2

In the sentence:

His family and professional life have made him uniquely able to write novels with a family setting which can absorb the conflict between past and present, tradition and novelty, good and evil, common beliefs and the idea of the modern family today.

I am having trouble identifying the main and subordinate clauses. I suspect that that there’s 1 subordinate clause (adjective clause “which can absorb...) but I am not sure.

Thank you for your help!

0

4 Answers 4

5

[His family and professional life have made him uniquely able [to write novels with a family setting [which can absorb the conflict between past and present, tradition and novelty, good and evil, common beliefs and the idea of the modern family today]]]

In the simplest analysis, there is one main clause (the sentence as a whole) and two subordinate clauses, i.e. the infinitival clause “to write novels …”, and the relative clause “which can absorb …”. Brackets surround the clauses.

In more advanced grammar, there are two further subordinate clauses, i.e. the "made him uniquely ..." clause, which is complement of "have", and the "absorb the conflict ..." clause, which is complement of "can".

[His family and professional life have [made him uniquely able [to write novels with a family setting [which can [absorb the conflict between past and present, tradition and novelty, good and evil, common beliefs and the idea of the modern family today]]]]].

9
  • You've mentioned in one comment that infinitival clauses are non-finite and all non- finite clauses are subordinate. So, in the sentence To write The Great American Novel is my aim, there is one main clause (the whole sentence) and one subordinate clause (the infinitival clause To write TGAN...), right? One more thing: In the past I remember you once corrected me over my calling an adjective clause a relative clause, or the other way round. Here you didn't bother to point out this thing. Or are they one and the same thing here?@BillJ
    – user405662
    Jan 15, 2021 at 14:06
  • 1
    Yes, the infinitival To write The Great American Novel is a non-finite subordinate clause functioning as subject of the sentence. So we have a main clause, which is the sentence as a whole and whose verb is "is", and one sub clause. Relative clause is the correct term -- much better than adjective clause. I should have pointed that out! The classification of finite subordinate clauses is based on their internal structure, not on spurious analogies with the parts of speech.
    – BillJ
    Jan 15, 2021 at 14:16
  • 1
    No: In Peter felt that he had been cheated the whole sentence is the main clause. "Peter felt" is not a clause, but just part of one. The clause "that he had been cheated" is embedded inside the main clause (usually called the matrix clause). Importantly, the that clause is complement of the verb "felt" and thus is inseparable from it.
    – BillJ
    Jan 17, 2021 at 10:50
  • 1
    @user405662 It does, but objects are NPs, not clauses. Would it be helpful if I drew a tree diagram of your "Peter" example.
    – BillJ
    Jan 17, 2021 at 11:16
  • 1
    @user405662 I've gone ahead and posted a tree diagram of your "Peter" example.
    – BillJ
    Jan 17, 2021 at 11:29
1

Unless you're referring to some specific novels with a family setting, you need to put a comma before which in your sentence (meaning all the novels with a family setting fit the description provided by the following adjectival clause.) Furthermore, just to make sure it's the novels (and not the family setting) the clause is modifying, it would perhaps be better to italicize the part novels with a family setting.

As regards the clause identification, you have got that right: the clause leading up to novels with a family setting is independent, and the clause following it is dependent.

7
  • Thank you! As I’ve mentioned, I was also thinking that maybe the “to write novels with a family setting” clause could also be a noun clause functioning as adjective complement of “able”. Would that also be correct?
    – Jananlov
    Jan 15, 2021 at 11:47
  • 1
    In the simplest analysis, there is one main clause (the sentence as a whole) and two subordinate clauses, i.e. the infinitival “to write …” clause and the relative clause “which can absorb …”
    – BillJ
    Jan 15, 2021 at 12:08
  • 1
    [His family and professional life have made him uniquely able [to write novels with a family setting [which can absorb the conflict between past and present, tradition and novelty, good and evil, common beliefs and the idea of the modern family today]]]. Brackets surround the clauses.
    – BillJ
    Jan 15, 2021 at 12:16
  • Very useful comments as always. Many thanks, @BillJ!
    – user405662
    Jan 15, 2021 at 12:23
  • 1
    Note also the more advanced analysis, as shown in my answer.
    – BillJ
    Jan 15, 2021 at 12:42
1

