.

!i 7.2 Gaps and antecedents

gap function, as in He did it for that reason. The same applies, of course, to other relative
expressions.
In [zoiii] the antecedent for the gap in the hollow clause is not overtly expressed. But
it is understood, by virtue of being subject of an imperative, as you, and this can realise
the gap function: It is hard to please you. In Pat; wants_; to be hard [to please_;],
the antecedent (the subject of the be clause) is likewise missing, but this time it is
recoverable from the superordinate want clause.
Mismatches
There are a number of constructions where the matching requirement [22] is not strictly
observed. They are illustrated in [27], but as all are dealt with elsewhere in the book only
a summary commentary is needed at this point.

1088

Chapter

12

Relative constructions and unbounded dependencies

occur in post-verbal position: instead of *I find that no one realised such action might
be illegal surprising we need the version with extraposition I find it surprising that no one
realised such action might be illegal. In [vi J the preposed content clause could not replace
the gap because the latter is complement of the preposition on, which does not license
complements of this category: it requires an NP (see Ch. 11, 8.3, for further discussion
of this very marginal type). Finally, [vii] has preposing of a predicative complement NP
from within a concessive PP. Here there is a more systematic departure from the form
found in non-preposed position, with the latter requiring an indefinite article: Although

she is g brilliant advocate, she's unlikely to win this case.

Q,9pi~W!J.1:iPP~Pfunpq1,m.9e~Ldependency constructions
1~,isp,~i$ip~Jqr~eitai1J,.1111bounded dependency constructions to combine in such a way
;fl~}~
the. anttcedent in the other. In the following, for example, an open

fu~t\th~[a~::1n

7.3 Location of gaps

the value of xin the proposition 'You insisted that we needx' ':and the intended meaning
of [ii] is similarly "I told her the value of x in the proposition 'That we need xis agreed'".
This meaning can in fact be expressed by means of the extraposition construction: I told
her what it is agreed that we need.

The structure for the interrogative clause in [31i] is as follows:

Prenucleus:
NPi

Nucleus:
Clause

1089

1090

Chapter 12 Relative constructions and unbounded dependencies

These have the same grammatical structure, differing only lexically, with [i] having
write and [ii] despise as the verb of the relative clause. But they differ significantly in
acceptability: [i] is clearly acceptable, while [ii] is very unnatural. This difference has a
semantic explanation. The relative clause combines with the antecedent subject to form a
nominal that denotes a class of subjects. In the case of [i], this class has some coherence:
to say of some subject that Steven Jay Gould wrote a book about it points to a selection
of significant topics in areas like evolutionary biology, geology, palaeontology, etc. The
class denoted by the nominal in [ii] has no such coherence. What would have to be true
of a subject in order for it to be an x such that Steven Jay Gould despises a book about x?
Someone, at some time in history, has to have written a book about xthat Gould despises
for some reason (it is badly written, or was plagiarised, or has annoyingly pretentious
page design, or is full of mistakes, or whatever reason there might be). The subject in

~ 7.3 Location of gaps

(See Ch. 10, 7.12, for discussion of such ambiguities in open interrogatives.) In [iv] the
content clause is complement of an adjective rather than a verb.
(d) Closed interrogative clause in complement function
[37] i There are several books; here [that I'm not sure [if you've read_;]].
ii The actor had to be careful with the amount of venom poured into a character [who;
in the end we don't know [whether to hate or pity_;]].
iii 'tt woman boarding in front of me was carrying a huge sports bag; [that the cabin
crew wondered [whether there was going to be enough room for_;]].
Interrogative content clauses accept gaps much less readily than declaratives. Examples
are rarely found in published material, though [ii] is an attested example from a weekly
magazine. Acceptability seems to diminish quite rapidly with increasing complexity, with

1091

1092

Chapter

12

Relative constructions and unbounded dependencies

(g) pp
[ 40]

ii
iii
iv
v
vi

Some of us; he wouldn't even speak [to_;].

This is the knife; [you should cut the tomatoes [with_;]].
1What day; will you not be able to return the book [until_;]?
"Here is a list of the objections; [that they went ahead [despite_;]].
*You pay me;, I'll do it [if_;].
"It was this proposal; [that they sacked me [because I criticised_;]].

In [i-iv] the gap is complement of a preposition and has an NP as antecedent. This

results in what is called a stranded preposition - a transitive preposition with the complement missing but understood. It is a very common construction except in formal
style: see Ch. 7, 4.i. Stranding is most generally permitted when the PP is in complement function, as in [i]. With PPs functioning as adjunct, acceptability depends on the

fi

7.3 Location of gaps

Examples [i-ii] have the gap itself in complement function, but this time - in contrast to
[41] - the result is very clearly ungrammatical. Preposing must apply to the whole NP:
The insinuation that it was my (au]!; I emphatically reject_; and The question how the
accident happened; they haven't begun to address _;.26 In [iii-v] the gap is within the
declarative content clause functioning as complement in NP structure. In general, this
construction is oflow acceptability. There is, for instance, a very sharp difference between
[iii-iv] and comparable examples where the clause is complement of a verb: How much;
did the secretary report that it would cost_;? and He's someone; [that I agree we should
not have appointed_;]. However, the construction is by no means wholly excluded. It
is most acceptable in examples containing collocations of light verb + noun such as
give an assurance, make the claim, hold the belief, etc., which have essentially the same
meaning as the verbs assure, claim, and believe respectively (cf. Ch. 4, 7). Thus [v] does

