Modification question

Question

Hi,all.I'm a chinese student studying english sevral years now.I have some confusing questions about qualification or modification to ask.I list them as follows:

1.The more you practise,the better you get.

In this sentence,which clause modifies the other?Exactly which word?How to analyse them?

2.For long there hasn't been a need for strict economy to make 2 ends meet.

Here,the 2 place of underline modify which word or phrase?Or,should I take them as a whole one?How to diagnose it?Or rather:there is no need for dark matter to explain observations,the question is the same as above.

3.He ran quickly so as to catch the last bus.

Here"so"and"as" are what attribute?I mean whether they are conj. or adv. or whatever others?Should I take the "as" as conj.?(Upon my experience,I take it for granted because of it being head of the infinite verb "to catch") As is mentioned above,so I can take "so" as adv. because of it being head of conj..So,questions are followed:"as to catch..."modify which word?Does it modify the "so"?"so" modify which word?Does it modify "ran" or "as"?How to estimate it?

4.There is no use in my tying to explain how can I....

"in my tying to explain..."modify which? Could I replace the original sentence for this one: there is no use of/for/in(which is right?) me to explain...?

Sorry for my poor english; I would be happy if only you could understand what I mean.

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

648019651.The more you practise,the better you get.

In this sentence,which clause modifies the other?

Neither clause modifies the other. However, you might consider that the first clause is logically subordinate to the second because it acts like an if clause or an as clause. If you practice more, you improve more. As you practice, you get better.

64801965.For long there hasn't been a need for strict economy to make 2 ends meet. ... ... there is no need for dark matter to explain observations

In these, what is needed or not needed is given in the for phrase, so the for phrase goes with "need". The verb "need" takes an object that tells what is needed, but in noun form "need" takes its object with the preposition "for":

... ( need for strict economy ) ... ~ "someone" needs strict economy

... ( need for dark matter ) ... ~ "someone" needs dark matter

The infinitive, however, is an infinitive of purpose, telling what the needed element would be used for. It might be considered as belonging to the whole sentence -- a sentential adverbial.

A rewording is

People have not needed strict economy in order to make two ends meet.
One does not need dark matter in order to explain observations.

64801965He ran quickly so as to catch the last bus.

The infinitive of purpose here is introduced by "so as", which I would call a combination of an adverb and a conjunction. But others may have a different opinion.

64801965There is no use in my tying to explain how can I....

my trying to explain is the object of the preposition in. trying is a gerund.

CJ

64801965 · Answer

CalifJimNeither clause modifies the other. However, you might consider that the first clause is logically subordinate to the second because it acts like an if clause or an as clause.

Mmh, I looked it up in Longman English Grammar, and it says that the latter clause modifies the comparative which is in the former one as it expresses how the degree of the former amount varies in relation to the latter clause. Here it means how more you practise compared with "the better you get". That"the better you get" modifies "the more".

CalifJimThe infinitive, however, is an infinitive of purpose, telling what the needed element would be used for. It might be considered as belonging to the whole sentence -- a sentential adverbial.

With your opinion, I tend to regard the infinitive as a complement as you can say, ie., strict economy make 2 ends meet, and dark matter explain observations. Logically, the object is the subject of the infinitive. Am I right?

CalifJimThe infinitive of purpose here is introduced by "so as", which I would call a combination of an adverb and a conjunction.

You're definitely right. I agree with you at all. That's my thought. "as" is a conjunctive and introduce the infinitive phrase "to catch the last bus" as a whole element to modify the adverb "so", and "so" modifies the finite verb "ran". So all the whole one "so as to catch the last bus" can now modify the finite verb "ran".

64801965There is no use in my tying to explain how can I.

I made a mistake about the question I asked. My real question is whether "in my tying to explain how can I..." here is an attributive or an adverbial? Could I reword the original for this one: There is no use in/for/of me to try to explain how can I...?

CalifJim · Answer

For long there hasn't been a need for strict economy to make 2 ends meet. ...

... there is no need for dark matter to explain observations

64801965 Logically, the object is the subject of the infinitive. Am I right?

I think you're saying economy is the subject of make two ends meet, and dark matter is the subject of explain observations. That doesn't seem correct to me. As I said, these are like the sentences below. I've added the subject of the infinitive:

People have not needed strict economy in order (for people) to make two ends meet.

One does not need dark matter in order (for one) to explain observations.

The structure does not strike me as that same as this one:

There is no need for Melissa to pay this bill.

Here Melissa is doing the paying, so Melissa is the subject of the infinitive.

But in the preceding cases, strict economy is not making two ends meet and dark matter is certainly not explaining anything.

Maybe these diagrams will help:

[There is (no need (for dark matter)) ] (to explain observations).

[There is (no need (for Melissa to pay this bill) ) ]

CJ

(I couldn't get the font to look normal.)

CalifJim · Answer

64801965My real question is whether "in my tying to explain how can I..." here is an attributive or an adverbial?

It doesn't seem to be clearly either attributive or adverbial to me -- although you may want to consider it adverbial as explained later in my post.

I would explain it differently, there is no use in ... being so idiomatic. I see my trying to explain how ... as the logical subject.

My trying to explain how ... is of no use / is not useful.

So the underlying predicate adjective unuseful is expressed idiomatically as there is no use in, mimicking the relationship in There is no money in my wallet, so that metaphorically the use (usefulness) is said not to be located inside the trying, just like the money is said not to be located inside the wallet. Taken metaphorically, and to get back to your original question, the expression in my trying ... is thus adverbial on the surface even though it is logically the subject.

64801965Could I reword the original for this one: There is no use in/for/of me to try to explain how can I...?

The most understandable of these is ... no use for me to try ..., but it is not really the most idiomatic. The standard formula is as in the original: no use in + gerund. in me to ... and of me to ... are not at all reasonable combinations.

CJ

64801965 · Answer

Hmm, I have to say if you analyse some sentences by grammar it will make you go crazy cause it's quite confusing and equivocal(or ambiguous), and it's one of the most difficulties in the world. But it's my favourite because if you understand it totally you understand English completely, as for our foreigner who studies English as a a second language. So I have to continue studying grammar hard. Come on, myself.

CalifJim
I think you're saying economy is the subject of make two ends meet, and dark matter is the subject of explain observations. That doesn't seem correct to me. As I said, these are like the sentences below. I've added the subject of the infinitive:

Normal 0 People have not needed strict economy in order (for people) to make two ends meet.

Normal 0 One does not need dark matter in order (for one) to explain observations.

The structure does not strike me as that same as this one:

There is no need for Melissa to pay this bill.

Here Melissa is doing the paying, so Melissa is the subject of the infinitive.

But in the preceding cases, strict economy is not making two ends meet and dark matter is certainly not explaining anything.

Well, it's definitely all right that you can have different opinion about it.

Here I exactly mean the infinitive phrase "to make 2 ends meet" and "to explain observations" are the complement of the object which is the object of the preposition-- "for", as you can say, for example, I made strict economy cause two ends meet, I made dark matter explain observations, it's just examples. There "cause two ends meet" and "explain observations" are the complement of the object-- "strict economy" and "dark matter" which is the object of the finite verb "made" as in the examples above. So in the examples you've given above I think the "(for people)" and the "(for one)" might omit as well.

Of course you can reserve your opinion.

64801965 · Answer

CalifJimIt doesn't seem to be clearly either attributive or adverbial to me -- although you may want to consider it adverbial as explained later in my post.

I tend to take it as a attributive.

CalifJimI see my trying to explain how ... as the logical subject.

as you said, I put it this way: "in my tying to explain how I can..." modifies the subject "no use", so it, which qualifies "use" and makes a description of it, is a part of the subject, and now comes up with your opinion-- "as the logical subject".

CalifJimthe expression in my trying ... is thus adverbial on the surface

No, "in my tying to explain how I can..." is not in relation to the finite verb "is", so it's not the adverbial. I make a instance: A strange man in the pantyhose is there (There is a strange man in the pantyhose), and you can't say a strange man is there in the pantyhose (In the pantyhose there is a strange man). May this instance help you know my meaning. Perhaps you have other idea, and please let me know if you'd like.

CalifJimThe most understandable of these is ... no use for me to try ..., but it is not really the most idiomatic. The standard formula is as in the original: no use in + gerund. in me to ... and of me to ... are not at all reasonable combinations.

Thanx for doing me the favour of the instruction.

64801965 · Answer

I prefer explaining English rules but memorizing it. <img src="http://www.EnglishForward.com/emoticons/emotion-11.gif"/>

64801965 · Answer

64801965I prefer explaining English rules but memorizing it.

I prefer explaining English rules but no memorizing it

64801965 · Answer

64801965Here I exactly mean the infinitive phrase "to make 2 ends meet" and "to explain observations" are the complement of the object which is the object of the preposition-- "for", as you can say, for example, I made strict economy cause two ends meet, I made dark matter explain observations, it's just examples. There "cause two ends meet" and "explain observations" are the complement of the object-- "strict economy" and "dark matter" which is the object of the finite verb "made" as in the examples above.

Hmm, I realize I was wrong. Here "to make 2 ends meet" and "to explain observations" are NOT the complement of the object which is the object of the preposition-- "for". "for strick economy" and "for "dark matter" are only in relation to the "need", while "to make 2 ends meet" and "to explain observations" are adverbial of purpose, which modify the noun "need", and meaning the purpose of "need", i.e. no need for dark matter to explain observations is there. And also it can be interpreted as you did, telling what the needed element would be used for, and considered as belonging to the whole sentence -- a sentential adverbial.

64801965 · Answer

64801965Here I exactly mean the infinitive phrase "to make 2 ends meet" and "to explain observations" are the complement of the object which is the object of the preposition-- "for", as you can say, for example, I made strict economy cause two ends meet, I made dark matter explain observations, it's just examples. There "cause two ends meet" and "explain observations" are the complement of the object-- "strict economy" and "dark matter" which is the object of the finite verb "made" as in the examples above.

Hmm, I realize I was wrong. "to make 2 ends meet" and "to explain observations" are NOT the complement of the objects -- "strict economy" and "dark matter", which are the objects of the preposition-- "for". The "strict economy" and "dark matter" are only in relation to "need" but not in relation to the infinitive. The infinitive, "to make 2 ends meet" and "to explain observations", which are adverbial of purpose, modifies the noun "need" and gives the purpose of the noun "need", i.e. no need for dark matter to explain observations is there.

need for	dark matter
to explain observations

And also it can be interpreted as you did, telling what the needed element would be used for, and considered as belonging to the whole sentence -- a sentential adverbial.

To C.J.

Best wishes.

Modification question

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions