A Descriptive Grammar of English (Part 3)
Lecture Three. Functional and Structural Aspects of Meaning: Interrogation and Negation,
Condition and Comparison
An Outline of the present Lecture
A reference to the gist of the content of the present lecture.
A reference to the types of utterances in different speech acts and to interpersonal meaning
(A summary of Lecture Two).
3. Grammar and discourse organisation in English.
4. Typical utterances/sentences in spoken and written English.
5. .Interrogation and types of questions in English (Ref.: a summary table from INSIDE OUT).
6. Negation: a definition and the basic forms.
7. Negation in speech and writing.
8. The principal patterns of negative forms.
9. Major regularities in the use of negation in English.
10. Condition and types of conditional clauses.
11. Typical variations in conditional clauses.
12. Comparison and the typical syntactical patterns.
13. A summary of the content of the present lecture and the student's gain.
1. The gist of the present lecture. While reviewing the functional types of utterances in different speech acts (commands and instructions, suggestions, permissions and requests), the exchange of questions and responses is brought to the fore to highlight reduced utterances in spoken English, their idiomatic character and interpersonal meaning. The well-formed English sentence is compared with functional types of questions in discourse. The modal component in questions, their reduced forms and the meaning of negative questions are described as significant points in interrogation. With the focus on spoken rather than written English, such structural aspects of meaning as negation, condition and comparison are described and their typical syntactical patterns reviewed.
2. As the illustrative material considered in Lecture Two may well introduce and illustrate the principal concepts in the present lecture, they will be revised here. Four groups of utterances realising different speech acts are indispensable in successful communication:
Commands and instructions in the order of the decreasing strength of their compulsory sense:
a) declaratives with must = strong compulsion: You must be clear on what the right answer is.
I think you must aim for three years.
b) declaratives with w/sh = strong fml commands: Who asked you in? You will please leave, now.
You shall say you are sorry for what you've done.
c) interrogatives with w = the most direct command: Will you put that down darling?
Will you close that door?
d) declaratives with can = polite commands: You can just leave that on the desk.
e) declaratives with you're going to= indirect commands, occasionally: And you're gonna look at
that window for me. You're going to follow me, if you want to help.
f) interrogatives with can/could & will/ would = more polite commands: Will you put that down,
dear.(most direct) Can you take that somewhere else please…?
Could you raise your left leg? Would you go to page twenty-nine?
to page twenty-nine?
g) interrogatives with Would you like to = tentative commands: Would you like to tell the rest
of the class the story of `The Hungry Dragon'? (CGE, 685: 413a-e)
Suggestions of different degrees of compulsion:
a) declaratives with can/could: You can make little designs. You could have four columns.
b) declaratives with may: You may well find that it's worth the effort…
c) declaratives with might: You might look at that.
d) negative interrogatives with can/could: Can't you just spray it with water?
Could you not send it back?
e) declaratives with should and ought to: But… I think you should try London. I think we ought to
turn these radiators down.
It's not good enough. You ought to complain. (CGE, 687:414a-h)
Permissions:
a) declaratives with can/may: Of course you can. You can eat as much fruit as you want.
b) interrogatives with can/could, may/might:
Can I borrow it for a week or so? (the least formal and most direct)
Could we have this room for the next hour? (more formal and less direct)
May I use your phone, John? I'd like to call…(the most formal and least direct of the three)
Might I speak to Mrs Lutterworth? (very formal and rare)
c) interrogatives with Do/Would you mind if:
Do you mind if I take my shoes off?
Would you mind if I turned this off just for a few minutes? (CGE, 693: 415a-f)
Prohibition is expressed by mustn't, more formally by may not and very formally by shall not, will not. (CGE, 694-5:415c-d)
Requests:
interrogatives with can & will (less polite than) could & would:
Can you drop me at the garage on Long Road?
Will you do it for me?
Could you have a look?
Would you spare a moment?
a formulaic interrogative Would you like to go and play in the garden?
Would you like to join the guests at the coffee table?
(CGE, 696: 416a-c)
3. The examples above illustrating a realisation of different speech acts show that:
these utterances have been drawn from spoken English;
statements and questions function interchangeably in spoken English;
speech act predetermines the frequency of questions and answers (cf. permissions);
the context of the utterance determines its referential and logical content: the referential
content basically depends on the vocabulary, while the logical content on the type of the
utterance: there is a difference in the structure of the utterance when one questions and seeks information and when one states;
it is not the type of the utterance that determines its representational content (or its
interpersonal meaning). Both questions and answers may be equally direct (cf.: You can make little designs. Of course you can. Just put it there. Will you do it for me? Will you close that door? ) and equally tentative (cf.: You might look at that. You could have four columns. Could we have this room for the next hour? Would you go to page twenty-nine? Would you like to tell the rest of the class the story `The Hungry Dragon'?). It is the context and, further, the choice of the form of the modal and more or less elaborate pattern of the utterance.
These remarks lead us to the question of the management of discourse by different types of utterances, primarily to question patterns in interrogation and attitudinal content in negation. A few aspects of more elaborate structures in statements (condition and comparison) will be considered further, basically with reference to written English.
