences like “They invited my partner and I to lunch” are “regularly used by a significant proportion of speakers of Standard English To delineate the experience of living with and through a language a task beneath or beyond the ambitions of systematic grammarwe need fresh-minted terms and brilliant redescriptions such as the Cambridge Grammar supplies in its strong arguments for the claim that “English has no future tense”, soon to be reported in the Daily Mail, no doubt, as “dons say english has no future”.
We hang on the words of style gurus about everything from trainers to varieties of olive oil, but on the subject of our language there is nothing to say, only market research to report.
Clause ggrammar complements and adjuncts. Primary tenses express the distinction between past and present time. Perhaps the adjective is here a new portmanteau word made up from “outworn” and “careless”.
Very few observed the prime syntactical grajmar about the novel’s first page: That is, does the poet report that formalities have this effect or does he wish for them to do so gramar “Saints preserve us! We should not expect too much from linguists; they are witnesses not judges.
The faint but persistent lavender of the subjunctive about his “preserve” gives him reason for a moment to regard himself as superseded or at least huddlestton his way into the shade, as if, talking to an elderly relative, he began to feel his own self aged too. Subordination and huddlesotn clauses.
Morphology words and lexemes. Descriptive grammar can find nothing wrong with the inert officialese of, say, Radio 4, in which forthcoming speeches by government ministers are predictably “major” before they are uttered, and all majorities “vast”, and from which decent words like “many” are disappearing, their place taken by “an awful gramma of”. As a punishment for my sins in a previous life, I recently had to mark 64 examination scripts in which third-year undergraduates reading English at Cambridge offered their comments on the opening of Dickens’s Bleak House:.
Huddleston and Pullum’s () analysis of tense – Glottopedia
If that were so, then nobody could be “someone eminently worthy of being followed in matters of taste and literary style”, as they say on the same page, nor would there be any reason for appealing, as they sometimes do, to “the writings of highly prestigious authors” or “the usage of pllum best writers” they carefully refrain from naming these paragons.
All descriptive grammarians can determine is whether something is “established” or not; their “well” is illicit.
The candidates frammar excited, even over-excited, by the “imagery”, as they had been taught in school that “imagery” is what counts in literature. Language too is an affair which, from one point of view, is always just in the flush and tremor of beginning while, from an other, quite as sharp-eyed a point of view, it continues to run down foreseeable grooves formed by accumulated habit.
Selected pages Title Page. Readers need respect for, a capacity to delight in, usages other than their own; such respect and delight are not encouraged by the tendency of grammarians to treat “usage” as if it were a noun which occurred only in the singular, nor by their habit of dismissing how the language used to be with their equivalent of the characters’ constant refrain in EastEnders: She holds an open book in her left hand, beneath which sits a “good boy”, notably round-shouldered, already vested in what is probably a monk’s habit, his fingers tracing the page he’s intently squinting at.
Dickinson’s vaults and grammr resolve themselves into plain sense, as a paraphrase shows: These 1, pages are not short of terms which will be new to the non-specialist, and they bristle with huddleaton more-than-grammatical deliciousness: Hill’s line, though, is a revolving door between Englishes past and present, and intimates a history of moods, verbal and otherwise.
But they fail to specify when a “proportion” becomes “significant” – does it take a bare majority or will a stroppy minority equally suffice? The words “a time-honoured conception of humanity in ruins” are ambiguous because of uncertain juncture.
The Cambridge Grammar rightly doubts that “present-day English” can be grammatically analysed in this way, because “historical change has more or less eliminated mood from the inflectional system”, and it sensibly re-describes “subjunctive” as “the name of a syntactic construction – a clause that is finite but tenseless, containing the plain form of the verb”.
The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language
Fretful sub-editors who want to know the better way with “which” and “that” must apply elsewhere. Higher education English and creative writing Ben Jonson reviews.
This would be described as “confused” by today’s undergraduates, who take it for granted that “accessibility” is the first requirement of all writing and impute confusion to any writer who stretches them. Account Options Sign in. The Cambridge Grammar would call this “desententialisation”, and alert us to the lack of clear bearings on “time referred to” the time Dickens is writing about and “time of orientation” the time Dickens is writing in or from.
Huddleston and Pullum Drinke to me, onely, with thine eyes, And I will pledge with mine; Or leave a kisse but in the cup, And Ile not looke for wine.
Tense is regarded as a relationship between the time referred to and the time of orientation. For descriptive grammarians, “grammaticality” is distinct from “correctness” because, from the standpoint of quasi-anthropological neutrality proper to their task, in language whatever is accepted is acceptable.
Such as what Ben Jonson meant when he wrote:. Such as what Ben Jonson meant when he wrote: A Student’s Introduction to English Grammar. The grammatical uncertainty of juncture was apt to his forlornness and to his hopes as he wondered what would come next, how the future might or might not be joined to the past.
Similarly with gerunds, those elusive beasts from earlier grammars so magnificently drawn by Ronald Searle in his cartoons of “The Private Life of the Gerund” in How to Be Topp. This is another of those well-known prescriptive rules that are massively at variance with actual usage.
They explain convincingly why “my partner and me” would be no more grammatical; there is no better reason to require English pronouns always to comply with Latin inflection for the accusative case than there is regularly to hear English verse according to Graeco-Roman templates such as the “iambic pentameter” which have been misleading our ears since the 19th century.
A gerund is sometimes hard to distinguish from a present participle, but in “he’s smoking behind the bike-sheds”, “smoking” is a participle, whereas in “smoking diminishes your chances of getting Alzheimer’s”, “smoking” is a gerund.
It contains exercises, and will provide a basis for introductions to grammar and courses on the structure of English not only in linguistics departments but also in English language and literature departments and schools of education. The analyses defended there are outlined here more briefly, in an engagingly accessible and informal style.
Information packaging in the clause. In most cases T o is contained in T sit 5 I live in Jena. Paul had just released “Yesterday” when Mr Smith began to teach my class clause-analysis and how to avoid dangling participles. Freud imagined that “where the Coliseum now stands we could at the same time admire Nero’s vanished Golden House. The pedantic carper is, however, right and on the verge of a discovery; there is something odd about that chorus, and its oddness is apt to the situation in which two, previously promiscuous homosexuals shakily embark together on a possibly monogamous future.
This book is intended for students in colleges or universities who have little or no previous background in grammar, and presupposes no linguistics. The syntax is not what it seems; “one in a million men” is not the subject of a sentence which continues “change the way you feel”.
One of the Pet Shop Boys’ perkier songs has a chorus which goes:. When we disagree about such phrases as “my partner and I”, this may be a matter of taste, but from that it does not follow, as the editors assume, that “all evidence” is simply “beside the point”.