Grammar phrase/clause - help

Question

Hi! allI was wondering if you could help me with the analysis of the following sentence.Seven hours after the bombing, the acrid smell of smoke still hung thick in the air.1. In the phrase, "Hours after the bombing", is "after the bombing"serving as a prepositional phrase? or is "after" a conjunction (unlikely i think)2. Now what is the function of "Hours after the bombing"? Does itmodify "the acrid smell"? To me, it looks like the "Seven hours after the bombing" is an ellipsis form of "Even Seven hours after the bombing"... but it is still not a clause...I am just beginning to analyse sentences, and help is much appreciated.RegardsNemo

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]Hi! all I was wondering if you could help me with the analysis of the following sentence. Seven hours after ... after the bombing", is "after the bombing" serving as a prepositional phrase? or is "after" a conjunction (unlikely i think)[/nq]
It's a prepositional phrase. One thing that convinces me of this is that conjunctions don't govern and assign case in the way prepositions do. Consider
He saw the girl and me
The girl and I saw him
I went after him
*I went after he
[nq:1]2. Now what is the function of "Hours after the bombing"? Does it modify "the acrid smell"? To me, it ... the bombing" is an ellipsis form of "Even Seven hours after the bombing"... but it is still not a clause...[/nq]
It looks to me to be a phrase modifying the clause "the acrid smell of smoke still hung thick in the air. Why should it be a clause? modifiers of clauses come in a variety of forms
At seven clock, the acrid smell of smoke still hung in the air Unelievably, the acrid smell of smoke still hung in the air

and more. Neither of the two modifying expressions here are clauses.

Usenet · Answer

Hi! all
I understand that "Seven Hours after the bombing" serves as an adverbial phrase modifying the verb hung.
Now my question is:
"Seven Hours after the bombing" is in nominative case ( Seven Hours - noun; after the bombing; prepositional phrase sevring as a modifier of the noun)
In most cases, nominative case can serve as adverbial only if a prepostion is understood (ellipted). Right?
For example, I returned Monday morning (here 'monday morning' is in nominative case serving an adverbial function because the prepostion 'on' is understood. Thus the form is actually a prepostional phrase 'on monday morning', and this can serve as an adverbial modyfying 'returned'
Given the above, how can we say that the 'nominative case' is serving as an adverbial modyfying 'hung'?
Nemo
P.S: I have taken the above line from a local newspaper and was actually wondering if the sentence is grammatically correct.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Hi! all I understand that "Seven Hours after the bombing" serves as an adverbial phrase modifying the verb hung. Now ... modyfying 'returned' Given the above, how can we say that the 'nominative case' is serving as an adverbial modyfying 'hung'?[/nq]
There are linguistics ways of looking at this, and sophisticated users' ways of analysing it, and the two approaches have entirely different aims. I look at it as a sophisticated user.

We don't have cases in English (except for the few obvious exceptions like "I" and "me"). It may perhaps help you to construct good sentences if you've been trained that way; but it's ultimately misleading, because it doesn't reflect the way English works.

If it makes you more comfortable, you can say that "seven hours" is here an elliptical expression for something like "after seven hours" or "in seven hours" (there are examples from early modern English of that sort of phrase). But I'd say such an expansion would be wrong, and would reinforce a mistaken idea of what we actually do.

There is no reason for an adverbial phrase always to have an understood preposition: some do, some don't. The example you give, "after the bombing", is good English, and contains a preposition. The "Monday morning" usage without "on" you mention is not quite formal English: in Britain it's regarded as vulgar, though I think it will some day become acceptable.
[nq:1]Nemo P.S: I have taken the above line from a local newspaper and was actually wondering if the sentence is grammatically correct.[/nq]
Nothing wrong with it.
(Note spelling: "modify".)
Mike.

Usenet · Answer

Thus spake Nemo:
[nq:2]Hi! all I was wondering if you could help me ... prepositional phrase? or is "after" a conjunction (unlikely i think)[/nq]
"After" is a preposition.
[nq:2]2. Now what is the function of "Hours after the ... after the bombing"... but it is still not a clause...[/nq]
It is an adverbial phrase of time.
[nq:2]I am just beginning to analyse sentences, and help is much appreciated.[/nq]
[nq:1]Hi! all I understand that "Seven Hours after the bombing" serves as an adverbial phrase modifying the verb hung. Now ... modyfying 'returned' Given the above, how can we say that the 'nominative case' is serving as an adverbial modyfying 'hung'?[/nq]
(top posting corrected)
What I want to know is how we know it's the nominative case when it isn't a pronoun. Other than in pronouns, there are no cases in English. (Or else everything is in the nominative case, which renders mentioning it redundant.)
I would disagree that the adverbial is modifying the verb, unless you understand the verb as metonymic of the sentence. I would analyse it as a sentential adverbial, because it tells us when the whole main clause occurs (seven hours after something previously mentioned).

Simon R. Hughes

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Hi! all I understand that "Seven Hours after the bombing" ... the 'nominative case' is serving as an adverbial modyfying 'hung'?[/nq]
[nq:1]There are linguistics ways of looking at this, and sophisticated users' ways of analysing it, and the two approaches have ... good sentences if you've been trained that way; but it's ultimately misleading, because it doesn't reflect the way English works.[/nq]
Just to add to the unanimity, I don't see any reason to say that "hours" in "Seven hours after the bombing" is in any particular case. As Simon Hughes argued, there's no way to tell.
[nq:1]If it makes you more comfortable, you can say that "seven hours" is here an elliptical expression for something like "after seven hours" or "in seven hours" (there are examples from early modern English of that sort of phrase).[/nq]
Or possibly *"At a time seven hours after the bombing..."
[nq:1]But I'd say such an expansion would be wrong, and would reinforce a mistaken idea of what we actually do.[/nq]
I agree.
[nq:1]There is no reason for an adverbial phrase always to have an understood preposition: some do, some don't.[/nq]
In particular, I think you can always form a sentence-adverb phrase from a length of time followed by a word, phrase, or clause denoting a temporal relation. "An hour later", "three-and-a-half years into their marriage", "five femtoseconds before the decomposition was complete," etc. You can do the same with distance. "Two miles to the north".
[nq:1]The example you give, "after the bombing", is good English, and contains a preposition. The "Monday morning" usage without "on" you mention is not quite formal English: in Britain it's regarded as vulgar, though I think it will some day become acceptable..[/nq]
Already fine for this U.S. speaker.

