Consider these sentences:
"He said that the laptop is shut off."
"He said that the man is strong."
If I am not mistaken, traditional grammar would label everything after "he said..." as a subordinate clause, also called a dependent clause.
However, it appears to me that if you chose to consider the word "that" as a type of "connection word" (which might even be omitted) what follows looks remarkably like an independent clause.
"The laptop is shut off."
"The man is strong."
The problem is with the definitions of "dependent clause", found basically everywhere:
A dependent clause is a group of words that contains a subject and verb but does not express a complete thought. A dependent clause cannot be a sentence.
A dependent clause is a group of words with a subject and a verb. It does not express a complete thought so it is not a sentence and can't stand alone.
A dependent clause is one that cannot stand alone as a sentence. A dependent clause will function as an adjective, and adverb, or a noun. A dependent clause ...
Yet, those phrases "The laptop is shut off." or "The man is strong." do appear to express complete thoughts, and could be sentences.
How can you say "The laptop is shut off" (or any other statement spoken by a person).. "can't stand alone" or "does not express a complete thought"? They look like fully complete independent clauses.
"The sky is blue". "He said the sky is blue." The dependent clause obviously could stand alone.
Are the definitions of "dependent clauses" misleading?