1

In sentences like

What Mary bought was a first edition.

which part would be the dependent and which would be the independent clause?

How could I break this down into a formula, something like "wh- clause + something + to be + dependent clause"?

3
  • Although it doesn't quite answer, it may help to look at other questions about wh-clefts: 1 2 3. The Wikipedia page should help too.
    – Stuart F
    Commented Apr 24 at 16:48
  • 1
    What @GrammarCop said. Commented Apr 25 at 1:54
  • The whole sentence is a main clause since it is not dependent on some other element. The construction is called a pseudo-cleft; one where the backgrounded element is placed in a fused relative construction. Briefly, the noun phrase "what Mary bought" contain an embedded relative clause, so your example consists of a main clause and an dependent clause.
    – BillJ
    Commented Apr 25 at 8:25

1 Answer 1

3

The structure of the main clause (independent clause) is:

What Mary bought [Subject - NP]

was [Predicator - Verb]

a first edition [Predicative Complement - NP]

The subject is a fused relative, which means that the head word what has the function of both head noun and relative word, similar to that which. The result is that What Mary bought internally has the structure of a clause, but as a unit is a noun phrase as it can take on the same functions as a noun phrase would in a larger clause.

This makes the sentence very similar to The book that Mary bought was a first edition, where the whole sentence is the main (independent) clause, and the relative clause that Mary bought is the dependent clause.

As far as a formula goes,

[Mary bought] [a first edition]

[Mary bought] [what]

[What + Mary bought] [was] [a first edition]

[Wh... + ...] [be] [substitute for wh...]

However, the 'substitute for wh...' could be any number of things: noun phrase, preposition phrase, clauses of various sorts.

What he wanted was a coke. [Noun Phrase]

Where he wanted to go was up over the hill. [Preposition Phrase]

What he said was that he'd leave tomorrow. [Content Clause]

What he wanted to do was leave tomorrow. [Plain Infinitival Clause]

What we had planned on was him taking the lead. [-ing clause]

There are of course a few nitty gritty rules on what parts of a sentence can or cannot be foregrounded (moved to the substitute for wh... position) in the formula above, but this is the general idea.

1
  • You might add that it's a pseudo-cleft construction.
    – BillJ
    Commented Apr 25 at 8:33

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .