Parsing Exercises | Max's Collection
Date: 2020-06-29- He was waiting for the rain to stop.
- Nobody’s ever been bothered by being dead.
- The main difference between object and complement in English grammar is that the object is what is affected to the action of the subject while the complement is a part of a clause that usually follows the verb and adds more information about the subject or object.
- (TODO) I know about it (Objectivism) in name only (and only since learning about FI, and because of FI)
- Exercises done on 2020-07-27
- I can explain.
- I can explain the acronyms if need be.
- It is a poor argument of my superior reason, that I am unable to make justice be apprehended and felt in the most necessary cases, without the intervention of blows.
- So Alice, I just wanted to add, this sentence would have a parenthetical if the point wasn’t to be an example of a sentence with a parenthetical
- you are done whether you fight or run
- both rugby and football are popular
- to be or not to be, that is the question
- i’m going to steal that kid’s lollipop whether you like it or not
- you will find uninvited family in the drawing room; not only your ‘long lost’ brother, but also his new (and insufferable) wife
- 2020-08-15 so you see, Mr. Bond, neither the British Secret Service nor God can save you now
- we should be persuaded by neither eloquence nor vitriol, but instead by those arguments for which, despite detractors’ best efforts, there are no unanswered criticisms
- no sooner had he written the eighth example than he began to reconsider adding more
- learning is not a one-off exercise, but an unbounded journey
- we could either stop at ten exercises or write more
He was waiting for the rain to stop.
was :: verb
he :: pronoun
waiting :: gerund
for :: preposition
to stop :: infinitive
rain :: noun
the :: det
:: subject
- ‘to stop’ - could be (preposition,noun) but a noun would mean something like ‘a stop’ could be put in there, doesn’t feel right => infinitive makes more sense
Nobody’s ever been bothered by being dead.
implied => Nobody [has] ever been bothered by being dead
bothered :: verb, linking
has :: aux verb
been :: aux verb
ever :: adverb
:: adverbial
nobody :: pronoun
by :: preposition
being :: gerund
dead :: adjective / object of 'being'
:: adverbial
- ‘ever’ adverb on ‘has’
- -> usage: can remove ‘ever’, ‘has ever’, but not just ‘has’
- -> ‘ever been to the moon?’ -> implied ‘have you’
bothered as root nobody under bothered
- bothered becomes a linking verb bc
relative pronoun -> clause function as modifier
The main difference between object and complement in English grammar is that the object is what is affected to the action of the subject while the complement is a part of a clause that usually follows the verb and adds more information about the subject or object.
I found this on a grammar website.
{<[difference] between [x and y]>} is that {[x is [what is [affected to [action of [subject]]]]]} while {[y is [a part of [a clause that [usually follows the verb]]] that [follows the verb] and [adds info about [subject]]]}.
prelim structure
is that
The main difference between object and complement
in English grammar
while
the object is
what is affected to
the action
of the subject
the complement is
a part of a clause
that
and
usually follows the verb
adds more information
about
the subject or object
Note: who the hell was paid to write that?
main grammar tree goes here if I ever do this
(TODO) I know about it (Objectivism) in name only (and only since learning about FI, and because of FI)
Note: I can definitely write this better (it’s from early learning: objectivism). Left it like this for purposes of analysis, partly because I said ‘and because’
Exercises done on 2020-07-27
I can explain.
(added after doing the one below)
can :: aux verb
explain :: verb
i :: pronoun
I can explain the acronyms if need be.
if :: conjunction
can :: verb
i :: pronoun
explain :: infinitive
acronyms :: noun (object)
the :: det
be :: verb
need :: noun
It is a poor argument of my superior reason, that I am unable to make justice be apprehended and felt in the most necessary cases, without the intervention of blows.
‘It’ refers to ‘that’. ‘that’ is a fwd reference for ‘I am unable to make justice be apprehended and felt in the most necessary cases, without the intervention of blows’.
Could be reordered to: ‘That I am unable to make justice be apprehended and felt in the most necessary cases, without the intervention of blows, is a poor argument of my superior reason.’ (note: unsure of commas, making ‘without the intervention of blows’ parenthetical feels right; alternatively no comma before ‘without’ might work too)
[It (X)] is a [bad argument] of [my ability to make good arguments]. X: [I can’t do justice when necessary without violence]
The sentence is interesting because it’s about a hypothetical but doesn’t explicitly mention it.
alt structure 1
that :: subordinating conjunction
is :: verb
it :: pronoun, referring to the subordinate clause
argument :: noun
a :: det
poor :: adj
of :: prep
reason :: noun
my :: det
superior :: adj
am :: verb
I :: pronoun
unable :: adj
to make :: adverb infinitive
justice :: noun
be :: aux verb
and :: conj
apprehended :: verb
felt :: verb
without :: prep
intervention :: noun
the :: det
of :: prep
blows :: noun
note: ~it’s optional to put a [be] in front of felt, but apprehended needs one.~ not true, justice could be felt and apprehended. well, could you say make justice felt and apprehended? make justice felt feels fine.
from https://www.websters1913.com/words/That
- As a conjunction, that retains much of its force as a demonstrative pronoun. It is used, specifically: –
(a) To introduce a clause employed as the object of the preceding verb, or as the subject or predicate nominative of a verb.
for (a): it is introducing a clause which is the subject of a preceding verb via ‘it’
idea for omission: “… superior reason, [the fact] that I …”
‘that’ could be modifying ‘argument’
the form of the sentence is {dependent coordinating clause}, that {subordinate clause}
the purpose of the sentence is to focus on the quality of the argument, not on what it is.
I think I am unable ... of blows is the predicate nominative of It via is
similar sort of sentences
you’d be a bad king, Michael
You is a pronoun and forward reference to the noun Michael
it is a smooth bird, the A380.
it is a bad omen for his career, that he hasn’t had a job since highschool.
it refers to the subordinate clause he hasn't had a job since highschool
it is a thought I had, that school is boring
this has basically the same meaning (or, at least, a very similar meaning) as the past tense of “i think that school is boring”. (edit: i thought that school is boring is obviously closer to that past tense)
some curious slightly different sentences:
it is a thought I'd had, that school was boringit is a thought I'd have, that school was boringit is a thought I had had, that school was boringI'd had the thought that school is boringI'd have had the thought that school is boring(q: is this grammatically complete?)school is boring; I'd've had that thought
version that’s a better demonstration?
it is a thought shared by many, that school is boring
it is a versatile word, that which clarifies the dependency of a pronoun on the other side of the sentence.
back to the main sentence
~At the end of all that, I think I’m happy with the tree above.~ wait, nope, not yet
is the structure basically the same as it's good, that you came?
TODO: come back to this later and think about other ways of doing the tree
hmm, the quote is from Godwin’s Political Justice I think (can’t remember where I picked it). that was published in 1793, but websters 1828 doesn’t have a definition of that as a conjunction!
alternate structure 2
idea: that is two-way link with it
is
it :: pronoun relative pronoun (linked to 'that')
that :: relative pronoun / pro-sentence (linked to 'it')
am :: verb
I :: pronoun
unable :: adj
to make :: adverb infinitive
justice :: noun
be :: aux verb
and :: conj
apprehended :: adj
felt :: verb
without :: prep
intervention :: noun
the :: det
of :: prep
blows :: noun
argument :: noun
a :: det
poor :: adj
of :: prep
reason :: noun
my :: det
superior :: adj
alt structure 3
[;] or [and] :: conj
is :: verb
it :: pronoun, referring to the clause marked by 'that'
argument :: noun
a :: det
poor :: adj
of :: prep
reason :: noun
my :: det
superior :: adj
that :: pronoun labelling the clause
am :: verb
I :: pronoun
unable :: adj
to make :: adverb infinitive
justice :: noun
be :: aux verb
and :: conj
apprehended :: adj
felt :: verb
without :: prep
intervention :: noun
the :: det
of :: prep
blows :: noun
issues identified in tutoring 20
apprehended and felt are verbals
to make :: infinitive
be :: linking verb
justice :: n
and
apprehended :: participle, adj
felt :: participle, adj
note: to is a particle
be is linking verb, objects are apprehended and felt so can’t be finite verbs, they’re participles (adjectives)
linking verbs: big diff must have a complement, and complement can be an adjective (as well as a noun).
So Alice, I just wanted to add, this sentence would have a parenthetical if the point wasn’t to be an example of a sentence with a parenthetical
Note: I actually wrote this sentence recently
[root]
Alice :: pronoun
[] :: parenthetical, relative to entire sentence
wanted :: verb
I :: pronoun
just :: adverb
to add :: noun infinitive
so :: conjunction, primary clause omitted, introduces concluding statement
have :: verb
would :: modal verb (helper)
sentence :: noun
this :: determiner
parenthetical :: noun
a :: det
if :: prep
was :: verb
point :: noun
the :: det
not :: adverb
example :: noun
to be :: adjective infinitive
an :: determiner
of :: prep
sentence :: noun
a :: det
with :: prep
parenthetical :: noun
a :: det
alt:
so :: conj
[primary clause omitted]
[node/sub-root]
Alice :: pronoun
I just wanted to add :: parenthetical
this sentence [...] :: clause
tut 20
parenthetical can put under the verb -> modifies the sentence
have is infinitive – the ‘having’ isn’t happening; it’s the ‘woulding’
pretty much alwasy the first verb is finite verb, second verb is infinitive (often without the ‘to’)
subject finite-verb non-finite-verb (as object of finite verb; particle, gerund, or infinitive)
So Alice, I just wanted to add, this sentence would have a parenthetical if the point wasn’t to be an example of a sentence with a parenthetical
if :: conj
would :: modal verb (helper)
sentence :: noun
this :: determiner
have :: verb
parenthetical :: noun
a :: det
[] :: parenthetical, adverbial
so :: ??
