0
Pshyamprasad Posted 21 years ago
Grammar
Blue eyed gal, dog and soldier
Hi all,
This odd context i am finding many a times. Below are examples and question.
He kissed the girl with blue eyes.
He beat the dog with stick.
He shooted the soldier with gun.
In first sentence ,The the prepositin phrase "with blue eyes" acting as adjective phrase by describing the gal.
in Second sentence, The prepositional phrase "with stick" acting as adverbial phrases by desribitng how he beat.
We are cleare about these without even getting in to grammatical details.
But in the third sentence ,
To whom the phrase "with gun" refers. Is it "Solldier who is holding gun", or he shooted the soldier with the help of gun.
To summarise, The Identification of adjective and adverbiial phrases are based on context and in the third sentence the context is not clear, Unless a adjective clause is used. Or is there a way to syntacticallye identity to whom the the phrase referfs to.
regards,
psprasad
This odd context i am finding many a times. Below are examples and question.
He kissed the girl with blue eyes.
He beat the dog with stick.
He shooted the soldier with gun.
In first sentence ,The the prepositin phrase "with blue eyes" acting as adjective phrase by describing the gal.
in Second sentence, The prepositional phrase "with stick" acting as adverbial phrases by desribitng how he beat.
We are cleare about these without even getting in to grammatical details.
But in the third sentence ,
To whom the phrase "with gun" refers. Is it "Solldier who is holding gun", or he shooted the soldier with the help of gun.
To summarise, The Identification of adjective and adverbiial phrases are based on context and in the third sentence the context is not clear, Unless a adjective clause is used. Or is there a way to syntacticallye identity to whom the the phrase referfs to.
regards,
psprasad
Top answer
Hello P. 1. MrP shot the soldier with the gun.
- Hello P.
- 1.
- MrP shot the soldier with the gun.
- This is perfectly ambiguous.
- In some contexts, you would know that MrP used a gun to shoot the soldier.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
5 Answers
0
Hello P.
1. MrP shot the soldier with the gun.
This is perfectly ambiguous. In some contexts, you would know that MrP used a gun to shoot the soldier. In others, the soldier would have the gun.
You could remove the ambiguity thus:
2. MrP, who had a/the gun, shot the soldier.
3. MrP shot the soldier who had the gun.
4. MrP shot the soldier, who ha
1. MrP shot the soldier with the gun.
This is perfectly ambiguous. In some contexts, you would know that MrP used a gun to shoot the soldier. In others, the soldier would have the gun.
You could remove the ambiguity thus:
2. MrP, who had a/the gun, shot the soldier.
3. MrP shot the soldier who had the gun.
4. MrP shot the soldier, who ha
00
If you think that's bad, try, "We saw the man on the hill with a telescope". 
00
I have more.
She served French fries to the customers on plastic plates.
We return the merchandise to the department store that is broken.
The typewriter is running on the desk.
She served French fries to the customers on plastic plates.
We return the merchandise to the department store that is broken.
The typewriter is running on the desk.
00
The sentence "We saw the man on the hill with a telescope" can be analyzed in the following way.
The standard simple sentce structure -> Subject + verb + object + complement + Adverbial Qualification ( reference wren & martiin )
Here, the man becomes Object. The advective phrase is always placed immediate to the noun which it describes.
And next is, the adverbs shoul
The standard simple sentce structure -> Subject + verb + object + complement + Adverbial Qualification ( reference wren & martiin )
Here, the man becomes Object. The advective phrase is always placed immediate to the noun which it describes.
And next is, the adverbs shoul
00
"She served French fries to the customers on plastic plates. "
French fries becomes the indirect objectt and customers direct object which completes the sentece , and " on plastic plates" becomes adverbial qualification. And apart from this i think that the sentence interpreted most of the times correctly without getting in to grammarical dettails, unless the sentence exists in fantacy tale.
French fries becomes the indirect objectt and customers direct object which completes the sentece , and " on plastic plates" becomes adverbial qualification. And apart from this i think that the sentence interpreted most of the times correctly without getting in to grammarical dettails, unless the sentence exists in fantacy tale.
0
Related Questions