CLAUSE AS EXCHANGE
4.3 Other elements of Mood structure
4.3.1 Structure of the Residue
The Residue consists of functional elements of three kinds: Predicator, Complement and Adjunct. There can be only one Predicator, one or two Complements, and an indefinite number of Adjuncts up to, in principle, about seven. An example is given in Figure 4-7.
Fig. 4-7 Structure of the Residue
4.3.1.1 Predicator
The Predicator is present in all major clauses, except those where it is displaced through ellipsis.* It is realized by a verbal group minus the temporal or modal operator, which as we have seen functions as Finite in the Mood element; for example, in the verbal groups was shining,have been working,may be going to be replacedthe parts functioning as Predicator are shining,been working,be going to be replaced. The Predicator itself is thus non-finite; and there are non-finite clauses containing a Predicator but no Finite element, for example eating her curds and whey(followingLittle Miss Muffet sat on a tuffet). For the discussion of non-finite clauses, see Chapter 7, Section 7.4, p. 395.
Sister Susie ’s sewing shirts for soldiers
Subject Finite Predicator Complement Adjunct
Mood Residue
O t h e r e l e m e n t s o f M o o d s t r u c t u r e
* Note that the name of this function is ‘Predicator’, not ‘Predicate’. The latter term has been used in traditional grammar, formal grammar and logic. From a functional point of view, its use in accounts of grammar represents an attempt to characterize Rheme and/or Residue.
The function of the Predicator is fourfold. (i) It specifies time reference other than reference to the time of the speech event, that is, ‘secondary’ tense: past, present or future relative to the primary tense (see Chapter 6, p. 309). (ii) It specifies various other aspects and phases such as seeming, trying, hoping (see Chapter 8, Section 8.4, p. 495). (iii) It specifies the voice: active or passive (see Chapter 6, Section 6.3.2, p. 337). (iv) It specifies the process (action, event, mental process, relation) that is predicated of the Subject (see Chapter 5, p. 168). These can be exemplified from the verbal group has been trying to be heard, where the Predicator,been trying to be heard, expresses (i) a complex secondary tense, been+ing; (ii) a conative phase,try+to; (iii) passive voice,be+-d; (iv) the mental process hear. Examples:
All the people in the affected areas are panicking(Text 15) We are going to releasethe document to the press (Text 12) Can you tellus a little about your early life? (Text 7) You’llhave to makeit a lot clearer (Text 10) You’dbetter lookat it (Text 8)
Brazil wasn’t discovered(Text 12)
The Indians had originally planned to presentthe document to President Fernando Henrique Cardoso (Text 12)
There are two verbs in English,beandhave, where strictly speaking the simple past and simple present forms consist of Finite element only, rather than of a fusion of Finite with Predicator. This is shown by the negatives: the negative of is, was is isn’t,wasn’t — not doesn’t be,didn’t be. Similarly with have(in the sense of ‘possess’, not have in the sense of
‘take’): the negative forms are hasn’t,hadn’t, as in Table 4(5). The pattern withhavevaries with the dialect: some speakers treat have‘possess’ just like have‘take’, with negative doesn’t have; others expand it as have +got (cf.I haven’t a clue/I don’t have a clue/I haven’t got a clue). But since in all other tenses beandhavefunction as Predicators in the normal way, it seems simpler to analyse them regularly, as ‘(past/present) + be/have’. An example was given in Figure 4-7 (where strictly (a) would have no Predicator). Note that in the text analysis in Section 4.8 the shorter version is adopted to save space.
Table 4(5)Simple past and present forms of beandhave
past positive past negative present positive present negative
be was, were wasn’t, weren’t am, is, are isn’t, aren’t, (ain’t)
have had hadn’t have, has haven’t, hasn’t
4.3.1.2 Complement
A Complement is an element within the Residue that has the potential of being Subject but is not; in other words, it is an element that has the potential for being given the interpersonally elevated status of modal responsibility — something that can be the nub of
the argument. It is typically realized by a nominal group. So in the duke gave my aunt that teapotthere are two Complements,my auntandthat teapot. Either of these could function as Subject in the clause:my aunt was given that teapot by the dukeandthat teapot was given my aunt by the duke. (These variants contrast in voice; see Chapter 5, Section 5.8, p. 303.) Here are some corpus examples illustrating the assignment of subjecthood and complementhood to elements of the clause (Subject in bold; Complement underlined):
Wealso should ask um ... — And Joanhas been invited. (UTS/Macquarie Corpus) Son (crying): Ithurts. Oh, my little toe, look at it.
Father (to son): Oh, your little toehas been scraped by the — Mother (to Father): Did youscrape it, did you?
Father (to Mother): Must have, accidentally. ... (UTS/Macquarie Corpus)
Imust tell Betty that when I go down at the end of the month. — Yeah! [laughing] Most of ithas been said by Sandy now about the savoury muffins. (UTS/Macquarie Corpus)
Any nominal group not functioning as Subject will be a Complement; and this includes nominal groups of one type which could not function as Subject as they stand, namely those with adjective as Head, for example:
Inspection can be frightening, but staff morale has to be kept high. (Text 97) The clergy’s concern was, of course, still spiritual. (Text 122)
(Note that in a clause such as a right nit/proper barmy was uncle Algernon, wasn’t he?,uncle Algernonis the Subject.)
There is an explanation of this ‘from above’ in terms of function in transitivity: nominal groups with adjective as Head can function in the clause only as Attributes, and the Attribute cannot be mapped to the interpersonal role of Subject. This is because only participants in the clause can take modal responsibility, and the Attribute is only marginally, if at all, a participant. See Chapter 5, Section 5.4.3, p. 219.
It will be noted that the Complement covers what are ‘objects’ as well as what are
‘complements’ in the traditional school grammar. But that distinction has no place in the interpersonal structure; it is imported from the experiential analysis, that of transitivity.
Since the term ‘object’ is strongly associated with the formal analysis of transitivity, we use Complement as the term for this single element within the Residue.
4.3.1.3 Adjunct
An Adjunct is an element that has not got the potential of being Subject; that is, it cannot be elevated to the interpersonal status of modal responsibility. This means that arguments cannot be constructed around those elements that serve as Adjuncts; in experiential terms, they cannot be constructed around circumstances, but they can be constructed around participants, either actually, as Subject, or potentially, as Complement (we shall see in Chapter 5 that all participants are not construed as equal; some are more likely than others to be given the status of Subject). We thus have three degrees of interpersonal
O t h e r e l e m e n t s o f M o o d s t r u c t u r e
ranking or elevation in the clause, as shown in Figure 4-8: Subject — Complement — Adjunct.
An Adjunct is typically realized by an adverbial group or a prepositional phrase (rather than by a nominal group). In my aunt was given that teapot yesterday by the dukethere are two Adjuncts: the adverbial group yesterdayand the prepositional phrase by the duke.
A prepositional phrase, however, has its own internal structure, containing a Complement within it (see Chapter 6, Section 6.5, p. 359). In by the duke,the dukeis a Complement with respect to the prepositionby(which serves as a Predicator). So although by the dukeis itself an Adjunct, and could not become Subject, it has as one of its constituents the duke, which is a Complement at another rank, and could become Subject.
In the case of by the duke, if the duke comes to function as Subject then the preposition simply disappears: the teapot was presented by the duke, the duke presented the teapot.
Similarly with the Adjunct to my aunt; ifmy aunt becomes Subject, then todisappears:that teapot was given to my aunt, my aunt was given that teapot. (The principle behind this is explained in Chapter 5, Section 5.7, p. 280.) But increasingly in modern English the Complement to any preposition has the potential of becoming Subject, even where the preposition has to be retained and hence to function as an Adjunct on its own. For example, inthat paper’s already been written on,that paperfunctions as Subject, leaving onbehind as a truncated Adjunct (Figure 4-9).
Fig. 4-9 Related clauses with same item as (a) Subject, (b) Complement in prepositional phrase
The typical order of elements in the Residue is: Predicator ^ Complement(s) ^ Adjunct(s), as in the duke gave my aunt that teapot last year for her birthday. But, as we have noted, an Adjunct or Complement may occur thematically, either as a WH- element in an
someone ’s already written on that paper
Subject Finite Adjunct Predicator Adjunct
Mood Residue
(b)
that paper ’s already been written on
Subject Finite Adjunct Predicator Adjunct
Mood Residue
(a)
Fig. 4-8 Degree of interpersonal ‘elevation’ in the clause
modal responsibility actual Subject participants
potential Complement
modal responsibility none Adjunct circumstances
interrogative clause or as marked Theme in a declarative clause. This does not mean that it becomes part of the Mood element; it is still within the Residue. As a result, therefore, the Residue is split into two parts; it becomes discontinuous. In that teapot the duke had given to my aunt last year, where that teapot is a marked-thematic Complement, the Residue is that teapot . . .given to my aunt last year. Discontinuous constituents can be represented in the box and tree diagrams as in Figure 4-10.
Fig. 4-10 Discontinuous Residue