1093

1094

Chapter 12 Relative constructions and unbounded dependencies

applies to finite clauses, as seen in the example used in the introduction to this section,
[31ii].27

(k) Coordinates
We saw in 7.2 that a gap cannot itself function as a coordinate (cf. [ij viiij}, but there
are also constraints on the occurrence of gaps within coordinates. Compare:
[46] i Who was the guy; [that [Jill divorced_;] [and Sue subsequently married_;] J?
11 *Who was the guy; [that [Jill divorced Max] [and Sue subsequently married_;]]?
In general, a gap can occur within a coordinate element only if a gap with the same
antecedent occurs in all other coordinates in the coordination construction. In [i], for
example, each of the two coordinates (enclosed by the inner sets of brackets) con-

7.5 Parasitic gaps

11'Z~jts1 will this piecej be easier [to play_

j on_ ;] ?

and

. ~m;~H~~se,
the underlining marks the antecedents of the
)p.g as object of the verb play, the other as object of the preposition on.
~~~~h:~~st11!we;1:1t~! as reflected in a main clause such as Kim will play
\ :' ~'.::t;l'P.cogtailli,g the noun piece will thus be the antecedent for the
... ;yj::~'cLth~'N'pi:~.ntairiing the noun instruments will be antecedent

!{+:kiW .

J(~~kl~ffqfpn.,. . . .

,e:119:ted,f;r.Oifqh~,diagra~

that the first antecedent is linked to the second gap, and

1095

1096

Chapter

12

Relative construct
ions and unbounded dependencies

explained in Ch. 15, 2.1, a distinctive property of coordination is that such processes as
relativisation must apply 'across the board': if relativisation applies within one coordinate it must apply within all. This is what accounts for the difference in grammaticality
in [ 46], where [i] satisfies the across-the-board requirement and [ii] violates it.
Parasitic and across-the-board gaps can combine, as in the following attested example,
where the parasitic gap is marked by an initial subscript 'p':
[52]

Fairbanks reached for a towel, a clean one and not the scarcely crumpled one; [that
Como re himself had [used_;] [and left_; thriftily on the ledge below the mirror
rather than consign P-i to the linen basket]].

The outer brackets enclose a relative clause within which there is a coordination functioning as complement of the perfect auxiliary have. The two coordinates, enclosed by the

1098
6.3 Superlatives n64
6.3.1 Inflectional and analytic superlatives 1164
6.3.2 Non-superlative uses of most 1165
6.3.3 Absolute and relative superlatives 1166
6.3.4 The structure of superlative phrases 1167

1099

Preliminaries

1100

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

comparisons in [1] compare the two buses (the one I took and the one I had taken last
time) for identity.
Scalar comparison can be regarded as the more central type: inflectionally marked
comparatives are scalar and, within the inequality category, comparative clauses are rare
in the non-scalar constructions.
Equality vs inequality
These terms apply reasonably transparently to scalar comparison. If Kim is as old as Pat,
then Kim's age is (at least) equal to Pat's, and if Kim is older than Pat, their ages are not
equal.
We do not so readily invoke these terms in describing the meaning of non-scalar
comparisons (for example, I took the same bus as last time does not mean "The bus I took

. s 1.2
[3 J

i Jill is as clever as Liz.

ii Jill isn't as clever as Liz.

Term and set comparison

[Jill may be cleverer J

[Jill must be less clever J
<,

Example [i] is consistent with Jill being cleverer than Liz: we can say Jill's as clever as Liz,
somewhat more so in fact.3 Scalar equality therefore normally excludes only the relation of
inferiority: it gives a lower bound. And the negative in [ii] accordingly entails inferiority,
ruling out both the case where Jill and Liz are equally clever and that where Jill is cleverer.4
This is just as well for the practical use of the language, for while some scales (such as
those involving physical size) allow precise measurement, most do not. It would normally
be nonsensical to ask whether Jill is exactly as clever as Liz, for example.
The extent to which a comparison of equality is compatible with superiority will
vary with the content and context: He made as many as eighteen mistakes carries a much
stronger suggestion that perhaps exact equality holds, for example, than He made as

1101

1102

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

the comparison is between Kim's version (primary) and Pat's version (secondary); in
this case there is no immediate syntactic relation between the NPs expressing the two
terms, but Pat's is lower in the constituent structure, and in that sense can be regarded
as subordinate relative to the primary term.
The examples in [5ii] express comparison between the members of some set: in the
type of set comparison illustrated here, one member of the set is picked out as being at
the top of the scale. In [iia] the set is identified by the NP them all: the comparison is
between the members of this set with respect to how many mistakes they each made,
with Ed ranked at the top of the scale. It is possible to omit the PP of them all, in which
case the set being compared is identified contextually. In [iib] the comparison is between
the prices paid for paintings by Cezanne, and again one is picked out as being at the top
of the scale.

[9]

1.3 Comparative complements, governors, and phrases

TERM COMPARISON

Scalar
Non-scalar

Equality
Sue is as good as Ed.
Sue is in the same class as Ed.

Inequality
Sue is better than the other two.
Sue goes to a different school from Ed.

~Syntactic differences
The two most important syntactic differences between term and set comparisons are the
following:
[10] i Comparative clauses occur only in term comparisons, where they are associated
with the secondary term.
ii Superlative and comparative grades are used in comparisons of inequality; the
superlative is restricted to set comparisons, while comparative grade is used

1103

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

and expanded comparative complement including it. As applied to the examples in

[12], this gives:
[13]

i BARE COMPARATIVE COMPLEMENT

ii EXPANDED COMPARATIVE COMPLEMENT

we did last year

than we did last year

b1
th

last year's
to last year's

The main prepositions that occur in the expanded complement vary to some extent
according to the type of comparison:

[14]
SCALAR
NON-SCALAR

EQUALITY

INEQUALITY

[1

as
as, to, with

than, to
than, to, from

Comparative governors

 1.3

Comparative complements, governors, and phrases

by the adverb as which introduces the comparison. In [ii] it is the preposition as itself
that introduces the comparison.
Comparative phrase
We apply the term comparative phrase to a phrase containing a comparative governor.
In [12], for example, the comparative phrases are more satisfactorily than we did last year
and superior to last year's. In other cases it may be a larger phrase:
[17]

This may be a more serious problem than you think.

Although more modifies serious, it is the phrase headed by problem that is the comparative
phrase. This is another place where we can invoke the metaphor of upward percolation:
the comparative feature percolates up from more to more serious and thence to the whole
NP. We take up in 2-4 below the issue of how far such upward percolation can go, i.e.

1105

1106

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

vi This illustrates the delayed right constituent construction, which is more often found

with coordination than with subordination (and hence is described in Ch. 15, 4.4).
A typical coordinate example would be Three-quarters of them oppose and only 15 %
actually support the proposed office reorganisation. The final NP, the proposed office
reorganisation, is understood as object of both oppose and support. If the comparative
complement were in final position, it would need a separately realised object: More

people oppose the proposed office reorganisation than support it.

The most usual position for the comparative complement is at the end of the clause
containing the comparative phrase, as in [i.Si-iii]. This means that if the clause contains material (other than the comparative complement itself) following the head, the
complement will characteristically be postposed, very often to a position outside the
comparative phrase. In [18ii-iii] postposing is optional: we can also have She's more

s 2.1

Reduction of comparative clauses

~ Variables vs constants

The comparison in [ri] is between how good it was and how good I had expected it to
be - but the sentence doesn't say how good it actually was or how good I had expected it
to be. To describe the meaning we therefore need to invoke variables: we will informally
represent the primary term as "It was x good" and the secondary one as "I had expected
it to bey good': The governor, the comparative inflection, then indicates that x exceeds y:
"x > y". This kind of comparison is thus to be distinguished from that where one or both
of the terms is a constant. Compare, for example:
[2]

i It was better [than I had expected].

ii I stayed longer (than six weeks].
iii Sue is just like her mother.

[variable-variable comparison]
[variable-constant comparison]
[constant-constant comparison]

1107

1108

Chapter13 Comparative constructions

(a) Obligatory absenceof counterpart to the comparative governor
The minimum reduction is seen in such examples as:
[4]

i The swimming-pool is as deep as [it is_ wide].

ii *The swimming pool is as deep as [it is very I quite I two metres wide].
The comparative governor, the underlined as, is a degree modifier of deep in the matrix clause, and the corresponding position in the bracketed comparative clause must
be empty. This requirement is satisfied in [i], where the position of degree modifier
(modifying wide) is empty, while [ii] is ungrammatical by virtue of this position being
filled. The inflectional suffix -er counts as equivalent to the analytic marker more, so that
the position indicated by '_', which we will refer to as the gap, must likewise remain
empty in The swimming-pool is deepQ than [it is_ wide].

 2.1

Reduction of comparative clauses

examples are:
(7]

She wrote more~

than [her husband wrote _novels].
You couldn't be a worse polo-player than [you are a _singer].
Ill He is more afraid o(her than [she is_ of him].
rv There is no more reason to invite him than [there was to invite her].
11

In [i] novels contrasts with plays and hence we have an overt counterpart to the comparative phrase: both the comparative phrase and its counterpart are NPs functioning
as object of their clause, the former headed by plays, the latter by novels. Example [ii]
is similar, except that the comparative governor is here within an attributive adjective
(worse) rather than a determinative (more). In [iii-iv] the contrast lies not in the heads of
the comparative phrases (afraid and reason) but in the post-head dependents:'_ of him'

1109

1110

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

non-comparatives:
[10] i *J didn't enjoy the concert as much as [Kim had enjoyed_].
ii "Kim enjoyed the concert and I enjoyed_ too.
The reduced VP is commonly headed by the verb do, which in some varieties of
English is best considered as an auxiliary verb that can be stranded like those in [ 8] and
in other varieties as a pro-form (see Ch. 17, 7.2):
[11) i I get it wrong more often than [she does].
ii We treat our apprentices better than [they do their career employees].
Here too the reduced comparative clauses are formally identical to non-comparative
clauses found in other anaphoric constructions: I often get it wrong and she does (too); We
treat our apprentices well and they do their employees. And again the possible replacements

2.1

Reduction of comparative clauses

to just a past participle (than expected). In [14] we give a sample of verbs figuring in
this construction, with the annotation '-Aux' indicating the possibility of omitting the
auxiliaries.
[14] acknowledge
assume -AUX
imagine
like
remember
suppose

admit -AUX
believe
imply
plan -AUX
require -AUX
suspect

allow
dream
indicate -AUX
predict -Aux
schedule -AUX
think -Aux

anticipate -Aux
expect -AUX
intend -AUX
realise -AUX
show -AUX
warrant

appear
hope
justify
recognise
suggest
wish

Dream takes the preposition of. The Ariadne was going to be much hotter than our space
people had ever dreamt of.

1111

1112

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

In [i] just the verb is optionally omitted (we could insert loved or did), whereas in [ii]
the subject is omitted as well as the verb (we could supply he sent or he did).
The resultant structures are again like ones found in various types of coordination:

(19] i MaxlovedJillandshe_him.
ii He sent postcards to his friends and_ letters to his mother.
As before, the permitted expansions are different: in (19], for example, we could expand
to and she loved him even more or and he sent many letters to his mother, but the even
more and many cannot be added in (18] by virtue of conditions (a)-(b ). There are also
differences with respect to negation. In (18] the comparative clause is interpreted as
positive ("as she loved him", "as he sent letters to his mother"), even though the matrix
clause is negative - and changing the matrix to positive has no effect on the polarity of

'

(21)

SUBJECT

11

a. She is older than [I_].

a. She is older than [me_].

. 2.2

Than/as+ single element

NON-SUBJECT

b. "The decision affected Kim more than [_I].

b. The decision affected Kim more than [_me].

If the pronoun is understood as object or complement of a preposition it is accusative, as

in unreduced clauses: The decision affected Kim more than it affected mel*I. If it is subject,
the choice of case depends on the style. In formal style it appears as nominative, again as
in unreduced clauses: She is older than I am; but informal style has accusative, as in [iia],
where the missing verb cannot be inserted. Some speakers find I obtrusively formal and
me obtrusively informal, and therefore avoid both constructions by retaining the verb:
She is older than I am.
(g) Restrictions on omission of subject

1113

1114

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

be syntactically like Bob is similar to Liz, where there is no question of Liz being a
clause.
One initial point to make is that there are unquestionably some constructions where
a single element following than/ as is an immediate complement, not a reduced clause:
[25]

I saw him as recently as Monday. It is longer than a foot. He's inviting more
people than just us. He's poorer than poor. Sue deals with matters such as
sales. I saw no one other than Bob.

The underlined expressions here can't be reduced clauses, because they can't be expanded
into clauses: cf. *I saw him as recently as I saw him Monday; *I saw him as recently as Monday
is; and so on.
The question then is whether all single element constructions should be treated alike

~~

. 2.2

~F~i)p~~tiou~ \Jompare;Jorexample:

Than/as+ single element

,

