The Cambridge grammar of the English language /. Rodney Huddleston, Geoffrey K. Pullum p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 0 The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, often abbreviated CGEL by its adherents, is a comprehensive reference book on English language grammar. Its primary authors are Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum. English Grammar. RODNEY HUDDLESTON. Ullil’ersity of Queensland. GEOFFREY K. PULLUM. Ulliversity ()f Caliji)mia, Santa Cru. “CAMBRIDGE.:>.
|Published (Last):||23 August 2017|
|PDF File Size:||2.94 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||7.27 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Cissy has long gone to his reward, I struggle on with my round shoulders and inculcated dislike of the “split infinitive”, and Sir Paul still has the big grin. At first hearing, a traditionalist might want to change “change” to “changes” – “one in a million men changes the way you feel” – though even Neil Tennant might have difficulty getting his mouth round that extra syllable while following the broad, expansive lines of the tune.
Yet a language like English is simultaneously virgin and long clapped-out, so guddleston words for it are still good too. The candidates were excited, even over-excited, by the “imagery”, as they had been taught in school that “imagery” is what counts in literature. We should not expect too much from linguists; they are witnesses not judges. We hang on the words abd style gurus about everything from trainers to varieties of olive oil, but on the subject of our language there is nothing to say, only market research to report.
NOTES ON THE EXERCISES
Such as what Ben Jonson meant when he wrote:. They explain convincingly why “my partner and me” would be no more grammatical; there is no better reason to require English pronouns always to comply with Latin inflection for the accusative case than there is regularly to hear English verse according to Graeco-Roman templates such as the “iambic pentameter” which have been misleading our ears since the 19th century. The Luxury to apprehend The Luxury ‘twould be To look at Thee a single time An Epicure of Me In whatsoever Presence makes Till for a further Food I scarcely recollect to starve So first am I supplied – This would be described as “confused” by today’s undergraduates, who take it for granted that cambridfe is the first requirement of all writing and impute confusion to any writer who stretches them.
One in a million men change the way you feel one in a million men baby, it’s up to me At first hearing, a traditionalist might want to change “change” hudvleston “changes” – “one in a million men changes the way you feel” – though even Neil Tennant might have difficulty getting his mouth round that extra syllable while following the broad, expansive lines of the tune.
The last line of Geoffrey Hill’s poem, “Pisgah”, reads: As a punishment for my sins in a previous life, I recently had to mark 64 examination scripts in which third-year undergraduates reading English at Cambridge offered their comments on the opening of Dickens’s Bleak House: The syntax is pullm what it seems; “one in a million men” is not the subject of a sentence which continues “change the way you feel”.
For descriptive grammarians, “grammaticality” is distinct from “correctness” because, from the standpoint of quasi-anthropological neutrality proper to their task, in language whatever is accepted is acceptable. The descriptive grammarian in quest of systematic clarity will correctly observe that “historically the gerund and present participle of traditional grammar have different sources, but in Modern English the forms are identical. It can be a sign of respect to raise cambriddge objection rather than roll over permissively while re-describing usual practice in such a way as to make a new locution fine by readjusted norms.
Carved on the west front of the cathedral at Chartres, Grammar, a stern dame, looms over two small pupils. Put the “only” elsewhere and the schmooze evaporates: And what is “careworn verbiage”? Hill’s line, though, is a revolving door between Englishes past and present, and intimates a history of moods, verbal and otherwise.
Huddleston and Pullum: Exercises
Perhaps the adjective is here a new portmanteau word made up from “outworn” and “careless”. Such as what Ben Jonson meant when he wrote: A gerund is sometimes hard to distinguish from a present participle, but in “he’s smoking behind the bike-sheds”, “smoking” is a participle, whereas in “smoking diminishes your cambeidge of getting Alzheimer’s”, “smoking” is a gerund.
These 1, pages are not short of terms which will be new to the non-specialist, and they bristle with a more-than-grammatical deliciousness: Or consider some characteristic lines from one of the language’s most grammatically resourceful writers, Emily Dickinson:.
All descriptive grammarians can determine is huddlewton something is “established” or not; their “well” is illicit. Of course they are uncertain about number, and whether number of partners matters. The faint but persistent lavender of the subjunctive about cambdidge “preserve” gives him reason for a moment to regard himself as superseded or at least on amd way into huddelston shade, as if, talking to an elderly relative, he began to feel his own self aged too.
