Compound and Semi-compound Sentence

 

The compound sentence is a polypredicative construction built on the principle of coordination (parataxis); the clauses of a compound sentence are arranged as units of syntactically equal rank, equipotently, that is to say, compound sentence doesn't have syntactical hierarchy [15].

Paradigmatically, the compound sentence is derived from two or more base sentences, joined as coordinate clauses (otherwise called cojoins) either syndetically or asyndetically. One of them becomes the leading clause, and the other clauses occupy the dependent sentential position and may be called sequential clauses [18]. Though the dependence between the clauses of a compound sentence is not of a subordinative nature, it can be manifested positionally, cf.: She recovered and then she had another seizure. She had another seizure and then she recovered. The sequence of events described in these sentences is totally different because of the specific positioning of the clauses. She became seriously ill and her immune system was compromised. Her immune system was compromised and she became seriously ill. In this examples causal-consequential relations are shown as different. However, the change might be possible if the clauses contain some sort of description, as in: Everything was still; there was nobody around. = There was nobody around; everything was still.

Although acompound sentence constitutes a syntactic whole in meaning and intonation, there has been some controversy concerning its syntactic status. Some linguists maintain that it is not a specific syntactic construction, but rather a sequence of separate sentences similar to that in supra-sentential constructions in the text [5]. For we can easily split the compound sentence into two simple ones, cf.: You can see it coming but there's nothing you can do about it. You can see it coming. But there's nothing you can do about it. Notice that there is a distinct semantico-syntactic difference between the two constructions: the closeness of connections between the events is shown by means of combining predicative units into a coordinative polypredicative sequence, while the connections between the events in a sequence of independent sentences are shown as rather loose.

As stated by L. Iophic and Chahoyan, the grammarians have adopted three ways to look at the problem of the syntactical status of the compound sentence [34]:

1) to explain it by the complete independence and the possibility of isolating each member of a compound sentence without any change of its meaning or intonation;

2) to employ new terms to express more exactly the grammatical peculiarity of this combination of sentences. The terms “double”, “triple” and “multiple” sentences were used by E. Kruisinga and H.R. Stokoe [48];

3) to exclude compound sentence from the structural classification of sentences, which was suggested by Iofik [34].

Some scholars consider that the compound sentence occupies a specific intermediary position in syntax – its place is between a composite sentence and a sequence of independent sentences [8]. But according to M. Blokh, the idea of non-existence of the compound sentence in English should be rejected unconditionally [15].

From the point of view of its structural complexity, the compound sentence can be of two types: two-clause and multiple-clause sentence [4]. Multiple-clause constructions are in turn divided into:

1) “ open ”, which may be further expanded by additional clauses (as in various enumerations or descriptions): We were sitting in the dark, the howls of wolves were barely audible, the cicada noise was growing louder...

2) “ closed ” constructions with their final part joined on an unequal basis with the previous ones [4], e.g.: Luke tried everything: he apologized, he bought her flowers, he even cleaned the apartment – but she wouldn't listen anyway.

Sometimes coordinate clauses may belong to different communicative types: You may live leave now, but who will give us the answer?

The intensity of cohesion between the coordinate clauses can become loose, and in this case the construction is changed into a cumulative one [3], i.e. She wouldn't fall asleep without the teddy-bear; this was one of her cute quirks.

In cases when the coordinate clauses have some common elements the elliptical structures are employed to avoid the repetitions: Some people get roses, and some people get thorns. => Some people get roses, and the others — thorns.

Semi-composite sentence is a semi-composite sentence built up on the principle of coordination [15]. It displays an intermediary syntactic character between the composite and simple sentence. Its immediate syntagmatic structure is analogous to that of an expanded simple sentence because it possesses only one completely expressed predicative unit.

Reasons for existence of the semi-composite constructions:

1) The tendency of speech to be economical;

2) Specific semantic function which differs from the function of the composite sentence proper [8]. The specific feature is that the events rendered by a semi-composite constructions appear to be more closely connected, cf.: Sarah said her goodbyes, and then she left the room. => Saying her goodbyes, Sarah left the room. While the first sentence describes the two events as a succession, the second one represents them as a situational blend, a fusion.

Grammatically speacking, the process of semi-compounding is about overlapping round the identical element. For example, it can be a subject-sharing type: I was extremely tired, but kept on dragging through the business of the day.

Semi-compound sentences may be syndetic and asyndetic: The one on the right showed no signs of decrepitude, as the one on the left. (syndetic); Seeing his attitude, I wasn't sure about our deal. (asyndetic).

Based on the quantitave principle, semi-compound sentences are classified into minimal (They kissed and snuggled like little bunnies.) and multi-base constructions (They've jumped around, kept on singing and were in a great mood all day.).