~~~~DJ~~r~iiio/!l;;;:tr;;Z::J:;:Jr;d
:!l~;uf[a;;a~s~~~n that Pat will.

i\.:1A;~:..
.

't':i~rrz()refijiportant to do it welt than to do it quickly.

. 1t,:rl~ll;:is'diff(trent from to do it quickly.
We'&'-~y~.de'Clarative content clause in [ia] and an infinitival clause in [iia], but

~h~$~ ~ilnn'oi'.function as complement to such prepositions as to and from. It's not just a

' n/'4f .al10'111~a

large range of expression types, however: the important point

,~9i1atrs~jll~,fiaJ:is not licensed by than but by confident, and similarly the
~:;~,"fii~J'is;Jkensed by important. On a reduced clause analysis than in [i]

., .. ..

. nt~v~'.~l~u~e b~t<:~;comparative clause as its immediate complement: that

. . . . 'deredas a content clause, is complement of the understood confident, the item

1115

1116

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

(c) Pp~en,.tial for expansion

A j:]:i_.d factor is alr~~dyj.inplic;it from the discussion above. Examples like [23] (Bob is as
gel}~~o~~~,Uz) cmJ:>eexpan,.d,~4jntp obvious clausal structures:
[28] i
"' ji;

a; Bob is as generous as Liz.

.i.,Jenj0yed)t)Jlore.~han the film~ .

b. Bob is as generous as Liz is.

b. I.enjoyed it more than I enioyed the film.

Iti~~,o~~;~ilia~su9hexpapsioriispossible; it is an important advantage of the reduced clause

ancilysis. j:l:iat it brings outthe difference between such examples and those like [25], where
n~5:},'f<ll}Sionis possible. At the same time, it ties in with the semantics. Bob is as generous
af.f;~.<;~s(ti}tef preted as a.variable comparison ("Bob is x generous, Liz is y generous, and x is
(a~le~it)i~~~alto /'),whereas this kind of interpretation does not apply in [25 J (recall the
cpuir'~i\.he~eenyariable':Nariable and variable-constant comparisons illustrated in [2] of
-~'T:} . ~:N"~.;;</><,- _ ,_f,.<t _: ":".. '._4_, .:--:~.
:_
_-.
1M~t~over,;1theiredcedcla~s~ analysis offers a straightforward account of the ambiguity

. 2.2 Than/as+ single element

f3'ifr;fjs;~wrJ>lipneAAng(!lq,/Jefor~

, 1.) ,);cgJ.Ht!Ehqngd_!).ngel~

Liz ...

more, often

than Liz. ( = [ zovl)

H'~tiTil~~~ib~t~tn(! k~rrie ahibiguicy' as [ii], being expandable to either (a) before Liz phoned
ji./%Jj\<5,.ff:~ft,~eJffesh~R!iqru;dLiz. But itwould be wrong to say that Liz is a reduced clause
. ;~Ju~.\;fi!$\:rigt~d.'~b()ve),a pronoun in this position cannot appear in nominative
',~phb~(d,M_ng(!l42:PJfore:She is ungrammatical. It would therefore be wrong to treat
exp~ridability as sufficient to establish that a reduced clause analysis is valid.

~ ~~1,~~?sj:~hJ~Wi,1,\~~~complement analysis

~e}i()~-present two arguments against treating every phrasal complement to as or than

~~;~ID~:~g/6,(r~dused'clause. Again, though, we note that there are complicating and
,: . ~. : :' h' : i:f' , -~ ,_ '.-'---~~>!lit>1:'1:fr
~\""~;' ~vi:;-,~~ ~"<' ''. _ - ~- ~,
we;Jkl:!nirig consitletatidns; tlie'argumerits are riot' conclusive.
-=

"."

,_ :"

- _

__ ,

1117

1118

Chapter

13 Comparative constructions

There is nothing special about [i]: what we gave her is not significantly different from
any other NP, such as the book we gave her, for example. Note, in particular, that [i]
could be expanded to She apparently liked it more than she liked what we gave her. The
meaning of [ii] (at least in the salient and intended interpretation) is "She apparently
liked it more than we liked it". Here what we did can't be expanded: on the contrary,
what can be dropped to give She apparently liked it more than we did. It is therefore
using a fused relative NP instead of a comparative clause. This second construction is
commonly encountered in speech, but it is not normally found in published writing: it is
very doubtful whether it can be regarded as belonging to the standard variety of English.

2-3 Likeness arid contrastbetween comparativeclause and matrix

2-4 The comparative phrase

[3 7] i The trains arrive on time more often than [they do in England].

ii It tastes better than [it does with sugar in].
The implicit elements are recoverable deictically (i.e. from the time, place, or other
circumstances of the speech act) or anaphorically (from previous mention). In [i] the
contrast is between England and the country we are in or have been talking about; in
[ii] we understand "like this/that, i.e. without sugar in".

Temporal contrasts
The main contrast may be a matter of time, expressed by tense:
[38) i Itisbetterthan[itwas].

ii It wasn't as good as [it is now].

1119

1120

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

In [ i] the comparative phrase is more powerful (than my car had been ):13 we understand the
secondary term as "my car had been ypowerful". In [ii], however, the comparative phrase
is not more powerful but the larger sequence a more powerful motor-bike: this is why the
example is anomalous, for we have to interpret the secondary term as "my car had been a
y powerful motor-bike". Instead of this we need examples like [iii], where the secondary
terms "I had had !!ypowerful motor-bike" and "mine had been ;!ypowerful motor-bike"
make sense. As suggested in 1.3, we can think of the comparative feature as 'percolating'
upwards from the AdjP to the NP in which it functions as attributive modifier.
AdvP
Compare similarly:
[41] i She spoke more persuasively than her father had_.

3 Metalinguistic comparison

In [i-ii] the comparative phrase is the NP more topics, not the PP on more topics: in [i] the
missing subject is understood as "y many topics", not prepositional "on y many topics",
and in [ii] on cannot be omitted from the comparative clause, as would be possible (and
indeed required) if it were part of the counterpart to the comparative phrase.14 In [iii],
however, the comparative phrase is the PP in a far less buoyant frame of mind: we interpret
the comparative clause as "he had left us in a y buoyant frame of mind" and it is not
possible to add in after us.
~t

w2~~Pf}::~~q:<;:?S,~~,Q~ 1,Jpwc,irds percolation

o~~,fi~as occasio~~l ex~rriples where the upwards percolation goes beyond what is allowed
f~"t,;9~.the:cipoy~:~q~ount. In the followingit applies with postpositive AdjPs:

[44JL j,'. fhir~~~fd Ji~;~ ~sface risks greater than President Kennedy's most influential

advisers

1121

1122

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

degree to which his brother is old. In [ii] we have a variable-constant comparison (like
Kim is taller than six foot): middle-aged denotes a segment on the scale expressed by
old and [ii] puts his age beyond that part of the scale. What [iii] says, however, is that
Ed is more properly described as old than as middle-aged: we call this metalinguistic
comparison because it is concerned not with segments on the age scale but with the
relative applicability of the linguistic expressions old and middle-aged.
Syntactically, metalinguistic comparison differs from ordinary comparison in that it
allows only analytic comparative forms: older in [ii], for example, excludes this metalinguistic interpretation. The construction here also excludes a comparative clause as
complement to than/ as: "Ed is more old than he is middle-aged.
Other examples of metalinguistic comparison are:

[I]
i
ii

ADJECTIVE
ADVERB

4.1.1

More and less

PLAIN

COMPARATIVE

SUPERLATIVE

tall
soon

taller
sooner

tallest
soonest

Grade differs from other inflectional systems in English in that only a subset of adjectives
and adverbs inflect: with others the comparative and superlative categories are marked
analytically (i.e. by means of a separate word), rather than inflectionally (i.e. by morphological modification). For the comparative category, analytic marking is by means
of the adverb more, which we will represent as more. (with subscript 'a' mnemonic for
'analytic'). Consider, then:

[2]

INFLECTIONAL COMPARATIVE

a. This is shortgr than that.

ANALYTIC COMPARATIVE

b. "This is more. short than that.

1123

1124

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

little. As such, it contrasts with the plain form:

[6]

PLAIN FORM

a. We have little money.

INFLECTIONAL COMPARATIVE

b. We have lessi money than we need.

Again, the less a that modifies the adjectives in [5 J does not contrast with the plain form
little: *This is little porous. The little in [ 6a] belongs to the determinative category and is
sharply distinct, in terms of both syntax and meaning, from the adjective little of a little
house, etc.'5
Difference in relations of

more. to Jessa and of more, to less,

Morea and less. are markers of comparison of superiority and inferiority, respectively.
If we include the comparison of equality, we have the three terms shown in [7] (with

4.1.1

More and less

would be applicable. How much money do you have?, for example, doesn't presuppose
that you have much money, whereas How little money do you have? would generally be
used only in a context where it has been established that you have little money.
Adjectives
Some pairs of adjectives show the same behaviour as much and little, whereas for others
the relations are different. Consider the following comparisons of superiority:

[IO] i a. Kim is older than Pat.

ii a. Yours is better than mine.
iii a. Monday was hotter than Tuesday.

b. Pat is )!Q1!11gQ than Kim.

b. Mine is worse than yours.
b. Tuesday was colder than Monday.

In [i] we again have equivalence between [a] and [b]. In [ii] there is entailment in only
one direction: [b] entails [a], but [a] does not entail [b]. This is because [iia] is neutral

1125

1126

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

Adjectival less;
The less, that we have considered above is the comparative form of the determinative
little, but less, can also belong to the adjective category:
3) i Is Soviet influence throughout the world greater or less than it was ten years ago?
ii They can employ apprentices provided they pay rates which are not less than those

[1

of the other workers.

iii They too had felt the influence of Christianity to a greater or less extent.
Here less, contrasts with adjectival greater rather than with determinative morei. A noncomparative construction corresponding to less in [i] might be Soviet influence is now
quite small, just as a positive orientation version would be along the lines of Soviet
influence is now very great/ considerable (not much). Similarly, in [ii] a non-comparative

 4.1.2

Comparative forms of degree determinatives

The relation between less and fewer is fairly complex. In non-count singulars only less
is possible: Kim has less/*fewer money than Pat. In plural NPs we have:
(17 J i She left less than ten minutes ago.
n Less/ Fewer than thirty of the students had voted.
iu
rv
v
vi

He made no less/fewer than fifteen mistakes.

You pass if you make ten mistakes or less/fewer.
He took less/*fewer pains to convince us than I'd expected.
He made fewer/ less mistakes than the others.

Both [i] and [ii] have than+ numeral. In [i] ten minutes expresses an amount of time
rather than a number of individuated units, and in such casesfewer is virtually impossible - just as few would be in a comparison of equality: She left as little/*few as ten minutes

1127

1128

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

contexts (She doesn't trust you much), while unmodified little does not occur in this
position.

4.2 Less central governors in scalar inequality (rather, prefer, superior)

s;~ Rather

This contains the comparative suffix er but the original base rath (meaning "soon")
has been lost, so that rather is no longer analysable as an inflectional comparative. It
nevertheless retains clear semantic and syntactic affinities with ordinary comparative
constructions. We consider four uses where it appears in construction with than.
(a) The idiom would rather ("would prefer")

4.2 Less central governors in scalar inequality

governor - than can't be replaced by rather than in simple structures like Kim is more
patient than Pat. Nor can it occur in combination with determinative more: *Kim has
more patience in situations of this kind, rather than Pat.

Prefer
The meaning is the same as that of like better, which is overtly comparative; prefer itself,
however, is at the periphery of syntactically comparative expressions. It occurs in the
following constructions:
(24] i
n
m
iv

They prefer kangaroo meat 1Q beef.

She prefers to read rather than watch television.
1He'd
prefer to put David over the cliff than let him have the land for building.
They preferred to sell their produce for gold rather than the local currency.

1129

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

poor quality"; the comparative meaning, "much poorer quality", is nevertheless also
possible. Note finally that while an inflectional comparative cannot itself be compared,
such recursive comparison is much more acceptable with these forms:
[26] i *Our forces are more worse than theirs than you acknowledge.
ii Our forces are more inferior to theirs than you acknowledge.
Other adjectivesderiving from Latin comparative forms are anterior, posterior, prior, senior,
junior, major, and minor. Exceptfor the last two these can occur in the predicative construction
with a to complement, and senior/junior can takefar and much as modifiers (cf. He's far senior
to mi: in experience), but otherwise their syntactic resemblanceto English comparative forms
iS llegllgibJe,18

4-4-2 Modification

houses, etc.; cf. also the informal (as) like as not, "probably" (He'dJike as not prefer to eat
his meals there).

4.4 Modification
4-4.1 Degree modification
The governors of scalar comparison may be modified by such expressions as:
[ 29] i
ii

INEQUALITY:

EQUALITY:

much, far, immensely, a great deal, a lot, somewhat, rather,

slightly, a bit, (a) little, no, any
at least, about, approximately, roughly, every bit, easily,
half, twice, nearly, nothing like, nowhere near

1131

11.)L

IV

The result is [all the more disappointing] because she had put in so much effort.

v That's [all the more reason to avoid precipitous action].

vi He went prone on his stomach, [the better] to pursue his examination.
The here modifies the following comparative (more, less, better), forming a phrase which

in turn is modifier to an adjective ( [i/iv]), an adverb ([ii]), a verb ([iii/vi]) or determiner

to a nominal ([v]).19 In [i-ii] the is freely omissible. In [iii] the underlined occurrence
of the would be omissible if it introduced a modifier rather than a supplement (which
would mean dropping the comma), but not as it stands. In [iv], all the might be glossed
as "even': or all the+ comparative as "especially"; the can only be omitted if all is omitted
too. Example [v] is similar, except that all the more is here a DP functioning as determiner
in NP structure. In [vi] the better is a fronted modifier in the infinitival clause of purpose;
the is obligatory in this position but optional in the basic position - compare in order to

4.5 Comparative idioms and reanalysis

we can equally have a tensed form here: She more than doubled her. capital. Example [iii]
shows the same reanalysis with a comparison of equality; these tend to occur in nonaffirmative contexts and to have the form so much as, as here; as good as, however, can
also be used, as in [iv], meaning much the same as virtually.