The present course of a descriptive grammar of English has focused considerably on spoken English. It has also noted that the syntax of spoken and written English differs: the utterance is a major unit of syntax in spoken English and the sentence in written English. Part 2 of this course analysed the patterns of the English sentence, its referential and logical content. Reference and logic of the sentence will be supplemented in the present lecture with the grammar of condition and comparison. Part 3 of this course has focused so far this year on spoken English and on the syntax of interpersonal meaning in particular. Interpersonal meaning is most flexible in spoken English as it depends on the variable syntax and vocabulary and modifies the tone of discourse. In this lecture, it will be shown how interrogation, different types of questions and response utterances organise spoken discourse. Negation as a structural aspect of meaning will be shown to contribute to the structure of the utterance/sentence and to interpersonal meaning.
4. No analysis is required to observe that spoken English follows the pattern of an exchange of relatively short utterances, with questions and answers occurring interchangeably. Whether response tokens or longer utterances, answers in spoken English are usually idiomatic and rarely comply with the standard structure of the English sentence. A well-formed English sentence is a typical unit of written English. Response tokens and longer responses are challenging because of their idiomatic content and so is the expression of positive (or negative) attitude and modality. Responses, which have the form of statements in spoken English, are often elliptical or reduced. The same can be said of the structure of questions in spoken English. That is why questions will be discussed focusing on their patterns and interpersonal meaning. It has been known that in conversation of Western tradition, it is most important to speak when there is nothing to say. Questions therefore are significant utterances, because they initiate communication. Well-formed questions are more frequent in written than in spoken English where their modality is more important than grammatical completion.
5. Interrogation is an aspect of discourse which is directed to the obtaining of a response or information by active participation in verbal communication. It is a considerable section of discourse in which questions are the operating units. Unlike imperatives, which direct to action and are not communicative utterances, questions require verbal response and involve the listener into communication. But questions conduct face-to-face interaction and may make verbal exchange very direct. Directness is not always desirable in polite conversation, which poses the question of the idiomatic structure of questions and of the relevance of interpersonal meaning in them.
The standard and formal structure of questions in English can be presented in a summary table.
(The Table from Macmillan's Inside Out)
Contextually determined types of questions with a prominent modal component are different. Cf.:
Tell me what you want for dinner. (imperative, informal)
Are you tired? (simple interrogative, neutral)
Ready? (reduced question, informal, and context dependent)
Would you be George, by any chance? (modal, polite, low assumption of shared info)
Can I ask if you know what this is? (question with a preface and modal verb, polite)
So you got here early? (declarative, high assumption of shared knowledge) (CGE, 715:424)
To present a comprehensive review of the variation of questions in English, it has to be noted that structurally questions may be complete (Are you ready? When are you leaving for Milan?) and incomplete or reduced (Ready? You hungry? And what about Leeds?). They may and may not have interrogative structure (Do you want one? Would you prefer Spain or Portugal? Cf.: So you like the people round there? Tell me what time you're arriving again?) Functionally, questions in English may differ in how they elicit merely verbal response or (new) information. Cf.:
(A) `Well, how do you like being my sister-in-law?'
I gave this meaningless question as little attention as it deserved, and countered it with, `Surely you're not drinking orange juice on your wedding day?'
`You know quite well,' he said `that I never drink. I've told you before that I don't like it, but you don't seem to believe me. You even accused me of affectation last time.'
Did I really?'
`Yes, you did. And I must say that I am strongly inclined to believe that it is as much through affectation that you indulge.'
`Oh, you're quite wrong,' I said. `I love it.'
`I think a lot of nonsense is talked about drink,' he said. (Margaret Drabble. A Summer Bird-Cage. Chapter 3)
(B) `Come on, Sarah, let's go out.'
`All right', I said. `Where?'
`Let's go and meet John after the theatre.' She looked at her watch. `He's off in about half an hour. If we get a taxi we'll catch him before he leaves.'
I covered my astonishment and said, `Won't he mind if I'm there?'
`Why should he mind? Of course he won't. Come on, I can't spend a whole evening in.'
(Margaret Drabble. A Summer Bird-Cage. Chapter 11)
INTERVIEWER Since television has come, presumably you've had to do something to bring the people back?
(C) CINEMA MANAGER Yes, I think erm, whereas in the past our aim was to, er, provide a, a programme which changed each week, er, people were in the habit of going to the cinema, and they were prepared to accept almost anything. A, nowadays, a visit to a cinema must be an occasion. /…/ Saturday morning performances are useful, - these youngsters will probably demand a higher standard of entertainment than people have in the past, and so maybe they will go along to these performances, to cinemas of this character.
INTERVIEWER Mhm. You mention Saturday morning cinema - er, this special show for children. You do this, do you?
CINEMA MANAGER Oh yes, we do this, yes.
INTERVIEWER Er, what do you put on? What sort of … entertainment?
CINEMA MANAGER Well, very often erm … films which have been shown to adults, but we also show films specially produced for children. /…/ And these films, in actual fact, are more popular, er, than those produced for adults and just churned out, erm, for the benefit of children.
INTERVIEWER Mm. And, er, do you think there's anything behind this scheme of Saturday morning cinema? Are the, er, cinema managers interested in developing tastes in children or … what are they doing?
