Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Diploma Thesis
Chisinau 2008
Introduction
Introduction
Chapter One: A general overview on word order in English and Romanian.
2.2.2 Cases with two or more attributes in the English sentence comparing with
the Romanian one;
When we speak about the simple declarative sentence, we must take into
consideration that its order of words is fixed. To demonstrate this fact we will
concentrate our attention on the problems created by some changes of the main
parts of the sentence.
I speak English
As for example:
e.g. “Tess knew the name” – we see a simple S-P-O sentence that cannot
exist in another way than this one. In Romanian we translate this sentence in too
many variants:
To illustrate this, the author change the order of words in the following
sentence:
e.g. “Mr. Winter sent the little boy with a message to the next village one
December day.” (Hardy)
If we put the Direct Object in the first place and the subject in the third, the
meaning of the sentence will change altogether because the object, being placed at
the head of the sentence, becomes the subject, being placed after the predicate
becomes the object:
e.g. “The little boy sent Mr. Winter with a message to the next village one
December day.”[3, pag.264] [22, pag.221]
e.g. “Not a soul passed that way for o long while and the faint notes of the
band were the only human sounds audiable within the rim of the blue hills.” /
“Multa vreme nu trecu pe acolo nici un suflet… Nu se auzeau decit sunetele slabe
ale fanfarei singurele sunete omenesti, care rasunau pina departe spre dealurile
albastre.” – The right position of the subject in English is at the beginning of the
sentence, but in Romanian, we know that it is freedom in placing the subject. In
this order of ideas, the translator didn’t take much care about it and put it in the
end; in fact the meaning remains the same. Well, it might be translated in another
way like:
e.g. “Nici un suflet nu trecu pe acolo multa vreme…” or “Nu trecu nici un
suflet pe acolo multa vreme… ” or even “ Pe acolo multa vreme nu trecu nici un
suflet…”
“The parts of the sentence that are very closed to each other must not be
despised. Here is a general rule for a perfect word order:
b) the predicate verb, preceded by the object of time, indirect and direct
Every change interfering this order modify the syntactical rapports and in
fact the meaning of the sentence.” [2, pag.610]
In her book “Grammar of the English Language”, Ellen Henrichs- Kleinen,
says that a normal order of words in a sentence is:
But a specific element is that this order is kept only in the following
sentences, or cases:
3) At complex tenses:
e.g. “I have written a book.”
e.g. “I have forgiven you for the same.”
4) In the sentences succeding the direct speech:
e.g. “I’ll come”, he said to me.”
e.g. ““No”, she said becoming grave”[14, pag.239]
O. Jespersen states that the English language has developed a tolerably fixed
word order, which in the majority of cases shows without fail what is the subject of
the S-P-O sentence. This predominance of S-P-O word order makes conspicuous
any change in the sentence and inevitable calls forth a modification in the
intonation design. The most conspicuous place in the sentence are considered the
first and the last: the fist, because the full force of the stress can be felt at the
beginning of an utterance; and the last, because there is a pause after it.”
e.g. “My revered father had meanwhile been snoring loudly from the depths
of his easy chair”
To speak to the point, there are cases when a P-S-O is also correct in
meaning. To distinguish between the two S-P-O sentence and P-S-O sentence we
will give examples from both of them.
a) in interogative sentences:
e.g. “Was she on the terrace?”
e.g. “ Did he hold a degree?”
g) with emphasis:
e.g.“ Lucky is the man who has such a life”
h) in indirect speech , where the rithm of the sentence requires the
inversion of the subject with the verb:
e.g.““Yes”, he said.”
e.g.“For though I’ve never seen it, I know others who have”
i) in cumulative declarations:
e.g. “ The children are hungry, so am I” [2, pag.607].
Concerning the object in the S-P-O sentence we can say that its importance
is relative.
e.g. “The object is a secondary part of the sentence which stands in close
relation to a verb, completing restricting or in any other way modifying its
meaning” [3, pag.270]
e.g. “The usual position of the object is after the predicate. However, in
exclamatory sentences the direct object may occupy the first place:
e.g. “ This position of the object generally doesn’t cause inversion, except
in poetry, high prose and negative exclamatory sentences:
e.g. “Passage after passage did he explore, room after room did he peep
into”
In declarative sentences the front position of the object serves the purpose
of emphasis:
e.g. “ A fearful voyage I had with such a monter in the vessel” [21,pag.212]
e.g. “A natural incident relieved her anxiety.” / “Dar o intimplare ii puse
capat nelinistii.”
