Недалеко от деревнибыло лесничество. T R
(a) The forestry was near the village.
T R
(b) There was a forestry near the village.
R T
The functional sentence perspective (FSP) in Russian is signalled by the word-order arrangement: the words девушка and лесничество are the theme when they stand at the beginning of the sentence and the rheme when they are in the end-position. In English this difference is made clear by the use of the articles in (1) and the structure with "there is" in (2).
Further examples are:
When she left Ernest's a huge basket of groceries rested at the foot of the pram, and the small fortune of a pound note lay in her coat pocket. (Sillitoe)
Down the long avenue of his man-about-town experience, bursting, as it were, through a smirch of doubtful amours, there stalked to him a memory of his youth. (Galsworthy)
In answer to the ring, appeared a page boy with a silver soup tureen. (Galsworthy)
Compare also the "theme — rheme" arrangement in the following sentences:
He could show you this letter yesterday. Only he could show you this letter yesterday. He could only show you this letter yesterday. He could show you this letter only yesterday. He could show this letter only to you yesterday.
Similar in function is the use of particles and adverbs of emphatic precision in other languages:
Russian: только, именно, исключительно, etc.
Ukrainian: тільки, лише, саме, власне, etc.
French — seulement, uniquement, notamment, juste, etc.
German: пиr, gerade and others.
The role of the order of words used to signal the T—R arrangement is most evident in examples like the following:
And fast into this perilous gulf of night walked Bosinney, and fast after him walked George. (Galsworthy)
Cf. И. Боснии шел быстро прямо в волны ночи, грозившей бедой, и так же быстро шел за ним Джордж.
In the centre of the room, under the chandelier, as became a host, stood the head of the family, old Jolyon himself. (Galsworthy)
Cf. Посередині кімнати, під люстрою, як і лічить хазяїну, стояв глава сім'ї, сам старий Джоліон.
The actual division of the sentence stands in vivid and clear relief in syntactic structures with double inversion by which we mean not only putting the subject before the predicate but separating the verbal predicate. A few typical examples are given below, others will readily occur to the student.
He stooped over the drawer where she kept her jewels; it was not locked, and came open as he pulled; the jewel box had the key in it. This surprised him until he remembered that it was sure to be empty. He opened it.
It was not empty. Divided in the little green velvet compartment, were all the things he had given her, even her watch, and stuck into the recess that contained the watch was a three-cornered note addressed "Soames Forsyte", in Irene's handwriting. (Galsworthy)
The idea about the jewel box is given in the previous sentence; the adverbial adjunct and the predicate "Divided in the little green velvet compartment were" are the starting point of the statement (the theme) and the new information is carried by the subject of the sentence "all the things he had given her, even her watch" — the rheme.
Similarly: "stuck into the recess that contained the watch was "is the theme, and the new information is carried by the subject "a three-cornered note addressed "Soames Forsyte", in Irene's handwriting"— the rheme.
It is interesting to observe that in sentence patterns of the given type the subject often has a lengthy attribute attached to it, which adds to its rhematic quality and semantic prevalence in the whole statement.
In different speech events the components of the functional sentence perspective may correspond to different sentence-elements. In each case variation in the T—R arrangement as motivated by the consituation will be made clear by variation in prosody.
(a) John is going to Spainnext week.
T R
→ an answer to the question: "When is John going to Spain?"
(b) John is goingto Spainnext week.
T R T
→ an answer to the question: "Where is John going next week?"
(c) Johnis going to Spain next week.
R : T
→ an answer to the question: "Who is going to Spain next week?"
(d) Johnis going to Spain next week.
→ an answer to the question: "What is John going to do?"
Syntactic means to express the rhematic quality of the subject include also structures of predication with the passive verb-forms and converted subject introduced by the preposition by.
Fixed phrases of emphatic precision it is... (it was) also can, by situation, lay emphasis on any part of the sentence and intensify its rhematic quality.
Sentences that are introduced by it is (it was...) have special traits of their patterning and are logically interesting. We may reasonably say that they homonymically combine a grammatical and a stylistic meaning always signalled by the speech context or situation.