Alice :: pronoun
[] :: parenthetical, adverbial
wanted :: verb
I :: pronoun
just :: adverb
to add :: noun infinitive
was :: verb
point :: noun
the :: det
not :: adverb
to be :: adjective infinitive
example :: noun, object of 'to be'
an :: determiner
of :: prep
sentence :: noun
a :: det
with :: prep
parenthetical :: noun
a :: det
you are done whether you fight or run
(is this a correlative conjunction?)
whether :: conj
are :: linking verb
you :: pronoun
done :: adjective
you :: pronoun
or :: conj
fight :: verb
run :: verb
TUT20: mistake: fight/run as verb - must be verbals – participles
TUT20: comment after the fact: can put
youunderor;oris making a group and playing a verb role (verb pharse), so noun under the group is okay. If we could group(or fight run)and have a child that might work but can’t do that with these trees; putting under root node
alt:
whether :: conj
are :: linking verb
you :: pronoun
done :: adjective
or :: conj
fight :: verb
you :: pronoun
run :: verb
[you] :: pronoun
alt treating correlative conjunction as one unit:
... whether ... or ... :: correlative conj
are :: linking verb
you :: pronoun
done :: adjective
fight :: verb
you :: pronoun
run :: verb
[you] :: pronoun
both rugby and football are popular
are :: linking verb
and :: conj
both :: determiner
rugby
football
popular :: adjective
are :: linking verb
both :: determiner
and :: conj
rugby
football
popular :: adjective
are
both ... and ...
rugby
football
popular
are
both :: pronoun
and
rugby
football
popular
to be or not to be, that is the question
[;] or [and] :: conjunction
or :: conj
to be :: noun infinitive
to be :: noun infinitive
not :: adverb
is :: verb
that :: pronoun / pro-sentence
question :: noun
the :: determiner
i’m going to steal that kid’s lollipop whether you like it or not
am :: verb
I :: pronoun
going :: aux/helper verb (modal?)
to steal :: noun infinitive
lollipop :: noun
kid's :: adjective
that :: determiner
whether :: conj
or :: conj
like :: verb
you :: pronoun
it :: pronoun, indirect ref to stealing
not :: adverb
[you don't like it] :: implied replacement for 'not'
- am - finite verb
- going is complement of am
- to steal modifying going
- (that kid) is the noun being made possessive, but diagram is unclear
you will find uninvited family in the drawing room; not only your ‘long lost’ brother, but also his new (and insufferable) wife
outline: `{you will find family}; {not only [your bother], but also [that same brother’s wife]}
[;] :: conjunction
find :: verb
you :: pronoun
will :: modal verb
family :: noun
but :: conj
brother :: noun
your :: determiner
only :: adjective
not :: adverb
'long lost' :: adjective, quotes imply hidden implications
lost :: adjective
long :: adverb
also :: adverb
wife :: noun
his :: determiner
[and] :: conjunction, parenthetical, produces adjective phrase
new :: adjective
insufferable :: adjective
alt:
[;] :: conjunction
find :: verb
you :: pronoun
will :: modal verb
family :: noun
not only ... but also ... :: correlative conj
brother :: noun
your :: determiner
'long lost' :: adjective, quotes imply hidden implications
lost :: adjective
long :: adverb
wife :: noun
his :: determiner
[and] :: conjunction, parenthetical, produces adjective phrase
new :: adjective
insufferable :: adjective
2020-08-15 so you see, Mr. Bond, neither the British Secret Service nor God can save you now
implied: “so you see, Mr Bond, [that] neither …”
[;] :: implied conjunction
see :: verb
so :: adverb
you :: pronoun
Mr. Bond :: noun, referenced via 'you'
[that] :: pro-sentence
can :: aux verb
save :: verb
you :: pronoun
now :: adverb
neither :: pronoun
nor :: conjunction
British Secret Service :: noun
the :: determiner
God :: noun
:: reference of neither
:: reference of [that]
we should be persuaded by neither eloquence nor vitriol, but instead by those arguments for which, despite detractors’ best efforts, there are no unanswered criticisms
no sooner had he written the eighth example than he began to reconsider adding more
learning is not a one-off exercise, but an unbounded journey
we could either stop at ten exercises or write more
You can leave a comment anonymously. No sign up or login is required. Use a junk email if not your own; email is only for notifications—though, FYI, I will be able to see it.
Comments powered by Talkyard.