“When the direct object is emphasized and placed at the head of the
sentence, the inverted order of subject and predicate may be found.”[23,pag.211]
“But there are cases with two direct objects. The following verbs take two
Direct Objects – to ask, to answer, to take, to envy, to hear, to forgive. In fact, the
place of the direct Object is behind the verb”[14, pag.240]
But there is another object that is called the Cognate Object, that is placed
between the transitive verb and the Direct Object:
The Cognate Object or Accusative consists in the fact that it has the same
root with the verb which is considered transitive:
“The indirect Object usually denotes the person towards whom the action of
the finite verb is directed:
e.g. “I shall buy a book for you”.
The Indirect Object has a fixed place in the sentence – it precedes the
Direct one; it cannot be used without the Direct Object. The indirect object follows
the Direct Object if this one is a pronoun and the Indirect object another personal
pronoun.
When the Direct Object is a pronoun, it is placed before the indirect one:
In the case when the indirect object implies the idea of a selection, the Direct
Object is placed before the indirect one:
The prepositional object is always placed behind the direct object and the
indirect object:
“Words in the function of attributes modify nouns giving them some kind
of characteristic.”[10, pag.116]
“The attribute is the secondary part of the sentence which denotes the
qualities of a person or thing expressed by a noun (or pronoun) in any of its
functions in the sentence.” [9, pag.373]
“Attributes determine the noun and their place is before the noun:
Depending on closeness of the syntactic ties between the attribute and its
noun, we distinguish: close attributes and loose attributes.
Close attributes:
Loose attributes:
e.g. “Happy and carefree the children run down the hill.”
e.g. “Painted green, the house was almost invisible on the forest covered
hill.”
e.g. “You behave like a school boy afraid of his teacher.”[10, pag.117]
There are cases when the sentence contains two or more attributes, and then,
we may have doubts concerning their place in the sentence. To be sure where is
the place of every attribute, Leon Levitchi and Causanscaia will help us.
“Attributes denoting age, color, material and nationality come next to the
noun modified.”
e.g. Two years of married life had not lengthened her shost dark chestnut
hair.(Galsworthy)
When two or more attributes denoting age, color, material and nationality
refer to the same noun, the order is as follows:
[3, pag.272]
[18, pag.126]
e.g. “She was a fine and handsome girl – not handsomer than some others,
possibly – but her mobile peony mouth and large innocent eyes added eloquence to
color and shape” / “Era frumoasa la chip si la trup. Poate ca nu mai era cea mai
frumoasa, dar miscarea buzelor rosii ce bujorul si nevinovatia ochilor ei mari
faceau ca forma si culoarea acestora sa devina mai expresive.”
As we can see, from these examples, in Romanian it is less strict to keep the
right position of the very word. We can arrange the sentence as we want, the
flexibility of our language permit us such things.
There are cases when we can meet attributes in post- position. There are not
so many, but anyway we will mention them in order not to make mistakes.
“There are some cases when the post position of the attribute is its normal
place, when it is not emphatic: [3, pag.272]
1. Most adjectives in –able and –ible are placed after the noun, especially
when the noun is preceded by the adjective “only” or an adjective in a superlative
degree:
e.g. “After that, the blackness of unutterable night” – it follows the general
rule because here we don’t have any superlative.
e.g. “…such models unimpeachable as are turned out yearly by the lathe of a
systematic tuition.” – Here it is the superlative degree.
4. The adjective “proper” and “present”, coming from French, are placed
after the noun:
e.g. “It was something very strange in his words” / “Se simtea ceva straniu
in cuvintele lui.” – We see that in Romanian the expression is translated otherwise,
but the logical way is kept.
e.g. “As a gesture of proud defiance he had named his son Francis Nicolas.”
[3, pag.273]
e.g. “When I looked up… there stood the window pale, grave and amazed.”
e.g. “The boy inherited his own eyes, large, brilliant and black”.[3, pag.271-
274]
To draw a parallel with the adverbials, the attributes are to modify nouns,
while adverbials – verbs.