CINEMA MANAGER Well, it's a difficult question to answer. We think we're providing a service. We think that, er, we're fostering a community spirit. We're getting children into the habit of going to the cinema and perhaps this is something, er, which today we could describe as being a good thing since they've spent most of their early years at home and watching television and so on. It's getting them out, erm, getting them to sit with other people. The community spirit, I think, is very important and perhaps the cinema has got a part to play in this.
(A Cinema Manager // Mary Underwood. Listen to This! Teacher's Book - OUP, 1977, 106-107)
Apart from illustrating trivial questions in a conversation (Texts A and B), both these conversations and Text C illustrate that neither formally well-formed questions nor statements dominate in spoken English. But questions are more or less focused and shorter utterances, while responses are long and crowded utterances in which partial or lengthy and unplanned answers are given. (The students can consider how the answers evolve in an additive manner, what structures of the utterance and what phrases are current for a response to be adequate.)
Whether eliciting verbal response or seeking (new) information, the same question patterns recur in English (cf.: How do you like being my sister-in-law? & Er, what do you put on? What sort of entertainment? Did I really? & You do this, do you? ). But there are questions the structure and content of which differ in trivial conversations (A,B) and in the interview (C). Cf.: Won't he mind if I'm there? Why should he mind? Surely you're not drinking orange juice on your wedding day?
… do you think there's anything behind this scheme of Saturday morning cinema? Are the, er, cinema managers interested in developing tastes in children or… what are they doing? The questions from the trivial conversation (B) seek only verbal response (Won't he mind if I'm there?) or no response at all (Why should he mind?) and this is the usual goal of display and rhetorical questions. Display questions are the questions to which the questioner knows the answer, and rhetorical questions merely voice a question without expecting an answer. When the answer is given to rhetorical questions, it is the questioner who answers it. The texts quoted above confirm that display and rhetorical questions appear in polite conversations in which merely verbal response is expected. The questions quoted above from the interview (C) are not only formally correct. They are focused and emphasise the matter-of-fact points (…do you think there's anything behind this scheme…? Are the … cinema managers interested in…?). A matter-of-fact answer is indeed given to them. No answer of this kind follows the trivial question of the declarative structure (Surely you're not drinking orange juice on your wedding day?) in the trivial conversation (A). Mock argument issues instead and its goal to maintain verbal contact is achieved. It is also significant that the questions from conversation (C) focus on and imply Yes/No answers, whereas the questions from conversations (A & B) tend to elicit general verbal answers. This is so because Yes/No would kill conversation, which is undesirable. This means that the typical questions of the standard interrogative form (= ) function in business and matter-of-fact conversations, while negative questions or empty rhetorical questions are typically current in trivial conversations in which the maintenance of verbal contact is the principal aim. The functional-semantic character of questions in different conversations outlined, it is possible to describe the form and function of the typical questions in English.
Yes/No questions have the structure `auxiliary/modal verb - subject - verb - object/complement'. These questions seek either a confirmation or negation of the proposition of the question. The reply to them contains yes or no words with or without the auxiliaries (Yes.No. Yes, I do/did/didn't). Single word Yes/No answers very often have some form of vocative to them in English (Yes, sir. No, dear.). The standard Yes/No answer may be replaced by its informal variants: Yeah. Mm. Yep,yep. Okay, etc. In informal speech, Yes/No questions may be reduced at the expense of the auxiliary or modal: D'you want a biscuit? D'you get home all right last night? They may be reduced while omitting the auxiliary do/have and the subject you: You want some bread, Nick? Everybody got three sheets? Finished? Ready? (CGE, 718-720: 426-426a).
Wh-questions (what, when, where, which, whom, whose, why, how) ask for the information which the question word indicates. Longer responses therefore follow them: `How are you?' `I'm fine, thank you.' `Where is your farm?' `Right at the bottom of the lane?' These questions may have emphatic forms ( Who did turn up? What on earth was she doing there? ), but these forms are very strong and their ruder forms (How the heck did you come to that? Oh, what the hell does he want?) should be avoided by foreigners. Wh-questions may be reduced at the expense of the auxiliary (Where d'you work? What d'you want? ) The reduced form of wh-questions occurs only in informal speech. In informal speech, standard wh-questions may be replaced by declarative utterances intoned as questions (And you address it to who?) (CGE, 720-721: 427a-b)
Alternative questions are the questions which give the listener a choice of two or more alternatives provided by the question: Would you like smoking or non-smoking? How do you want to go to London, by coach or rail or are you driving? Do you want tea or coffee? The answer to alternative questions provides the particulars and may be no which emphatically negates one of the alternatives, followed by an explanation (`Are you actually somebody who's working at the university or are you a student?' `Oh no. I'm working there.').
Tag questions are the questions which are formed by a tag following a declarative clause: So you did, didn't you? It was nice of her to smile on us, wasn't it? Tag questions are a means to maintain conversation with least involvement. They are very interactive “in that they may constrain the range of possible or desired responses from the addressee.
Intonation is an important component in questions as it may vary their sense. There are, though, standard intonation patterns in different types of questions.
In Yes/No questions, the usual intonation is a simple rising tone (Is it far from here?= implies no assumption of how far it is). This tone leaves the question open while giving no indication of a possible answer. A complex fall-rising intonation in these questions implies the listener's agreement with the proposition of the question (Are you angry with me?= implies a suspicion that the listener is angry). Falling intonation may occur in these questions, especially when they are follow-up questions in a series (D'you want some soup? … Would you like some cheese and biscuits? … Do you want a cup of tea then?)
