- | In 1, Tinkerbell, the subject of the sentence is the predicand, and is thus said to be absent. In 2, the subject and natural predicand is Paris, though we can figure out that the intended predicand was likely Tinkerbell. In 3, the subject of the sentence is the dummy pronoun ''there'', which cannot be a predicand. This causes the sentence to be ungrammatical. In 4, and 5, however, ''absent'' is a preposition, not an adjective and no predicand is needed. Thus, even when no predicand is available, as in 5, the sentence remains grammatical. | + | In 1, Tinkerbell, the subject of the sentence is the predicand, and is thus said to be absent. In 2, the subject and natural predicand is Paris, though we can figure out that the intended predicand was likely Tinkerbell. In 3, the subject of the sentence is the dummy pronoun ''there'', which cannot be a predicand. This causes the sentence to be ungrammatical. In 4, and 5, however, ''absent'' is a preposition, not an adjective and no predicand is needed. Thus, when no predicand is available, as in 5, the sentence remains grammatical. Note that 4 does not assert that "many people are absent the upper classes," so that even when there is a likely subject, it doesn't function as a predicand when the adjunct is prepositional. |
沒有留言:
張貼留言