The use of such structures is always a logical result of the previous linguistic situations, and it is but natural that only the syntactical context can define their functional and stylistic value, with all the subtle shades of subjective modal force potentially implicit in them.
Variation in actualising a word or a phrase in a sentence is organically combined with changes in the order of words. The two devices in such structures appear inextricably involved and are inseparable.
The grammatical arrangement of words in these patterns may well illustrate the fact that the formal and the logical subject in a sentence are two independent elements.
The it-inversion is useful in all types of prose as filling the position of the sentence opener with a structural word that enables postponement of the theme.
The foremost notion in the speaker's thoughts, i. e. the logical subject of the utterance is the element introduced by it is... (it was ...).
When we say It is the teacher that decides or It was the student I was looking for, we mean: the teacher is the deciding person and the student was the young man I was looking for. The relative clause thus does not restrict the teacher or the student but obviously belongs to it. It is coffee I like best of all may be easily transformed into Coffee is what I like best of all. This seems to explain why in such sentences we can have a that-clause or a contact-clause after a word which is in itself so definite that it cannot be further restricted:
It is he that must decide.
It was ourvictory that saved the whole world from fascist slavery.
We cannot fail to see this logical connection in some proverbial sentences, which, analysed differently, will give no sense:
It is an illbird that fouls its own nest.
It is not thegay coatthat makes the gentleman.
It is the early bird that catches the worm.
The linguistic essence of structures with it is, it was has been variously treated by grammarians. Patterns of this sort are sometimes referred to as special emphatic forms of a simple sentence (H. Poutsma, O. Jespersen), complex sentences with emphatic attributive clauses (E. Kruisinga), complex sentences with subordinate subject clauses (G. Curme)1.
Any part of the sentence can thus be made prominent and intensified in its emphatic quality. Examples follow:
a) t h e s u b j e с t of the sentence:
It was not shewho was after them, but they after her. (Galsworthy) The problem in the background of her consciousness was how to help him,
and she turned the conversation in that direction, but it was Martinwho
came to the point first. (London)
b) the object of the sentence:
He it waswhom they cheered. (Bates)
Cf . They cheered him.
Further examples are:
It is not only companionship he will miss, but also his best friends.
It is not this picture I dislike.
c) the prepositional object:
It was not theresults oftheir experiments that we disapproved of, but some diagrams (the results of their experiment — the rheme of the sentence).
It was notto George Forsyte that the mind must turn for light on the events of that fog-engulfed afternoon. (Galsworthy)
... but it was hisdaughter that Soames wanted to gaze from behind Winifred's shoulder. (Galsworthy)
d)the attributive adjunct: It's an ill wind that blows nobody good (proverb).
e) a d verb і a 1 s of time:
It was at this timethat he wrote letters of enquiry to the general... (London)
It was then that she saw with whom she had to deal, the lady was undoubtedly Mrs. Soames, the young man Mr. Bosinney. (Galsworthy)
It was not until they found themselves a second time before the Eve,that he said: "I don't know why you asked me to come, Fleur. It's playing the goat for no earthly reason. (Galsworthy) f) adverbials of manner:
It was thusthat Frank Algernon Cowperwood's Chicago financial career was definitely launched. (Dreiser)
Was it that with the eyes of faith, he saw Bosinney looking down from that high window in Sloane Street, straining his eyes for yet another glimpse of Irene's vanished figure ... (Galsworthy)
1 See: H. Poutsma. A Grammar of Late Modern English. P. 2. Groningen, 1926; E. Kruisinga. A Handbook of Present-Day English. Groningen, 1931; G. O. Curme. A Grammar of the English Language, v. 3. New York, 1935; see also: Л. С. Бархударов, Д. А. Штелинг. Грамматика английского языка. М., 1960; В. Ilyish. The Structure of Modern English. M.-L., 1965.
It was thus simply, that she recorded a scene which had really made a deep and complicated impression on her. (Galsworthy)
With reference to persons, sentence-patterns with the pronoun he or she are also common.
He would indeed be a clever man who could decipher this old manuscript.
He is a good friendwho speaks well of us behind our backs (proverb).
The following comparison with Russian will not be out of place, in passing.