In Wh-questions, the usual intonation is a falling tone (Why do you need to see me?). However, when emphatically checking or clarifying information, speakers may use a fall-rising tone on the initial word (Who did you say was coming?)
In alternative questions, two parallel rising tones suggest a positive answer to both alternatives (Could you go and work in France or Italy? ). A rise-fall in these questions suggests that both alternatives are possible but only one of them can be the right one (Was it a CD-ROM or a DVD?). A fall-rise followed by a fall in these questions (Are you hungry or do you want to eat later?) implies a possible assumption that the listener is hungry.
Questions with a declarative structure are usually pronounced with a rising tone (You're busy all day?) which implies a request for confirmation. A falling tone in them (So you're going to be here about quarter past?) implies a strong assumption.
In tag-questions, intonation varies in the tag. A falling tone on a negative tag (They've been affected by it, haven't they?)(affirm. + neg.) expects agreement with yes. A rising tone on a positive tag (He's gone back, has he?)(affirm. + affirm.) also implies agreement with yes. A falling tone on a positive tag (She never talked to anybody, did she?) (neg. + affirm.) implies agreement with no. A rising tone on a negative tag (You've worked hard, haven't you?) (affirm.+ neg.) implies an anticipated agreement with yes, but open to challenge with no. A rising tone on a positive tag (He didn't get it, did he?)(neg. + affirm.) implies an anticipated agreement with no, but is open to challenge with yes. (CGE, 723-725: 429-431)
Echo and checking questions usually have a declarative word order and a wh-question at the end or at the beginning of a clause (Who was singing sorry? He's called what?) . Follow-up questions are similar structurally (`Margaret wants to talk to you.' `Oh, what about?)
Questions are sensitive units because they may sound too direct and threaten the dignity of the addressee. To avoid the unfavourable issues, questions may be prefaced with hedging expressions or other signals of politeness. E..g.: Can I ask you how old Fiona is? Could you tell me where the nearest toilet is? I have a question/ Would you mind a question. Is this result final? Two-step questions , whether direct (`Are you going to the match tonight?' `Yes, I am.' `Do you mind if I tag along?') or pre-questions (`I wondered if I might ask you something?' `Sure.' `Would you be able to write a reference for me?') represent one other form of tentative questions.
To avoid directness to a yes-no question, the discourse marker well is often used. E.g.: `Do you live in Bristol?' `Well, near Bristol.' The interjection oh is a frequent preface to replies and emphasises a range of emotive reactions to a question and heightens involvement. E.g.: `Do you feel you've had a good treatment?' `Oh definitely. Yes.' `Is it a fancy dress and all that?' `Oh no! You're joking, aren't you?' Emphatic response tokens, such as absolutely, definitely, certainly also emphasise involvement. All these aspects of meaning related to limited directness and emotive involvement are also part of interpersonal meaning which is a significant component in questions and responses. (CGE, 726-727: 433)
Delicate shades of meaning, such as different aspects of interpersonality, amplify instances of verbal utterances in spoken English, which have to be described and memorised. Structural meaning in syntax is more general and it operates by patterns. But the referential meaning of an utterance and its interpersonal component may be affected by structural meaning. For instance, there is a difference in how positive and negative questions are used and how they elicit response or action. The expression of negation, for instance, may make an utterance abrupt or neutral, direct or diplomatic. Although the standard forms of negation are familiar matters to the student, the appropriateness of negation is a challenging question. It is important as it is related to the referential (the logic of the statement) and to the interpersonal meaning (aspects of directness and tentativeness) of an utterance.
6. Negation is such a component of verbal meaning which denies the factual or logical truth of the utterance and which has a patterned expression in the syntax of English. The standard and patterned form of negation is the negation of the meaning of the verb or the verb phrase by the particle no/not attached to an auxiliary or a modal in an utterance (I am ready vs I am not / I'm not ready. We are going vs We are not/aren't going. I want to please him vs I have no desire to please him.). These examples also illustrate the fact that the auxiliary and the negative particle may function in their contracted forms in conversational style of spoken English. “Full negative forms occur in formal style (written and spoken) and in emphatic speech” (Alexander, 1992, 251: 13.4)).There is also a difference in logic when the verb phrase is negated and when the predicate complement is negated (cf.: I haven't a brother. I have no brother. I haven't promised to go. I have had no intention to go. It can't be my visitors at the gate. They are not invited visitors if they don't know how to use the bell. They are no visitors of mine if they come without warning.) . Similarly, in cases of transferred negation, the speaker's supposition is negated but the meaning of negation is transferred on to the that-clause: I don't suppose (that) anyone will object to my absence (= I suppose no one will object…). I don't think (that) you need worry (= I think you needn't worry). (Leech, Svartvik, 1991, 248: 636)
Negation can also be expressed by words with negative affixes (deforestation, dissatisfaction, illegally, immodest, inhuman, irregular, no-go, non-believer, unimportant, etc), by negative adverbs (never, seldom, rarely, hardly, scarcely, ever), and these cases are called `implied negatives' (Alexander, 1992, 253: 13.8)., by nouns, verbs and adjectives with negative meanings (His failure…She refused… It's now unlikely that…), and even by prepositions (without), conjunctions (unless) and a few other verbal means. Plain negation by the particle not is also possible without an auxiliary while canceling what has just been said: `See you Wednesday' `No, not Wednesday. Thursday.' `Ask Diana.' `No, not Diana. Ask her sister.') (Alexander, 1992, 254: 13.12)
7. The structural variants of negation illustrated above occur basically in spoken rather than in written English. Authors of The Cambridge Grammar of English even assume that “negation is more common in spoken than in written language” (CGE,729: 434). This is so because interpersonal meaning is very important in speech, and negation contributes to it. Negation is more flexible in spoken than in written English in general and it affects the interpersonal meaning of an utterance. To say I'm sure may be too assertive to maintain successful communication, whereas to say I'm not sure is encouraging in communication. In speech, “using negatives allows a speaker to remain non-committal” (CGE, 729: 434). Even in writing, negation expresses various aspects of interpersonal meaning (cf.: It cannot be denied that the authors have drawn on the works by Charles Darwin. It cannot possibly contain them all. … but there would seem to be no more need for an interval at this point in the performance…) in addition to its modification of the truth of the statement.
8. In Standard literary English, there is only one negative in any one clause (I can't get any eggs. I can get no eggs ). This rule has an exception in co-ordinated constructions in which more than one negative occurs: I've never had and never wanted a television set. (Alexander, 1992, 254: 13.10).
When a negative adverb, such as never, rarely, not only, begins a sentence, word order is inverted in the sentence (Never has there been such an effort to save whales from extinction. Not only is it a remarkable book, it is also a highly successful one. )
It is a rule in Standard English to use short responses to Yes/No questions: `Do you like dancing?' `Yes, I do.' `Did you lock the back door?' `Yes, I did.' / `No, I didn't.' Full answers to such questions never follow in genuine English, except from foreigners. But single words No or Yes are never used either in response to Yes/No questions. (Alexander, 1992, 253: 13.7). It is not only that such curt answers sound unfriendly or rude. They also tend to terminate conversation, which is undesirable in polite conversation in English. Single word Yes or No answers are often followed at least by a short vocative (Yes, sir. No, dear.) or by an additional utterance specifying the response (No. Not yet. No. That's right.) (CGE, 737: 441)
Blunt negative single word answers never occur in English except in extreme or outrageous cases. Otherwise, negative answers are softened by hedging (I'm afraid I can't. I think I would rather not.), by contrary, partial and commented responses (`Did you watch the news on TV last night?' `Yes but not all of it.' 'Are you ready to sign the contract?' `Yes, but… (+ an explanation) `Did you expect the NGO's support?' `Yes and no. (+ an explanation).
One specific case of negation appears in some forms of understatement in English. Understatement is a statement more moderate than truth would allow or require. It is related to the use of such qualifying adverbs as somewhat and rather (I was somewhat surprised to see him (= very surprised). I rather suspect we're making a mistake (= a less strong statement when the person is certain of a faulty action). Understatement is a typical English expression: a person who is a world champion may be heard to say, `I play a little tennis'. Cf.: `We might note all the guests. They are rather good material for noting.'(Margaret Drabble) A specific and popular case of English understatement is the negation of an antonym or the so-called the not un- device. E.g.: That wouldn't be altogether unacceptable. (= very acceptable) …though the choice of modern books was not unlimited,(= modern books were few) the shelves were stacked with many editions of classic texts… (Alan Bennett, p.74) Such authors like Sir Ernest Gowers think that this device “is useful in its place. There are occasions when a writer's meaning may be conveyed more exactly by … not unkindly, not unnaturally … than by kindly, naturally… (Ernest Gowers. The Complete Plain Words, p.46). But this kind of negation or understatement should not be abused as it may turn into a mannerism and make understanding difficult.
9. With the standard forms and patterns of negation summed up (see sections 6-8 above), it is possible to review regularities in the use of negation in English. In written English, negation is attached to the verb and to the verb phrase or its complement. Contracted forms of the verb and of the particle are not used in written English except when representing direct speech informally as is the case in novels or personal letters.
In spoken English, questions are positive as a rule (Do you turn left here? Did you watch television last night? Have you returned the book to the library?). However, negative questions also function in spoken English.
Negative questions are used: a) when the speaker expects, invites or hopes for the answer Yes: Don't you remember that holiday we had in Spain. A regular answer would be Yes, I do. A negative answer is formally possible but unexpected.
Cf.:
`I was thinking,' she said, `of that wedding we watched in that church in Milan, where we went to look at the frescoes. What was it called?'
`I can't remember,' I said. `The Guide Blue stopped at Florence. San Bartolomeo was it, or San Ambrosio? Some polysyllabic saint.'
`Wasn't it nice? And wasn't she charming? And weren't we relieved that she was charming?'
`It was so nice of her to smile at us on the way out.'
`Brides should always be beautiful, if they insist on getting married like this. For the sake of the guests. I must say that old Louise is certainly doing her stuff.'
`Yes, she is isn't she?'