Drinke to me, onely, with thine eyes, And I will pledge with mine; Or leave anx kisse but in the cup, And Ile not looke for wine. He might have meant that the time-honoured conception of “humanity” was in ruins, or that there remained an abiding conception of “humanity in ruins”, kindness amid dereliction, or even that his experiences in France refreshed for him the old notion of “the Fall of Man”, a long-standing ruinousness of the human.
Descriptive grammar can find nothing wrong with the inert officialese of, say, Radio 4, in which forthcoming speeches by government ministers are predictably “major” before they are uttered, and all majorities “vast”, and from which decent words like “many” are disappearing, their place taken by “an awful lot of”.
To delineate the experience of living with and through a language a task beneath or beyond the ambitions anc systematic grammarwe need fresh-minted terms and brilliant redescriptions such as the Cambridge Grammar supplies in its strong arguments for the claim that “English has no future tense”, soon to be reported in the Daily Mail, no doubt, as “dons say english has no hudcleston.
He was not asking Celia to restrict her drinking of healths to his alone but either calling her his “onely” or, more likely, saying that her eyes were the one intoxicant he needed, just as “leave a kisse but in the cup” means that a blown kiss, the mere aftermath of her lips, is all he wants on his. Topics Reference and languages books. Yet even the members of this excellent Cambridge team sometimes fail to confine themselves within the narrow bounds of testimony.
In her right hand, she brandishes a bundle of twigs above the bare torso of a “bad boy”; he’s holding his book with its cover toward him, his eyes are turned up into her disapproving stare and, though he looks as if he’s about to get a hiding, he has a big grin on his face.
Smoke lowering down from chimney-pots, making a soft black drizzle with flakes of soot in it as big as full-grown snowflakes – gone into mourning, one might imagine, for the death of the sun.
Bleak House hudrleston creatively over the boundaries between past and present in order to ask whether the story it’s telling is about the bad old days or the way we live now, to question confidence about history’s direction, to gauge the gap, if gap there be, between the primordial “mud” and the “Mlud” with which the Lord Chancellor is eventually addressed on the novel’s third page.
Advice about style amounts to no more than “aesthetic authoritarianism” or “taste tyranny”, “a universalizing of one person’s taste, a demand that everyone should agree with it and conform to it”. Paul had just released “Yesterday” when Mr Smith began to teach my class clause-analysis and how to avoid dangling participles.
Or consider some characteristic lines from one of the language’s most grammatically resourceful writers, Emily Dickinson: The grammatical uncertainty of juncture was apt to his forlornness and to his hopes as he wondered what would come next, how the future might or might not be joined to the past. She holds an open hiddleston in her left hand, beneath which sits a “good boy”, notably round-shouldered, already vested in what is huddldston a monk’s habit, his fingers tracing the page he’s intently squinting at.
Because linguists busy themselves with “actual usage” “synchronic” study of the language, in their termsthey are professionally bound to scant other, earlier usages; the “long-standing” must always give way to the “actual”. Very few observed the prime syntactical fact about the novel’s first page: These will have been in France. For the purposes of linguistics, sharp focus on current English is entirely legitimate, but there are things we may, and perhaps should, want to know about our language other than those synchronic description can reveal.
Language too is an affair which, from one point of view, is always just in the flush and tremor of beginning while, from an other, quite as sharp-eyed a point of view, it continues to run down foreseeable grooves formed by accumulated habit.
To those grammae have interests in language other than those of the linguist, “synchronic study” can at times seem like a polite name for parochialism. The Cambridge Grammar spends 20 extremely well-observed pages on “number and countability” in current English, and would dismiss the claim that “one” should take a verb in the singular; “one” with a plural verb is not looseness but “usage”.
Dickinson’s vaults and swivels resolve themselves into plain sense, as a paraphrase shows: The Cambridge Grammar observes wearily: The pedantic carper is, however, right and on the verge of a discovery; there is something odd about that chorus, and its oddness is apt to the situation in which two, previously promiscuous homosexuals shakily embark together on a possibly monogamous future. Higher education English and creative writing Ben Jonson reviews.