Я тот, которому внимала
Ты в полунощной тишине,
Чья мысль душе твоей шептала,
Чью грусть ты смутно отгадала,
Чей образ видела во сне.
Я тот, чей взор надежду губит,
Я тот, кого никто не любит... (Лермонтов)
It is also interesting at this point to compare the use of Russian and Ukrainian particles это, то, це, in patterns like the following:
О чем этовы задумались? What is it you are thinking
about?
З ким товін про це розмовляв? Who was it that he has spoken
about it to?
Що це ви тут обмірковуєте?? What is it you are discussing
here?
Further examples are:
Спочатку йому здалося, що це якась іграшка заплуталася в такелажі.
Это мышикота хоронят.
Cf. It is the mice that are hurrying the cat.
It was for our dear sake that he did it. = Це тільки для нас він це зробив.
It was of his kindness that I was thinking. = Це саме про його доброту я думала.
«На границе семантики и синтаксиса находится употребление так называемого стилистического (индивидуализирующего) этот..., тот...Местоимение в этом случае сообщает не указательное значение, а значение какой-то эмоционально подчеркнутой известности предмета, с названием которого согласуется:
Люблю воинственную живость потешных марсовых полей... Лоскутья сих знамен победных. Сияние шапок этих медных, Насквозь простреленных в бою!» (Пушкин)
Итак эти страшные письма, эти пламенные требования, это дерзкое упорное преследование,— все это было не любовь. (Пушкин) 1
Note. Instances are not few when this kind of emphasis is rendered in Russian and Ukrainian by using such intensifying adverbs as: именно, саме..
1 Л. А. Булаховский. Курс русского литературного языка, т. 1. К., 1952, р. 325.
As a matter of fact structures with it is (it was) combine two functions: expressing syntactic relations of subordination and laying logical emphasis on what is prominent in the speaker's mind by placing the words expressing the given idea in an unusual position.
Similar developments will be found in French. Structures with с'est, c'était ...qui, que are also known to combine their grammatical value with similar stylistic traits. Patterns of this kind in French are fairly common, e. g.:
C'est le premier pas qui coûte.
Cf. German:
Peter war es der mir alles erzählt hat.
It is to be noted that patterns of this kind are often a logical consequence of a lengthy narration developing in certain sequence. The stylistic aspect of the structure is defined by the context which is always explicit enough to make the meaning clear.
Euphemia Forsyte, who happened to be in the room — she had come round to borrow the Rev. Mr. Scoles' last novel "Passion and Paregoric", which was having such a vogue — chimed in.
"I saw Irene yesterday at the Stores;" she said" and Mr. Bosinney were having a nice little chat in the Groceries."
It was thus, simply, that she recorded a scene which had really made a deep and complicated impression on her. (Galsworthy)
One nice old general, going towards Cigars, was obliged to step quite out of the way, and chancing to look up and see Mrs. Soames' face, he actually took off his hat, the old fool! So like a man!
But it was Mrs. Soames' eyes that worried Euphemia. "She never once looked at Mr. Bosinney until he moved on, and then she looked after him. And, Oh, that look! (Galsworthy)
As B. Ilyish very rightly points out, there are some other points to be made concerning the thematic and rhematic analysis.
The theme need not necessarily be something known in advance. In many sentences it is, in fact, something already familiar, as in some of our examples, especially with the definite article. However, that need not always be the case. There are sentences in which the theme, too, is something mentioned for the first time and yet it is not the centre of the predication. It is something about which a statement is to be made. The theme is here the starting point of the sentence, not its conclusion. This will be found to be the case, for example, in the following sentence: Jennie leaned forward and touched him on the knee. (Wilson) which is the opening sentence of a short story. Nothing in this sentence can be already familiar, as nothing has preceded and the reader does not know either who Jennie is or who ,,he" is. What are we, then to say about the theme and the rheme in this sentence? Apparently, there are two ways of dealing with this question. Either we will say that Jennie represents the theme and the rest of the sentence, leaned forward and touched him on the knee, its rheme.
Or else we will say that there is no theme at all here, that the whole of the sentence represents the rheme, or perhaps that the whole division
into theme and rheme cannot be applied here. Though both views are plausible the first seems preferable. We will prefer to say that Jennie represents the theme, and emphasise that the theme in this case is not something already familiar but the starting point of the sentence.