`She looks wonderful.' (Margaret Drabble. A Summer Bird-Cage, Chapter 3)
b) when the speaker expresses surprise, disbelief or exasperation: `Can't you really ride a bicycle?' `No, I can't.'
c) when the speaker desires to persuade someone: `Won't you help me?' `Oh, all right then.' / `No, I'm afraid I can't.'
d) when the speaker wants to criticize or to express annoyance and sarcasm: `Can't you shut the door behind you?' (no answer is expected).
e) in exclamations (with the falling intonation) to remark or to reply to a statement: Didn't he do well! Isn't it hot here! `He has been very successful.' `Yes, hasn't he!'
Full forms of the auxiliaries are used in formal negative questions (Have I not asked you again to be here on time?) and in rhetorical questions (Are there not more than enough weapons of destruction on earth?)” Full and short form questions can be answered with Yes/No short answers.
The auxiliary does not echo the form of the question but indicates what the facts are (`Didn't you / Did you not go to a party last night?' 'Yes. I did.' (= I did go to a party last night) `No, I didn't.' (= I didn't go to a party last night.) `No, I did not.' (= emphatic denial)” (Alexander, 1992, 255:13.16)
Tag questions which, structurally, form affirmative-negative, negative-affirmative pairs receive positive or negative responses in accord with the tone on the tag. A falling tone on the tag “suggests greater certainty and asks for a confirmation of what the questioner assumes to be true by the initial part of the question: `You locked the door, didn't you?' `Yes, I did.' `You didn't lock the door, did you?' `No I didn't.'” (Alexander, 1992, 258: 13.22.2) These are comment questions. A rising tone on the tag means real questions which ask for Yes/No answers as well as for information: `You left the gas on, didn't you?' (= Did you leave the gas on?) `You didn't leave the gas on, did you?' (= I hope you didn't.) `You couldn't do me a favour, could you?' (= I hope you can). The interpretation of sense in the brackets defines the expected short answer. (Alexander, 1992 258: 13.22.1)
An affirmative-affirmative pair of clauses in tag-questions (`I'm rude, am I?' `He's leaving, is he?' `You like it, do you?') are much rarer than the positive-negative pairs. Affirmative-affirmative tag-questions with a rising tone “sometimes ask for confirmation of something the speaker already knows (`So she's getting married, is she?' (= Tell me more!)) (Alexander, 1992,258: 13.22.3). A falling tone in affirmative-affirmative tags may express disappointment (You sold that lovely bracelet, did you? (= I'm sorry you did.)). Sometimes affirmative-affirmative tags can also express suspicion, disapproval and even threat: You call this a day's work, do you? (= I certainly don't!) I'll get my money back, will I? (= I don't believe it!) So you thought you'd fooled me, did you? (Alexander, 1992, 258: 13.22.3). When the tone falls on the statement and rises on the tag, no answer is required. But affirmative-affirmative tag-questions like this are rarer than the tag-questions with one negative member.
The described patterns of negative and tag-questions are the typical patterns of negation in spoken English. When factual truth of a statement or question has to be confirmed, negation is one option to do it. Negation is expressed by negative particles to the verb (auxiliary or modal, as a rule) or verb phrase, as well as by negative pronouns (none, nothing, nobody, etc), by words with negative affixes (to dislike, disagreement, unpleasant, etc), by adverbs of negative meaning (never, hardly, scarcely, rarely, etc) and by words of `implied negative sense' (denial, failure, refusal ,etc). Single word negative responses virtually have no currency in English, while the negative response word functions with at least a short vocative. Short negative responses are often indirect (I'm afraid I can't. I don't think…Sorry, but I don't really feel like… Yes, but…). The negation of written statements in English follows the rules of the use of negative particles, pronouns and adverbs, and of words with negative meaning. An exceptional case would be the use of the word not to a noun phrase or other element of a clause rather than to the verb phrase. E.g.: Not all of the passengers escaped unhurt. Not a single word did he utter. Another exception would be the use of the word not without an auxiliary straight to the verb phrase. This is acse of non-finite clauses. To negate non-finite clauses, the negative is used to the verb phrase. E.g.: I asked him not to interfere. He told her never to do it again. Not having read the book, I can't tell you whether it is worth buying. (Leech, Svartvik, 1991, 248, 635)
10. Condition deals with statements other than factual, that is with imagined situations some of which are possible, unlikely or impossible. English syntax has a patterned expression of a whole range of possibilities. This is known as conditional clauses. Conditional clauses are of three basic types:
1) a statement of something that is quite possible (the real condition): If I lose my job, I will go broad. If they promote her, she'll get a big pay rise.
2) a statement of imagined situations/consequences now (unreal condition present): If I lost my job, I would go abroad. If they promoted her, she would get a big pay rise.
3) a statement of imagined situations/consequences then (unreal condition past): If I had lost my job, I would have gone abroad. If they had promoted her, she would have got a big pay rise.
(Alexander, 1992, 273: 14.2)
Conditional clauses usually precede the main clauses, as in the examples above. But conditional clauses may also follow the main clause: We can manage, if you let us know in time. If is a typical conjunction in conditional clauses. Other possible conjunctions are as/so long as, only if, on condition that, provided/providing (that) and unless. In the first conditional, the present simple combines with future reference. In the second conditional, the simple past tense combines with future-in-the past reference. In the third conditional, the past perfect tense combines with future-in-the-past reference.