@user405662 Here's a simplified tree diagram of the "Peter" example that you mentioned in comments. Note that there are two clauses: the sentence as a whole and the embedded subordinate that clause. I said "simplified" because the expression "been cheated" is also a subordinate clause functioning as complement of "had", and "cheated" is a subordinate clause functioning as complement of "been". But the principle is the same.

enter image description here

Pred = predicator (verb)

9
  • I don't know how to thank you for your painstaking efforts!! That really helped, Sir! @BillJ. Just this bit that remains to be cleared— You said Peter said isn't a clause in itself, but rather part of one. If I were to write instead Peter is said to have been cheated, there is the matrix clause (the entire sentence) and the subordinate non-finite clause to have been cheated, right? The mere presence of a verb (said here and in Peter said) alone doesn't suffice to call part of a sentence a clause. There is one matrix clause and rest of the dependent clauses are non-finite clauses.
    – user405662
    Jan 17, 2021 at 12:00
  • 1
    @user405662 The first sub clause is "said to have been cheated" (comp of matrix verb "is"), and within that clause is the sub clause "to have been cheated" (comp of "said") Within that clause is the further sub clause "been cheated" (comp of "have") and finally within that clause is the sub clause "cheated" (comp of "been"). There are 5 verbs and thus 5 clauses, one main/matrix, and four subordinate.
    – BillJ
    Jan 17, 2021 at 12:20
  • 1
    @user405662 In your example "Peter, who had been cheated, was distraught", the whole sentence is the main/matrix clause. The relative clause "who had been cheated" is subordinate. Then we have the further sub clause "been cheated" (comp of "had"), followed by the sub clause "cheated" (comp of "been"), so 4 verbs altogether and thus 4 clauses, one main/matrix and 3 subordinate.
    – BillJ
    Jan 17, 2021 at 12:30
  • 1
    @user405662 Sorry, I can't see "was crying" in any of your examples??
    – BillJ
    Jan 17, 2021 at 12:41
  • 1
    @user405662 In your example "Peter, who had been cheated, was distraught", the clause "who had been cheated" is a supplement. It is subordinate but it's not part of the matrix clause predicate, which is just "was distraught".
    – BillJ
    Jan 17, 2021 at 13:08
0

[His family and professional life have made him uniquely able to write novels with a family setting](A) [which can absorb the conflict between past and present, tradition and novelty, good and evil, common beliefs and the idea of the modern family today](B).

(A) - main clause

(B) - relative (or adjective) clause (A relative clause is a clause that is attached to an antecedent by a relative pronoun such as who, which, or that. In our case B is attached to "a family setting" by "which").

So, yes, you the subordinate clause is the one you found..

18
  • 1
    True, thank you for pointing it out. Will edit.
    – fev
    Jan 15, 2021 at 11:36
  • 2
    A subordinate clause will have a subject and a predicate. A prepositional phrase will not have that. In "Are you excited to go to France next year?", to go to France next year is a prepositional phrase.
    – fev
    Jan 15, 2021 at 12:08
  • 3
    You're mixing up category and function. "To know you" is a subordinate infinitival clause functioning as complement of "happy". And of course all non-finite clauses are subordinate.
    – BillJ
    Jan 15, 2021 at 12:20
  • 1
    @Jananlov Yes, infinitival clauses are non-finite, and non-finite clauses are always subordinate.
    – BillJ
    Jan 15, 2021 at 12:29
  • 2
    If we count the verbs: "have" + "made" + "write" + "can" + "absorb", = 5 verbs, so 5 clauses altogether.
    – BillJ
    Jan 15, 2021 at 12:58

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.