There are very many kinds of adverbials and each of them “pretend” a firm
position in the sentence.
“An Adverbial modifier hardly ever separates the Direct object from the
predicate. It stands either before the predicate or after the Direct object.”[11,
pag.329]
Adverbs of Place
(e.g.: here, there, behind, above)
Like adverbs of manner, these adverbs are put behind the direct object or the verb.
He stayed behind.
e.g. “He emerged from the theatre with the first of the crowd.”[3, pag.274]
e.g. “Well, they only kept up there about an hour, but that was sure a long
time”[25, pag.300]
e.g. “Not a human being was out-of-doors at the dairy.” / “Ograda laptariei
era pustie.” – the adverbial modifier of place stands either at the beginning or at the
end of the sentence. Here it is in the end, but it is not clear in the Romanian
variant; it might be translated in another way: “Nici o fiinta umana nu era la
laptarie” – here we can easily say that in Romanian even the order is kept.
e.g. “There was a great stir in the milk-hose just after breakfast.” / “Dupa
gustarea de dimineata accea toata lumea era in fierbere.” – the adverbial modifier
of place sometimes prcedes that of time, while in Romanian it is placed in front of
the sentence.
Adverbs of Time
(e.g.: recently, now, then, yesterday)
If you don't want to put emphasis on the time, you can also put the adverb of time at the beginning of the sentence.
e.g. “Angel felt that he would like to spend a day with her before the
wedding, somewhere away from the dairy.” / “Inainte de nunta, Angel simti ca vrea
sa mai petreaca o zi cu Tess hoinarind ca indragostitii undava departe de laptarie.”
– both adverbial modifiers are placed after the predicate. The adverbial modifier of
time follows the predicate and the adverbial modifier of place follows that of time.
In Romanian we do not have the same picture, because the adverbial modifier of
time is placed in front of the sentence. In fact, the meaning remains the same.
e.g. “They said finally that it was better not to act in a hurry but that they
would not object to see her.” / “In cele din urma parintii spusera ca ar fi mai bine
sa nu ia o hotarire pripita, dar ca nu ar avea nimic impotriva sa vada fata.” – the
adverbial modifier of time is usually placed either at the beginning or in the end of
the sentence. In the English sentences the adverbial is placed in the end of it, while
being translated into Romanian it stands in front of the sentence.
If you don't want to put emphasis on the time, you can also put the adverb of time
at the beginning of the sentence.
Note that some time expressions are adverbs of frequency (always, never, usually
usw.). These are usually put before the main verb (except for 'be' as a main verb).
The adverbial modifier of cause expresses the cause of the action done by
the subject and that is expressed by a predicate. Its place is usually at the end of the
sentence.
Adverb of Manner
(e.g.: slowly, carefully, and awfully)
These adverbs are put behind the direct object (or behind the verb if there's no
direct).
He drove carefully.
The most frequent position of the adverbial modifier of manner is after the
predicate, if the verb is intransitive and after the object if the verb is transitive:
e.g. “The children were playing happily.”
e.g. “Then those eyes flashed brightly through their filmy heaviness.” /
“Ochii somnorosi ii lucira sub greutatea pleoapelor.” – The adverbial modifier of
manner is usually placed after the predicate but it is lost while translating in this
case: “flashed brightly = lucira.”
The adverbial modifier of agency, the logic subject is used only in passive
voice; and its place depend on the context:
Adverbs of Frequency
(e.g.: always, never, seldom, usually)
Adverbs of frequency are put directly before the main verb. If 'be' is the main verb and there is
no auxiliary verb, adverbs of frequency are put behind 'be'. Is there auxiliary verbs, however,
adverbs of frequency are put before 'be'.
Sometimes it occupies the first place but this position generally doesn’t
cause inversion:
e.g. “Often, he had asked her to come and pass judgements on his
junks.”[17, pag.52]
e.g. “Whenever this happened the dairy was paralysed.” / “Ori de cite ori se
intimpla asa laptaria era ca paralizata.” – Both in English and Romanian the
adverbial modifier of frequency precedes the predicate-verb.
e.g. “…yet it was enough to build up wretched dolorous dreams upon there
in the shade of the night.”
The adverbial modifier of degree always precedes the predicate; if the verb
is in a compound tense-form they follow the first auxiliary:
e.g. “I fell strong enough to walk any distance” said she. / “Ma simt in stare
sa merg oricit, spuse ea.” – Ma simt destul de puternica…, it would be better,
because we can see the slight difference between the original, and the translated
variant.
e.g. “Mauki no longer weights one hundred and ten pounds.”[9, pag.379]
How we already mentioned, we know that all the words in the sentence
perform definite syntactic functions. But not every time the order of words is
respected in a sentence. So, to help us to understand how the meaning of one
sentence can change is the notion of the Inverted order of words. Usually, the
subject can change its place with the predicate. In this sub-point we are interested
in the importance of the inverted order of words, and we are going to demonstrate
that the changing of words’ place in the sentence has a firm intention.
To be more concrete we will take examples which state especially this fact,
and we will analyze this problem from a prospective point of view.
Peter Erdman in his work “Discourse and Grammar”, argues that the
inversion in fact, is the placing of the subject after the finite verb [Jacobsson 1951:
51]
• In interrogative sentences;
Where did they find her?
The inverted order of words is widely used when a word or a group of words
is put in a proeminent position. I this case inversion is due to the author’s wish to
produce a certain stylistic effect. Thus inversion occurs when:
c) Ad. Md. expressed by such adverbs as: so, thus, now, then, etc.
placed at the head of the sentence, if the subject is expressed by
a noun;
Now was the moment to act.
NB. If the subject is a pronoun, inversion does not take place.
Thus he thought and sank down upon the wet earth.
• The sentence begins with the word here which is not an adverbial
modifier of place but has some demonstrative force;
Here is my car, Sir.
N.B. If the subject is expressed by a personal pronoun, the word
order is direct.
“According to the form of the finite verb two types of inversion are then
distinguished. The first of this known as “absolute inversion”, has a verb form in
the present or past, followed by the subject”
The second part is known as “partial inversion” indicating that only part of
the predicator follows the subject (e.g. the “be” of the expanded from temporal
“have” ) [7, pag.23]
The definition of inversion as the placing of the subject behind the finite
verb raises problems with all English verb forms which do not have a contrast
between the finite and non-finite.
“Exception to the S-P-O rule that means inversion is when the predicate is
placed in front of the subject.”[14. Pag.240]
e.g. “Seeing Tess standing at gaze he went across to her.” / “Vazind ca Tess
privea in jur cautind pe cineva, se apropie de ea.”
e.g. “Do you know that riddle about the nott cows, Jonathan?” / “Cunosti
zicala aia despre vacile ciute, Jonathan?” – in interrogative sentences.
There are very many cases of inversion and in different sentences the subject
goes behind the predicate due to some categories of sentences such as
exclamations without the objects when “here” and “there” introduce a sentence; in
the sentence expressing a wish. In fact, we have already done this classification
and mentioned that the inversion produced is the process of changing the place of
the subject with the predicate.
“ The inverted order of words is widely used when a word of a group of
words is put in a proeminent position. Inversion occurs when an adverbial modifier
opens the sentence”[14, pag.241]
e.g. Then tere was the hissing of a train… / Se auzise apoi pufaitul unui tren
care se opri aproape fara zgomot.
In comparison with other authors, Causanskaia argues that “it must be born
in mind that emphatic order doesn’t necessarily mean inversion; emphasis may be
also achieved by the proeminent position of some part of the sentence without
inversion, i.e. without placing the predicate before the subject.”[3, pag.269]
There is the case to speak about the full inversion and partial one. Due to
many inflections in the language there are people that don’t distinguish between
them saying that inversion is in fact – inversion and it’s all. Looking inside of this
problem there are very close, but not the same:
e.g. “Up flew the sparks in myriads at the long were stirred.” – full
inversion;
e.g. Why do nott cows give less milk in a year than horned? / De ce ciutele
dau mai putin lapte intr-un an decit vacile cornute?
e.g. What is the good of your mother and me economizing… / Ce rost mai
are ca parintii tai sa stringa bani… - even the interrogative word in nominative
permits here the inversion.
e.g. Do you know why I did that, Tess? / Stii de ce am facut asta , Tess?
b) Inversion may be the result of emphasis. When some word in the sentence
is put in a proeminent position to make it emphatic, the structure of the sentence
may require an inverted order of subject and predicate verb.
e.g. “Up flew the bright sparks in myriads as logs were stirred.” (Dickens)
e.g. “Never shall I forget the lonely sensation of a first lying down, without a
roof above my head” (Dickens)[15. Pag.45]
e.g. But now glad am I to have you here! / Dar tare imi pare bine ca te am
aici linga mine!
“Since emphasis and stress normally fall at the beginning and end of the
English sentence, a skillful writer often inverts word order to place what he wishes
to have emphasized at the sentence’s beginning or ending.”
e.g. “Divine I am inside and out.” – more grammatically than if he had
written “I am Divine inside and out.” [23, pag.207]
“Word order is one of the subtlest and most important problems of style.
There are no rules or reliable guidelines; the best way to learn how best to order a
sentence is to read widely among skilled writers and educate your ear to possible
rhythms” [18, pag.128]
Sometimes word order involves logic, as we can see in the examples with
misplaced modifiers. Otherwise, lack of wondering purpose may seem to be what
the essay suffers from. But usually the issue is more one of style than sense.
- The meaning is clear, but it is lost when we change the words, it has
another connotation: “Life, the pursuit of happiness and Liberty.” \ “Liberty, Life
and the pursuit of happiness.”
We mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred
honor, again has the inevitability of the right word order.
Perhaps a slight shift in the normal word order creates dramatic tension.
Ordinarily, a modifier should be placed next to the word it modifies.” [23, pag.209]
e.g. What’s the matter? said he. / Ce-i, Tess, ce s-a intimplat? o intreba
Angel.
What a fresh and virginal daughter of Nature that milkmade is, said he. / Ce
proaspata si feciorelnica fiica a Naturii, isi spuse el.
e.g. “It is a lady again” – interrupted she holding out the bud she had peeled.
/ Ia uitate asta e altfel… il intrerupsese ea aratindu-i mugurele pe care il cojise.
“ Inversion in English is triggered by a variety of linguistic factors. First, the
type of sentence determines whether there is post-position of the subject.
Obligatorily or optional, inversion occurs with polar and “Wh” – questions,
negated imperatives, exclamations, comparative sentences and other constructions.
These can be termed sentence – type inversion.
e.g. “Dana liked the movie, and so did Bob.” [5, pag.27]
e.g. “On the floor squatted the man had been looking for.”
e.g. “Spearheading the campaign was Masspink, the party official.” ” [25,
pag.293]
e.g. “Some problems of word order are dealt with in the section of jargon,
circumlocution and dead wood.
Most writers settle somewhere between these two extremes” [23, pag.207]
Inversion generally causes many problems both in speech and writing. The
most important place is attributed namely to the inverted order of words.
In learning and especially while translating into English we must take into
consideration the place of each part and in some cases such as: emphasis or
something else to serve us of inverted order of words.
Conclusion
Generally, we must take into consideration the fact that while translating or
even speaking English we must be very attentive at the word order because we can
make mistakes aimless.
Introduction
Many researchers of word order and word order variation have
approached the subject matter by taking what can be described as a speaker's
stance. Constraints on, or patterns and preferences in, word order are studied by
observing how varying aspects of a meaning that is to be expressed, like
grammatical function assignment or information structure, influences word order.
In computational linguistics, natural language generation involves taking this
perspective.
Conversely, one may also emphasize the effect word order variation has on
the interpretation of a sentence. For instance, one may study how word order
restricts the available readings of a sentence in terms of grammatical function
assignment, information structure, referentiality of arguments, or quantifier
scoping. The computational linguistics task of natural language parsing is a
concrete example of this approach, which we may call taking the hearer's
perspective.
More recently, researchers have proposed that a more complete
understanding of word order is gained by combining these perspectives. For
instance, it has been argued that canonical word order is preferred in contexts in
which grammatical function assignment cannot be reliably determined using word
order independent information, such as case, agreement, or animacy. In a model
that combines perspectives, this can be formalized as a restriction of the speaker's
freedom in choosing a word order variant that is determined by hearer's ability to
recover the correct grammatical function assignment.
Reference list
1. “A practical English grammar”, Moscow, 1978;
2. Batstone, Rub, “ Grammar”, Oxford, 1995;
3. Badescu, Alice, “Gramatica limbii engleze”, Bucuresti, 1993, 729 p.;
4. Campbell, Doug, “Professor’s grammar rule”, Book – London: BBC
English, 1992, 64 p.;
5. Cataraga, Angela, “English Grammar in tables and scheme”, Ch.
USM,2007, 148 p.;
6. Causanscaia, “English grammar”, Leningrad, 1963;
7. Close, R. A., “A reference Grammar for students of English”, Moscow,
1979, 337 p.;
8. Close, R.A., “The new English as a foreign language”, Cambridge, 1968,
163 p.;
9. Cobb Timothy, Gardiner Richard, “Today’s English Grammar”, Buc., 1994,
330 p.;
10. Eastwood, John, Makin, R., “A basic English Grammar with exercises”,
Oxford, 2988, 240 p.;
11. Erdman, Peter, “Discourse and Grammar: Focusing and Defocusing in
English”, Max Niemer Verl., 1990, 227 p.;
12. Firnoaga, G.G., “Gramatica limbii engleze”, Omega press, Lucman,
Buc.,1998;
13. Ganea, Petru, Iliasenco O, “Refresh your English grammar”, Chisinau,
1992, 136 p.;
14. Gansina M, Vasilevscaia, “English Grammar”, Moscow , 1964, 547 p.;
15. Golovina, T., “The problem of analytical forms in modern English Grammar
structure” , Riga, 1977, 44 p.
16. Gordon, E. M., Kryluva, I. P., “A grammar of present day English”,
Moscow 2000, 448 p.;
17. Greenboum, Sydney, “The Oxford English Grammar”, Oxford university
press, 1996,652 p.;
18. Gruia, George, “A concise English Grammar”, grupus, 1996, 199 p.;
19. Gruia, George, “Gramatica limbii engleze”, Craiova, 1992, 400 p.;
20. Gzadar, E. Klein, “Generalised Phrase structure Grammar”, Cambridge,
1989;
21. Hansen, Eric, Nielsen, H. F., “Irregularities in Modern English”, Odense
University Press, 2003, 333 p.;
22. Henrichs – Kleinen, Ellen, “Gramatica limbii engleze”, Buc., 2003, 280 p.;
23. Jepson, R. W., “English Grammar for today”, Edinburg, 1960, 212 p.;
24. Jespersen, Otto, “The philosophy of Grammar”, Chicago, 1992, 363 p.;
25. Langendoen, D., Terence, “Essentials of English grammar”, Holly, 1970,
229 p.;
26. Levitchi, Leon, Preda, Ioan, “Gramatica limbii engleze”, Teora, 1997, 328
p.;
27. Levitchi, Leon, “Gramatica limbii engleze”, Teora, 1993, 256 p.;
28. Mc. Arthur, Tom, “The oxford Companion to the English Language”,
Oxford University Press;
29. Melenciuc, D., “A reader in English Stylistics”, Chisinau, 2005;
30. Melenciuc, D., “A practical Modern English Grammar”, Chisinau, 2003;
31. Morsberg, Robert, “Commonsense Grammar and style”, New York, 1965;
32. Paidos, C., “Gramatica limbii engleze”, Buc., 2001;
33. Panovf, Irina, “Gramatica descriptive a limbii engleze”, Buc., Lucman, 249
p.;
34. Preisler, Bent, “A handbook of English grammar of functional principles”,
Aarhus, 1992;
35. Rodderts, Paul, “Understanding Grammar”, New York, 1954, 550 p.;
36. Swan, Michael, “Grammar”, Oxford, 2005, 129 p.;
37. Yule, George, “Explaining English Grammar”, Oxford: University Press,
2003, 333 p.;
38. Zdreanghea, Mihai, M. Towson Nig., “English Grammar: Elements of the
grammatical structure of English”, ed. II, Cluj., Clusium, 1995, 182 p.;