11. Variations in the form of the verb in these types of conditional clauses are also possible.
1) In type 1 conditionals, different modals may replace future reference in the main clause when the present tense is retained in the if-clause: Is she finishes early, she can/could (= is free/would be able to)go out. If she finishes early, she might/should (= possibly/advisably) go out.
It is also possible to use should + infinitive in the if-clause and some form of imperative, as a rule, in the main clause: If you should see him, please give him my regards. This form of Type 1 conditional makes the condition more doubtful. It is also possible to further reduce the conditional with should: Should you be interested in our offer, please contact us. But this is a formal statement which appears in business letters, not in everyday conversation. (Alexander, 1992, 275-276:14.8).
2) In type 2 conditionals, were/was may interchangeably be used in the if-clause. “There is no difference in meaning, but were is more formal, particularly when we are making doubtful statements: If I was/were better qualified, I'd apply for the post.”(Alexander, 278: 14.13.1)
A few idiomatic formulaic variations are possible in type 2 conditionals. If I were you/in your position, I'd accept the job. These expressions are often used to give advice. If it were not/weren't for your help, I would still be homeless. This expression explains why something has or has not happened. An abbreviated if-clause is also possible (Were it not for your help,…) but it becomes a formal statement. (Alexander, 1992, 278: 14.13.3)
These are the most typical variations in conditional clauses. They do not exhaust all the possible variations but their delicacy requires more time than one lesson provides.
12. Comparison is an act of comparing one “entity or process with another” to highlight differences. The simplest case of comparison is morphological. This means the use of comparative forms of adjectives and adverbs to state differences in quality or quantity. E.g.: It's getting hotter and hotter. You dog might be fat but our dog is lazier, I'm sure. To express the same quality or quantity, the structure as… as is used: Leeds has almost as many coffee bars as London. John is as overweight as his wife. Comparison by singling out one thing expresses the highest degree of quality or quantity. This is expressed by the superlative form of an adjective or adverb with the determiner: Taipei has the tallest building in the world. It's the most interesting novel I have read in a long time. Comparative words may take premodifiers:
Joan's been a lot happier since she moved to London, hasn't she? The film was actually far more entertaining than the review suggested. It's only slightly less humid here than in Sri Lanka. (CGE, 759: 460; 765: 466c)
Comparison has several clause patterns in English.
1) Comparison is typically introduced by clauses with as, than, or which/that: The garden wasn't as big as I had imagined it would be. He's worked here longer than I have. It was the ugliest dog that I'd ever seen. In clauses with as or just as these words function as conjunctions. They are followed by subject-verb inversion with modal and auxiliary verbs. Cf: Do they drive on the left in Australia, as we do? He was a train driver, as was his father before him. I only wanted to help, as would anyone have done. “ In informal contexts, like is frequently used instead of as: Is he having a New Year's party, like he did last year?” (CGE, 773-4: 471a-b)
2) Comparison can be made with the help of clauses with as if and as though. They operate as the second element in comparison of relative similarity. E.g.: What's the matter? You're acting as if you're in pain. When I resigned from my job, I felt as though a weight had been lifted from my shoulders. When these conjunctions appear in non-finite clauses, they represent more formal contexts: She stood up as though to leave. Chantal looked uncomfortable, as though forced to consider the matter for the first time. (CGE, 774: 471c)
3) Clauses with an emphatic or degree words to an adjective or adverb are followed by non-finite clauses with the to-infinitive. E.g.: They are just too upset to speak about it. Would anyone be so irresponsible as to drink and drive after a party like that? If anyone is stupid enough to withdraw now, they'll lose all the money. (CGE, 775: 471d)
4) Clauses with rather than are typical English comparative clauses. The first element in these clauses names the preference to the exclusion of the second. Such comparisons are “followed by a verb in the same non-tensed form as the verb with which the comparison is made”. E.g.: The editor has decided to cut the paragraph rather than rewrite it. (also possible: rather than to rewrite it or rather than rewriting it.) I always prefer getting up early in the morning rather than lying in bed reading the papers.
5) Two comparative clauses headed by comparative elements take a double determiner the and form formulaic or proverbial statements. The elements compared are fronted as a rule. E.g.: The more I swim, the more energetic I feel. The less I work, the less I feel like working. The more I read it, the less impressed I am. The more, the merrier. (CGE, 776: 471g - j)
13. A summary of the functional-communicative types of utterances grouped as commands and instructions, suggestions, permissions and requests shows how discourse is managed by questions, answers and statements. The varying degree of compulsion in commands and instructions, of emphasis and directness in suggestions, permissions and requests highlight the role of interpersonal meaning in discourse.