ONE-MEMBER SENTENCES
The grammatical organisation of one-member sentences has its own traits. Such patterns should naturally be distinguished from two-member sentences with either the subject or the predicate omitted as the case is with ellipsis in sentence-structure.
Synsemantic in character, one-member sentences cover a wide and most varied range of meanings. The context, linguistic or situational, is generally explicit enough to make the grammatical content of the sentence clear.
One-member sentences have no separate subject and predicate but one "main" only instead.
It seems reasonable to make distinction between a) nominal or "naming" sentences and b) infinitival sentences.
Nominal sentences name a person or thing. They are fairly common in direct address, m so-called "word-representations" used to call up the image of the object in the mind of the readers or the person spoken to.
Examples, easily multiplied, are the following:
"Have you noticed Box I — the lady in white satin with the green lace shawl?"
"Yes". Berenice raised her glasses.
"Mrs, Frank Algernon Cowperwood, the wife of the Chicago millionaire. (Dreiser)
The modal meaning of appraisal in one-member sentences is to a considerable extent connected with the use of noun determiners, the definite article, in particular. Both the article and the demonstrative pronoun have here special connotation. Consider the following examples:
The restless, inhuman, and yet so human, angry sadness of the creature's eyes! (Galsworthy)
That fellow Wagner had ruined everything; no melody left, not any voices to sing it. Ah! the wonderful singers! (Galsworthy)
"That woman!" said Soames. (Galsworthy)
Here again, like in many other cases, the subtle shares of modal force and emotional colouring are made clear by the context, linguistic or situational.
The attribute is often expressed by the of-phrase, e. g.:
Would Mr. Mont convince him? Tony was sharp! Her head drooped. The unfairness of it all!Some had everything to their hand, like that pretty wife of Mr. Mont's. (Galsworthy)
Don't talk to me about the country. The doctor said I was to go there for six weeks last summer. It nearly killed me, I give you my word. The noiseof it! (Maugham)
She could think of him now with indifference. She loved him no longer. Oh, the relief and the sense of humiliation!(Maugham)
Oh, the shame of this day! You'll be comin' home with me now. (Dreiser)
If the head-word is a concrete noun the latter is very often used without attributive adjuncts. Sentences of this type are fairly common.
"What a picture", cried the ladies". "Oh, the ducks! Oh, the lambs! Oh, the sweets! Oh, the pets!"(Mansfield)
Such emotionally coloured sentences are often used with interjections or some other words introducing or concluding the direct speech.
Useless for young Roger to say, "Old cat!" — for Euphemia to hold up her hands and cry: "Oh! those three!" and break into her silent laugh with the squeak at the end. (Galsworthy)
Nominal sentences may follow one another in immediate succession, thus making up a string of co-ordinated nominal sentences, as for instance:
... A blue suit, a velour hat, some brown shoes, three pairs of socks with two holes in them, four shirts only a little grayed at the cuffs, two black-and-white ties, six collars, not two new, some handkerchiefs, two vests beautifully thick, two pairs of pants, and brown overcoat with a belt and just two or three nice little stains. (Galsworthy)
Analogous syntactic structures may be traced in Russian and Ukrainian. Compare the following:
Москва... Как много в этом звуке для сердца русского слилось... (Пушкин)
Вечерние сумерки. Крупный мокрый снег лениво кружится около только что зажженных фонарей. (Чехов)
Взяв друг друга за руки, мы с минуту стояли молча. Хорошая минута. (Горький)
Перед окном рабочий чертежный стол. Радио. Экран. Три, четыре книги. (Маяковский)
Гострий струмінь морозного повітря ... осяяні в домах вікна... чиїсь голоси... дзвінки звощика... стережись! І він опинився у глухій, безлюдній вулиці. (Коцюбинський)
Степи і степи... Безлісний, трагічно беззахисний край, переповнений надміром сонця і світла. (Гончар)
In Grammar books one-member sentences are often referred to as elliptical, with some items "understood" or "felt as missing". This, however, must be taken with much reservation, since it is not always possible to supply the missing part from the immediate syntactic environment, and there is insufficient justification for taking ellipsis into account.
Nominal sentences may be coordinated and make up a composite structure with the implication of various adverbial relations, causal or resultative, in particular, signalled by the context, situational of linguistic, the lexical meaning of words, in particular, e. g.:
Ah! Well! Another long heartache in the world — Poor Dinny! (Galsworthy)
Modal meanings are known to be expressed by structural elements of different linguistic levels. Indicating some kind of attitude of the speaker concerning the reality of what is expressed in predication, modality is, in fact, a regular structural feature of any sentence.
The same is true of one-member sentences. In these terms we distinguish:
(a) "Classical" nominal sentences naming an object of reality, asserting or denying its being. This is the same kind of modality as we find in two member verbal sentences when predication is expressed by the verb-form of the Indicative Mood. Compare the following for illustration:
"A black night", master.
Cf. It is a black night.
The two sentence-patterns given above are grammatically synonymous: the former is a verbless one-member sentence, the latter a two-member one. We cannot fail to see that both assert a real fact.
Further examples follow:
And Soames held out his hand. A distracted squeeze, a heavy sigh, and soon after sounds from the young man's motor cycle called up vision of flying dust and broken bones. (Galsworthy)
A distant flash, a low rumble, and large drops of rain spattered on the thatch above him. (Galsworthy)
What a life! What a life! was her one thought. (Dreiser)
"My wife, Professor". (Galsworthy)
She remembered Sir Lawrence's words: "Were there not, my dear? Most valuable fellows!" (Galsworthy)
(b) One-member sentences expressing command — stylistic alternatives of the Imperative Mood:
"Silence woman!" said Mr. Kenwigs, fiercely..."I won't be silent", returned the nurse. "Be silent yourself, you wretch". (Dreiser)
The two sentences (Silence! = Be silent!) are identical in their grammatical content but differ in style and emphatic value. Consider also the following example: "Silence there, will you!" says the beadle. (Dickens) The addition of will you in the last example intensifies the meaning of a categorical command as implied by the nominal sentence.
(c) One-member wish-sentences.
The emotional colouring of such wish sentences can be intensified by interjections, e. g.:
Oh, the fine clothes, the handsome homes, the watches, rings, pins that some boys sported; the dandies many youths of years were. (Dreiser)
(d) One-member sentences of hypothetical modality:
The anomalous and unprotected nature of a room where one was nut known. The look of it. Subsequent explanation to her mother and sister maybe. (Dreiser)
Dizzily, I lauded my knuckless once more again on Gavin's buttons. Dazzling, lights, shouts, rockets, in the sky... Heley's comet, perhaps! (Cronin)
A scandal! A possible scandal! (Galsworthy)
John... heard a car drive up. The lawyers again about some nonsense. (Galsworthy)
(e) One-member conditional sentences. Condition and consequence are contracted to each other, the former is expressed by a nominal one- member sentence and the latter by a two-member one. Reality or irreality will be indicated by the mood in which the verb of the two-member sentence is used in the given context.
INFINITIVAL SENTENCES
In terms of grammatical organisation infinitival sentences should reasonably be subdivided into one-member and two-member sentences. The two groups may well be illustrated by the following examples:
(a) To be unwordly and quite good! How new! How exciting!... To be onewho lived to make people happy. (Galsworthy)
(b) That fellow to talk of injuries! (Galsworthy)
In two-member sentences the infinitive is preceded by a noun or a nounal phrase.
Infinitival sentences are fairly common in spoken English and literary prose.
Like other units of predicative value, they can communicate not only their denotative meaning but also the connotative suggestions of various circumstances of their use.
The context, linguistic or situational, and intonation in actual speech will always be explicit enough to make the necessary modal meaning clear.
Aubrey Green threw up his hands. "Ah! That white monkey — to have painted that!(Galsworthy)
There are interrogative infinitival sentences, e. g.:
Why waste time? Why not stay here?
A suggestion made in such infinitival sentences may be rejected as impossible (nexus of deprecation).
We surrender? Never!
In terms of style and purpose, infinitival sentences merit attention as synonymically related to sentences with finite verb-forms. Identical in their grammatical content, such synonyms differ in stylistic value, and modal force. Compare the following:
| Infinitival sentences | Sentences with finite verb-forms |
| To have brought Fleur down openly — yes! But to sneak her like this! (Galsworthy) | I could have brought Fleur down openly — yes! But how can I sneak her like this! |
| Poor fellow! What a thing to have hadhanging over his head all the time. (Dreiser) | Poor fellow! What a thing had been hanging over his head all the time. |
| ... Would he have hesitated then? Not a moment! Operate, operate! Make certain of her life! (Galsworthy) | ...They must operate, make certain of her life. |
| A host to snatch food from a guest! A host to strike a guest! A gentleman to strike a lady! (Bennett) | How can a host snatch food from a guest? How can a host strike a guest? How can a gentleman strike a lady? |
| Such midgets to have made this monstrous pile, lighted it so that it shone in an enormous glittering heap, whose glow blurred the colour of the sky! (Galsworthy) | How could 'such midgets have made this monstrous pile lighted it so that... Cf. Syn. That such midgets should have made this monstrous pile and lighted it so that...! |
| It seemed to him unfair. To have taken that risk— to have been through this agony — and what agony! — for a daughter! (Galsworthy) | It seemed to him unfair. How could he have taken that risk... |
ELLIPSIS
Ellipsis in sentence-structure is a natural syntactic process in linguistic development presented as normal practices in many, if not all, languages.
Quite a number of elliptical patterns are shortcuts in syntactic usage fixed as a form of linguistic economy by right of long usage.
In terms of traditional grammar, elliptical sentences are generally identified as sentences with the subject or predicate missing. Some grammarians hold another point of view recognising ellipsis also in sentences where the secondary parts of the sentence are felt as missing. Such was A. M. Peshkovsky' s treatment of elliptical sentences in Russian1.
Similar statements will be found in L. S. Barkhudarov's and D. A. Shtellіng's grammar book (1973).
What is felt as implicit in elliptical sentences may be supplied from:
a) the immediate context, e. g.: "How was the play?" she inquired.
"Very good," returned Hurstwood. (Dreiser) "Cold., isn't it?" said the early guest. "Rather". (Dreiser)
b) relevance to a complete grammatical construction of a given pattern, e. g.:
"Doing well, I suppose?"
"Excellent."
"Glad to hear it." (Dreiser)
Ellipsis of a lexeme or constructions (or even parts of constructions) must surely be recognised in the analysis of sentences.
In terms of structure, distinction will be made between the following types of elliptical sentences:
a) omission of the subject:
Looks to me for all the world like an alf-tame leopard. (Galsworthy)
b) omission of the predicate in patterns with there is, there are, e. g.:
1 A. M. Пешковский. Русский синтаксис в научном освещении. М., 1956. See also: Л. С. Бархударов. Структура простого предложения современного английского языка. М., 1966.
He shook a thick finger at the room: "Too many women nowadays, and
they don't know what they want. (Galsworthy)
Soames stole a glance. No movement in his wife's face. (Galsworthy) "Nothing like dissecting to give one an appetite", said Mr. Bob Saweyer.
(Dickens)
c) omission of auxiliary, copulative and other function verbs, e. g.:
You going to take Irene? ('Galsworthy)
d) omission of the subject and auxiliary verb, e. g.: Mean to tell me you didn't know?
Remember that boy? Staying with my father? Going to marry him? "Hallo, Michael! I'm rather late. Been to the Club and walked home". (Galsworthy)
e) omission of the subject and the copula-verb, e. g.: I don't write. Not such a fool. (Galsworthy)
I don't believe I should have done it at your age — too much of a Forsyte, I'm afraid. (Galsworthy)
"How's your wife?" — "Thanks", said Soames coldly, "well enough". (Galsworthy)
Some of the above given types of elliptical sentences have become regular idiomatic expressions, e. g.: colloquial See? for Do you see?
That do? (= will that do?)
See you again tomorrow (= I shall see you again tomorrow).
"I tried it, but it nearly made me leave."
"Not me. I'm nearly ten, see?" He drew a half-pound bar of chocolate from his back pocket: "Take a bit. And break me a piece off as well". (Sillitoe)
But certain restrictions are reasonably to be placed on the recognition of ellipsis, in general, since there is often the danger that we may base some part of our analysis on "understood" items in a context where there is little reason for taking ellipsis into account.
Imperative sentences, for instance, are generally expressed with no subject; and even when a subject is expressed in such sentences, the subject may be somebody or anybody rather than you, e. g.:
Somebody fetch a piece of chalk.
To treat commands, therefore, as sentences from which the subject you has been omitted would be erroneous. Commands and requests seem to be more reasonably described by stating that they are subjectless sentences in which one of a very restricted number of possible subjects may on occasion be inserted.
It would be probably erroneous to say that when a speaker indulges in what grammatically may be referred to as ellipsis, he has always a clear idea of what he omits or neglects to express. It is more likely that the speaker very often has no definite idea of what he is omitting — indeed, that he would rather not be forced to render the idea or thought too carefully and exactly.
If, then, in such cases ellipsis should be assumed, it is because in each instance the complete grammatical construction would require more; it cannot be assumed that the speaker would necessarily fill out his construction, even in his own mind.
The first to be mentioned here are sentences presented by predicatives without a verb, e. g.: Splendid! Charming! Beautiful!
It is often said that in all these sentences the link-verb is (are, was, were) is understood, but this point of view gives no real explanation of the phenomenon. We must, in all probability, admit such patterns as a definite grammatical type, fairly common not only in English but in other languages.
There are elliptical sentences containing a subject and a predicative, which may be either a noun or an adjective e. g.:
Michael not cheerful? (Galsworthy)
Such structures are common in languages which have not developed a copula, i. e. a verb meaning to be, as well as in languages which have a copula but do not use it as extensively as, for instance, English. In Russian and Ukrainian this is the ordinary sentence-pattern, e. g.: Он занят. Он здоров. Вона щаслива. Він здоровий, etc.
By leaving out what may seem superfluous one creates the impression of hurry or stress of business which does not allow time enough to round off one's sentence in the usual way. It is also of importance that proverbs and proverbial sayings should be easy to remember and therefore not too long, e. g.: When angry, count a hundred. When at Rome, do as Romans do.
Observe also the following common sentence patterning:
He will have his own way, no matter what the consequences.
However great the danger, he is always fearless.
Never, no matter what the circumstances, must he dare to do such things.
Here we have really a double occurrence of the phenomenon in question. No matter is a preposed predicative without is, and in the clause which forms its subject, what is also a predicative to the consequences, etc., which forms the subject of the clause.
Peculiar is the use of isolated predicatives with and, e. g.:
He was such a success yesterday, and no wonder.
He may go and welcome. And a good riddance too!
You were angry, and small blame to you.
Not less characteristic are reduced clauses of comparison:
The greater the loss, the more persistent they were.
The more haste, the less speed.
In all such cases the fact that something is left out should not prevent us from recognising the utterance as sufficiently complete to be called a sentence.
He had gone up and down the stairs perhaps a hundred times in those two days, and often from the day nursery, where he slept now, had stolen into his mother's room, looked at everything, without touching, and on into the dressing-room...
Then rapidly to the door, down the steps, out into the street and without looking to right or left into the automobile. (Galsworthy)
A feeling of terseness and of vigour is also produced by the omission of verbs in such fixed patterns of usage as:
Needless to say, facts are stubborn things.
How naughty of him to say so!
In the same way the subject may be expressed by a gerund, e. g.:
No use crying over spilt milk.
No good doing such things.
Very often the subject that follows the predicative is a whole clause, e. g.:
Small wonder that we all liked it immensely.
What a pity we have missed the train!
Patterns like the following: No, he didn't. Why, hasn't he? are referred by R. L. Allen "semi-sentences".
Such sentence-patterns seldom occur as the first utterance in conversation. They are fairly common in "tag"-questions (You don't know Mr. X., do you?) and in short answers (No, I don't).
Distinction will be made here between finite and non-finite sentences:
No, I don't. Why, didn't she? Oh, caught in the act? On your way home? About to go there?
Perhaps the most important difference between finite semi-sentences and non-finite ones is that the former show time-orientation, whereas the latter do not.