$}}~;?l!J?rntl:JIJ#d.9.l!Ple,4h~capitql maybe contrasted with She did more than double her capital,
wf}ere de!fpki~ required to be ill the plain form: here there is no reanalysis, more being head,
a[J4Jhq.lJ;.dqyNeherc_~pi~al its complement.The construction with do allows less instead of
,,p~~gif~"ifP~~~~fol~$,op,~~~~~~i~ngf[32FJgoes not. The two constructions differ semantically
~JillU;~~:S::xnt;i~jc#Iy~upppst;:, for example, that her capital was initially $10,000. She more
th;it .....inc.r(!ased it to over $20,000. But that is not the
<:~_(:'.c:;:\:;:'>:-.'~.'~~,~;:'.'~''~f .. }< _,._._ . ,_ ~: ;_, .. ,~.-- . . ~."': _._.,_, .. .,,
ITiY.aning o($h~:"CJi(imor~than double her capital. This says that she doubled her capital and

t.l~~.;'J.euk~~,~~r~qpit~i':WM~W~

~hll

1133

1134

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

Example [ia] is a variable comparison comparing how soon the car will (possibly) be
ready and how soon I said it would be ready (cf. also the variable-constant comparison
It may be ready as soon as tomorrow). But such a comparative meaning is lost in [ib],
where as soon as is an idiom meaning "immediately" (and best regarded as a compound
preposition).
Similarly no sooner has its literal comparative meaning in (34iia], but is an idiom in
[iib-c], where the meaning is "The police arrived immediately after we got home". The
version with fronting and subject-auxiliary inversion, [iic], is much the more frequent.
The meaning is essentially the same as the construction with hardly/barely/scarcely+
when: We had hardly got home I Hardly had we got home when the police arrived. And
as a result of this equivalence blends between the constructions are found, with when
appearing instead of than with no sooner and vice versa with hardly, etc.:

ii 4.6 The correlative comparative construction

[ ib] as well on its own means "in addition" and functions as a connective adjunct. The
as well of [ii] normally combines with one of the possibility modals may, might, could;
it is possible to have a comparative complement consisting of as + bare infinitival (We
might as well have stayed at home as come here), but the version with the secondary
term unexpressed is more common. This use of as well is idiomatic in that there is no
corresponding non-comparative use of well: #yye stayed at home well. In [iia] it serves to
indicate dissatisfaction with what we have done: we're no better off than if we had taken
the simpler course of staying at home. In [ iib J it indicates an unenthusiastic, somewhat
grudging suggestion: "There's no reason why you shouldn't leave it at that". In [iii] (just)
as well means approximately "fortunate".
Idiomatic uses of better and best are seen in:

[3 8] i I knew better than to question his decision.

1135

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

approximately paraphrased by a construction in which the subordinate clause functions
as complement

to as:

[ 40J i As sanctions bite more, so the violence becomes worse.

ii The violence becomes worse as sanctions bite more.

~f

B~~~us:' . thi~ ~~r~llel movement along the two scales it is often possible to reverse the
direttfofrofdependency:

[4!}

i nci1tlJr_g we pay th~m, the harder they work.

ii The h~rder they work.the more we pay them.

IQ [i] the work clause is superordinate: the effort they put into their work increases as we
pay theITI more, In [ii] it .is the pay clause that is superordinate: the amount we pay them
increases as they work harder. The two versions are not equivalent, however: for example, if

Non-scalar comparison

atlcl 'the present construction is one of the cases where there is rro internal marking of
subordination. 22

5 Non-scalar comparison
The differences between term and set comparison are less extensive in non-scalar comparison than in scalar comparison, and in this section we will therefore deal with them
together. Two general points concerning the relation between the two types should be
made before we review the various comparative governors in turn.

Potential ambiguity between set comparison and term comparison

1137

1138

Chapter13 Comparative constructions

5.1 Same
Inherent definiteness
In attributive function same is restricted to definite NPs, and in predicative function it
occurs with the. Contrast, then, the distribution of same with that of identical:
[3 J

a. The same mistake was made by Ed.

a. *A same mistake was made by Ed.
in a. The two copies are the same.
iv a. She treats them all the same.
11

b. The identical mistake was made by Ed.

b. An identical mistake was made by Ed.
b. The two copies are identical.
b. She treats them all identically.

In NPs same usually occurs with the, as in [ia], but demonstrative determiners are
also found: this same version. In [iiia] the same is an AdjP rather than an NP, with the

5.1 Same

same symbol x in our representation of the meaning). Same is omissible in [ii],24 but its
presence serves to reinforce, to emphasise, the identity. Structurally the two constructions
are very similar - in [ 6], for example, both subordinate clauses have the complement of
at left understood. The main difference is that comparative clauses allow for a greater
amount of reduction than relatives. There is, for example, no relative corresponding to
the same hotel as_ usual, for the relative can't be reduced to a verbless structure like this.
Note also that relatives do not allow the inversion that is characteristic of comparatives:

Sheep and goats turned up on Timar at the same time asl'that did the dingo.25

~Same as with NP complement

It is very common for the comparative complement to consist of as+ NP. In some cases
it is possible to add a verb, in others it is not:

1139

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

earn more than you, then necessarily I earn as much as you and #If I earn more than you, then
necessarilyI earn the same as you.26

The same as as equivalent to (just) as or like

[9 J

i They stay here the same as you do.

ii You deserve a break the same as everyone else.

