One important point remains to be made about subordinate clauses (in English). Most of the subordinate clauses you will come across in written texts are introduced by a special word. In (3), the complement clauses are introduced by that, in (7) the relative clauses are introduced by which, who and that, and in (8) each type of adverbial clause has its particular initial word, although, because, as, when and if. In grammars from before, say, 1965, the words introducing complement clauses and adverbial clauses were generally known as subordinating conjunctions, and words such as and or but were known as coordinating conjunctions. Conjunctions are words that (con)join clauses. Coordinating conjunc- tions join clauses that have the same status. In (2a), for example, the clause Captain Benwick married Louisa Hayter is of the same status as Captain Wentworth married Anne Elliott. If (2a) were split into its com- ponent clauses, each clause on its own would immediately be able to constitute a sentence and to occur in a text. The clauses are of the same order or rank, hence co-ordinating conjunction and co-ordinate clauses. In contrast, if (8e), say, were split into its component clauses, only one of them would be able to constitute a sentence, namely the main clause Mr Woodhouse would have been unhappy. The adverbial clause of condition, if Emma had left Hartfield, cannot function as a sentence until the sub- ordinating conjunction if is removed. Subordinating conjunctions intro- duce subordinate clauses. Since 1965 or so, the term ‘complementiser’ has been used in one of the major theories of syntax not just for sub- ordinating conjunctions introducing complement clauses but for all subordinating conjunctions. This usage has spread to other theories of syntax and to grammars of English and other languages, and we too
adopt it.
A problem
is posed by the words that introduce relative
clauses. Who, whom
and which
are pronouns
that also function
as subordinating conjunctions. That they
are pronouns is indicated by the who/whom distinction parallel to he/him and so on and the contrast between
who and which, parallel to the contrast
between he/she and it. (The contrast
between who
and whom
is disappearing from English. It is only
used regu-
CLAUSES I 67
larly in the most formal and carefully edited texts.) The WH words can be preceded by prepositions, as in the fire at which Mr Woodhouse sat. The WH words will sometimes be referred to as relative pronouns and sometimes as complementisers. Relative clauses are also introduced by that. This word does not change (in technical terms, is invariable) and cannot be preceded by a preposition – *the fire at that Mr Woodhouse sat. It is not a pronoun but merely a subordinating conjunction or comple- mentiser.
All the subordinate clauses in (8) are optional and can occur no matter what verb is in the main clause. For this reason, they are treated as adjuncts. The above list of adverbial clauses is not exhaustive but merely illustrative. Detailed accounts of subordinate clauses in English and other languages can be found in the references at the end of the book.
To close this section, we return to conjoined clauses. Examples of conjoined main clauses were given in (2), but subordinate clauses can also be conjoined, as shown by the examples in (9). Example (9a) contains two conditional clauses conjoined by and ; (9b) contains two relative clauses conjoined by but.
- a. If Henry Crawford loved Fanny and if Fanny loved Edward, Henry Crawford was going to be disappointed.
b. It was Anne Elliott who loved Captain Wentworth but who rejected his first proposal.
E-Learning 