Jerry Friedman

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I would disagree that the adverbial is modifying the verb, unless you understand the verb as metonymic of the sentence. I would analyse it as a sentential adverbial, because it tells us when the whole main clause occurs (seven hours after something previously mentioned).[/nq]
I think "metonymy" an excellent description of the usage, but the way I was taught grammar which may have been a paedogogical simplification was to attribute such phrases to the principal verb itself wherever possible. I think of "sentence adverbs" as being further removed from the content of the sentence, expressing the author's attitude to it or pointing out its place in a larger scheme. "Certainly" and "hence" are a couple of common examples of adverbs often used this way.

Odysseus

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Thus spake Nemo:[/nq]
[nq:1]"After" is a preposition. It is an adverbial phrase of time.[/nq]
[nq:2]Hi! all I understand that "Seven Hours after the bombing" ... the 'nominative case' is serving as an adverbial modyfying 'hung'?[/nq]
[nq:1](top posting corrected) What I want to know is how we know it's the nominative case when it isn't a ... as a sentential adverbial, because it tells us when the whole main clause occurs (seven hours after something previously mentioned).[/nq]
McCawley ( The Syntactic Phenomena of English ) analyzes such phrases as prepositional phrases (in agreement, he says, with Jesperson), and as sentence adverbs, as you propose. The verb modifying adverbs, in McCawley's treatment, are degree adverbs such as "completely", "severely", "conclusively".

Greg Lee (Email Removed)

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I understand that "Seven Hours after the bombing" serves as an adverbial phrase modifying the verb hung.[/nq]
I think you will find, on parsing, that it is not: it is an adverbial phrase modifying the clause that follows it: that is to say, what is usually, if confusingly, called a "sentence adverb". (So-called "sentence adverbs" do not necessarily modify an entire sentence, but they do modify an entire clause; they are distinguished in use by their position a "normal" adverb, one that directly modifies a verb, follows the verb, as in "He ran quickly to the door", while a sentence adverb is one that comes anywhere else, typical positions being just before the verb, just before the clause in question, or just after the clause, as in "Regrettably, Jane could not attend" or "He sadly placed the wreath on the coffin" or "John came late, of course.")
[nq:1]Now my question is: "Seven Hours after the bombing" is in nominative case ( Seven Hours - noun; after the bombing; prepositional phrase sevring as a modifier of the noun)[/nq]
The phrase as a whole is an adverb: it therefore does not have case, regardless of such cases as its constituent parts may possess ("bombing" being a gerund in the accusative case, as the object of the preposition "after", while "hours" is a noun in the nominative case.) The question you ask thus does not arise.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Now my question is: "Seven Hours after the bombing" is ... bombing; prepositional phrase sevring as a modifier of the noun)[/nq]
[nq:1]The phrase as a whole is an adverb: it therefore does not have case, regardless of such cases ... the preposition "after", while "hours" is a noun in the nominative case.) The question you ask thus does not arise.[/nq]
Talk about cases in English, of course, isn't terribly helpful. As it's not possible to tell whether "after" takes the accusative (as Eric suggests), dative (as it would be in German) or even genitive case (as in Russian)(*) or any case you care to dream up on the spur of the moment and equally impossible to tell what case "hours" is in, you can argue about it as much as you like and it won't get you anywhere.

But, as Eric correctly suggests, the phrase acts as an adverb, and adverbs don't have cases in any European language (at least, none that I am aware of).
(*) In fact, Russian has several words for "after", depending on the precise meaning. These include:
In expressions of time:
posle (+ genitive case)
za (+ instrumental case)
cherez (+ accusative case)
spustya (+ accusative case)
In expressions of place:
za (+ instrumental case)
Meaning "in accordance with":
po (+ dative case)
As for "hours", in Russian the number "seven" takes the genitive plural. Some numbers take the genitive singular, those ending in "one" take the singular of whatever case you would normally expect:

Stoit odin rubl'. (It costs one rouble accusative singular.) Stoit dva rublya. (It costs two roubles genitive singular.) Stoit pyat' rubley. (It costs five roubles genitive plural.) Stoit dvadtsat' odin rubl'. (It costs 21 roubles accusative singular.)

Odin chas = one hour (in the nominative or accusative) Dva chasa = two hours
Sem' chasov = seven hours
This is the difference between a true case system, and the English case system which, to all intents and purposes, is extinct. The German case system is also looking rather poorly these days, but at least it makes sense to talk about a German case system.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Now my question is: "Seven Hours after the bombing" is ... bombing; prepositional phrase sevring as a modifier of the noun)[/nq]
[nq:1]The phrase as a whole is an adverb: it therefore does not have case, regardless of such cases ... the preposition "after", while "hours" is a noun in the nominative case.) The question you ask thus does not arise.[/nq]
The phrase as a whole is in English: therefore none of its constituent words has case. It is preposterous to suggest that "bombing" is in the accusative case and that "hours" is in the nominative. You might as well say that in "fat woman" the adjective "fat" is feminine.

Mike.

Grammar phrase/clause - help

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions