New answers tagged syntax
I think it will be something like this, putting the "last week" inside the verb phrase spanning "last week won the big race" to indicate the time. Noun phrases indicating time (e.g., "yesterday", "next month") are usually kept as noun phrase, and are just put next to the verb they modify. (image generated from http://ironcreek.net/phpsyntaxtree/ with the ...
Under the meaning you have chosen, it is part of the verb phrase "last week won the big race". So it goes beneath this; to the left of the verb "won" and the noun phrase "the big race"
The OP asked about the role of an infinitive following an adjective and followed by an object. I believe we can discern the syntactic nature of this construction by examining something similar called the tough construction, the syntax of which is discussed by Joasha Boutault in "A Tough Nut to Crack: A Semantico-Syntactic Analysis of Tough-Constructions in ...
You were wrong- (to pick that car) I was wise (to go home that day). Both of these are excellent examples of adverbial phrases. Since adverbs modify adjectives, these phrases modify the adjective, wrong and right. They describe what was right and wrong to do.
You were wrong to pick that car = It was wrong (of you) (for you) to pick that car = For you to pick that car was wrong (of you) I was wise to go home that day = It was wise (of me) (for me) to go home that day = For me to go home that day was wise (of me). The predicate adjectives (be) wrong and (be) wise are flip psychological ...
Ask is a transitive verb: it takes a Direct Object (DO), in its simplest form a noun phrase: Anne asked me [DO a question]. If we want to represent Anne's exact words, we use the question she actually asked, followed by a question mark and enclosed in quotes, in that DO position: Anne asked me "Who is your favorite actor?" The quotes mark this ...
Affirmative: that man was Negative: that man wasn't Interrogative: Was that man...? Affirmative statement: Tell me who that man was. Interrogative: (only 1 interrogative form at the beginning) Can you tell me who that man was? Interrogative: Who was that man? Affirmative: Anne asked me who my favourite actor was. (There's no question mark.) Question ...
It is an ambiguity only of the written representation of the language. In speech, the two meanings would receive different intonation and syntactic micro-pauses. I can't represent the intonational differences, but the phrasal units would be like this: Nellie washed ...... the dishes in the sink. [which dishes] Nellie washed the dishes.....in the sink. ...
There is no 'difference'. They are both 'habitual' present. 'I am speaking' would convey the present (progressive). Many other languages do not make this distinction.
As BillJ mentioned in the comment, "red" is an adjective functioning as an object (or objective) complement whose primary role is to complement the transitivie verb and its object to show what it has become. For example, "We painted the walls red" could be rephrased to: We painted the walls and (as a result) they became red. There are many transitive ...
Don't forget this document was originally written in German. From your quoted translation, I suspect that it wasn't written in Hoch Deutsch. I'd take the answers above and not worry about the garbled translation you cite.
There are several editions of the Manifesto, and several translations. An easier reading of this sentence is often given as No sooner has the labourer received his wages in cash, for the moment escaping exploitation by the manufacturer, than he is set upon by the other portions of the bourgeoisie- the landlord, the shopkeeper, the pawnbroker, etc. ...
Below is a suggestion as to how you might rephrase the text to avoid the problem. That which follows are examples of bad and good code respectively. One should substitute the latter for the former: //This is bad code; //This is good code.
Though both are grammatically correct, but have different meanings. 'We are all mad,' means, 'We are totally mad.' And 'We all are mad,' means, 'All of us are mad.'
The phenomenon and label of the change is one thing, and the result is labeled another thing. In the specific community (of aviation; I don't think I've heard this at all before so I'm assuming it is limited to here), it is simply a change in syntax accompanied by semantic drift. The result, where a passive form is interpreted actively, is called a ...
It’s an example of zero derivation. This means deriving a new word from another word while bypassing the usual derivation rule that involves adding a prefix or suffix such as ‑ify or ‑ize. To illustrate zero derivation, here is an example from the exploding penguin sketch: (1) Oh, intercourse the penguin. [Emphasis added] Monty Python derive ...
Top 50 recent answers are included