As interrogation is the driving factor in discourse and as negation has a bearing on interpersonal meaning, interrogation and negation are described in detail. Contextually determined 6 types of questions show that questions in actual communication differ from their formal patterns by their structure and interpersonal component. Questions may be complete and incomplete/reduced, with and without the interrogative structure. Questions also differ in how they elicit merely verbal response (display and rhetorical questions) or seek information (the prototypical questions of the standard interrogative form). Yes/No questions may be complete or reduced, in informal speech, at the expense of the auxiliary/modal verb or of the structural pattern. Single word answers to these questions have informal variants but virtually never function as single units. Wh-questions seek information in accord with the question word. They may be emphatic and reduced at the expense of the auxiliary. Wh-questions may be replaced by declarative utterances intoned as questions. Alternative questions, which offer the listener a choice of two alternatives, are quite direct questions. The answer to alternative questions provides particulars or emphatically negates one option. Tag-questions constrain the range of possible responses, basically require a comment and are interactive questions. Intonation regulates answers to them. A falling tone on a negative tag and a rising tone on a positive tag expect an agreement with `Yes'. A falling tone on a positive tag expects an agreement with `No', a rising tone on a negative tag - an agreement with `Yes', but a challenge with `No', while a rising tone on a positive tag - an agreement with `No', but a challenge with `Yes'. Yes/No questions are typically pronounced with a rising tone and Wh-questions with a falling tone. Indirectness matters in questions as a component of interpersonal meaning. Therefore questions in English are prefaced with hedging expressions. Pre-questions and two-step questions are favoured types of questions aiming at sociability. Similarly, responses may be prefaced by discourse markers or interjections. Both appropriate intonation and functional vocabulary increase the communicative value and the interpersonal sense of questions in English.
Negation is a structural component of meaning, which features both in statements and questions. The standard form of negation is limited to a negative particle attached to the auxiliary or modal or to a negative particle to the noun or the noun phrase. This entails some alterations in the pronouns in the clause. An exceptional case is the attachment of a negative particle to the element other than the verb phrase, while in non-finite clauses, of the particle not to the verb phrase. Negation can also be expressed by negative pronouns, by words with negative affixes, by adverbs of negative meaning or by words of implied negative sense. One word negatives are possible only in extreme or outrageous situations. Negation is limited to a single instance in one clause but it can be repeated in co-ordinated clauses. Understatement is a peculiarly English case of statement in which the antonym is negated to express a positive idea. Contracted forms of negative particles are possible but only in informal speech. The typical patterns of negation include negative questions, which invite an answer, express surprise, persuade or criticise somebody, while negative questions pronounced with a falling tone are exclamations rather than questions. Tag-questions, which involve negation, are regulated by the asking person in accord with his intonation. Like questions, negative responses and statements are acceptable when their directness is somewhat limited.
Condition is another component of structural meaning. It deals with statements which are possible, unlikely or impossible. . Conditional clauses are of three basic types: 1)the real condition, in which the simple present and future reference combine, 2)unreal condition present, in which the simple past and the future-in-the-past combine, and 3)unreal condition past, in which the past perfect and the future-in-the-past combine. Variations in conditional clauses of type 1 are possible when the main clause involves a modal. When the if-clause involved the modal should, the condition becomes more doubtful, but the omissions of the conjunction if turns the same clause into formal. In type 2 conditional, a variation of were/was is possible in the if-clause and were is a more formal variant. Type 2 conditionals also include formulaic statements like If I were you… If it weren't for your help…, but the contracted forms retain informality. Conditional clauses represent basically written English and expand the referential potential of the English sentence.
Comparison is also a structural component of meaning. The simplest case of comparison is realised by the use of morphologically derived comparative forms of adjectives and adverbs. The typical syntactical patterns of comparison include: 1)clauses with as, than, which/that, 2)clauses with as if, as though, 3)clauses with degree words followed by non-finite clauses with the to-infinitive, 4)clauses with rather… than, and 5)two comparative clauses with a repeated determiner the, which have a formulaic pattern. Comparison extends the referential potential of the English sentence.
What have we learned? Functional-communicative types of utterances in discourse differ from the standard formal patterns of respective utterances in English by contractions and by the reduction of the patterns. However, the meaning of any kind of communicative utterances is derived with reference to their standard patterns. As the referential and the interpersonal component of meaning are equally significant in current utterances, their reduction, completion and extension, functional vocabulary and intonation matter in their communicative sense. For example, intonation regulates an expected answer in tag-questions, vocabulary varies responses to Yes/No questions which are never one-word utterances except in outrageous situations. Indirect responses like I'm afraid I can't or I don't think I would are widely current. Similarly, questions are prefaced with Can I ask you how Fiona is? Could you tell me… or formed as two-step questions: `I wondered if I might ask you something?' `Sure.' 'Would you be able to write a reference for me?' As a structural component of meaning, negation varies in the degree of formality within the limits of its standard forms. The typical patterns of negation are realised in negative questions, tag-questions and statements or response utterances. Negation is of limited directness in response utterances and direct in statements, with understatements being an exception. The expression of condition in three basic syntactical patterns extends the referential content of the sentence. As a structural component of meaning, comparison is expressed in several syntactical patterns, beginning with morphological cases and finishing with such patterns as clauses with as, than, which/that, as if, as though and rather … than. This lecture has informed on four groups of patterns of referential meaning (interrogation, negation, condition and comparison) and on a whole variety of instances of interpersonal meaning in English.
Essential Reading
Ronald Carter, Michael McCarthy. The Cambridge Grammar of English. - CUP, 2007, p.715-776.
Supplementary Reading
L.G.Alexander. The Longman English Grammar. - Longman, 1992.
Geoffrey Leech, Jan Svartvik. A Communicative Grammar of English. - Longman, 1991.
13