[=(just) as]
[=like]

This construction belongs to informal style. The interpretation of the subordinate clause
in [i] would seem to be simply "you stay here": there is no counterpart of the comparative
phrase. In this respect it is a marginal member of the class of comparative clauses. The
connection with central members, however, is seen in the fact that it can be reduced to
such forms as as usual: We're going to the movies on Friday, the same as usual:"

5.2 Similar

5.2 Similar
We here examine similar as representative of a set of comparative governors that occur
with to, from, or with, but not the prototypical comparative prepositions as and than,28
and hence not with comparative clauses.
Similar with a comparative complement
Similar selects to and is found in the following range of constructions:
[12] i This festival is rather similar to Munich's Oktoberfest.
11 The tribunal has powers similar to those o(the courts.
m She was using g_ similar argument to that outlined above.
iv This problem is of similar complexity to the last one.

[predicative]
[postpositive]
[attributive:r]
[ attributive.n]

1141

Chapter

1142

t:;

13

Comparative constructions

Modification
Similar is a gradable adjective, and hence can be modified by such adverbs as very, quite,
rather, extremely, etc., and can itself be subject to scalar comparison (The Opposition's
policy is more similar to the government's than they care to admit). In general the degree
of likeness conveyed by similar falls short of complete identity, but it is sometimes used
for the latter, allowing such modifiers as exactly and almost.

_ Lexical derivatives
The corresponding noun and adverb are seen in:
[16] i The shooting had remarkable similarities with/to a terrorist execution.
ii Purchase of state vehicles is handled similarly to all state purchases.

. .

5-4 Different, other, else

relatively few roads.>" But in spite of the semantic similarity with relatives, such, unlike
same, does not normally take a relative clause instead of the comparative complement.
Examples like Such overseas interests that Australian companies do have are summarised
in Appendix ; are attested, but rare, and of questionable acceptability.
Such + as is also found occasionally without a following head noun:

[18]

i The concern they felt for me was such as I shall never forget_ .
ii We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as_ are both true and
sufficient to explain their appearances.

Note that the missing object in [ i] cannot be recovered from the such phrase itself: we need
to go to the subject NP (the concern they felt for me). In this respect the example differs
from normal comparative constructions (but compare [ 45 J of2 above); it may represent

1143

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

Construction [iv) is simpler than the equivalent Type I construction formed by replacing
Anglicans by those of Anglicans.32
c,;

Different+ to and than

While the verb differ selects only from, different also takes to or than:

[21] i
11

ni
rv

This version is very different to the one we shall hear in the simulcast.
%Records provide a different sort of experience than live music.
%The focus of interpersonal relationships is different in marriage than in a premarital situation.
%There was no evidence that anything was different than it had been.

They are, however, very much less frequent than from. Than is subject to regional variation: it is hardly used at all in BrE, but is well established in AmE, though even there it

5.4 Different, other, else

person holds different views. Example [iv] illustrates the use of the adverb differently in
set comparison.

Modification
Different (like similar) is a gradable adjective, allowing the usual range of modifiers for
this class, such as very and a scalar comparative (His views were more different from mine
than I'd expected). At the same time, however, it takes those found with scalar comparison
of inequality (cf. (29 J of 4): no, any, much (generally in non-affirmative contexts: It isn't
much different from the previous version), far, a great deal, and so on.

Other+ than
Other occurs only in term comparison.

The comparative

complement

has than as

1145

Chapter

13 Comparative constructions

Further constructions where other than appears to function as a constituent are illustrated in:
[26] i Did he consider the possibility of recording other than popular music in this way?
ii No one suggests these deals are other than legitimate commercial operations.
iii He is at pains to define his key terms other than anecdotally.

Again, other could not occur on its own in these positions, and it is doubtful if it can
properly be regarded as head. The underlined sequences are NPs in [i-ii] and an AdvP
in [iii], and it is plausible to take music, operations, and anecdotally as syntactic head
with other than a modifier, comparable to the reanalysed uses of more than and less than
discussed in 4. 5.
,,:; Else

5.5 As

adjunct on a par with those described in Ch. 8. Further examples are given in:
[28] i [As I have already observed_,] no reason has yet been offered for this change.
ii The event was sponsored, [as_ is the fashion these days,] by a brewery.
iii He didn't report the matter to the police [as you'd predicted_].
The comparative clauses functioning as complement to as are structurally incomplete
in that the clausal complements which their verbs would have in main clauses are missing.
They are recoverable from the matrix: in [28i], for example, what I have already observed
is that no reason has yet been offered for this change. Similarly in [ii]: what is the fashion
these days is for comparable events to be sponsored by a brewery. Example [iii] is
ambiguous: what you'd predicted may be that he would report the matter to the police
or that he wouldn't.

1147

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

ii a. She has recovered quickly, [as her doctor will confirm].
b. She has recovered quickly, which confirms that it wasn't serious.

[comparative)
[relative)

The underlining marks the subordinate clauses, comparative or relative, while the brackets in the [a) examples mark the adjunct of comparison. In [ia] we have a comparison of
equality between two variables: "x (he phoned home every day); he promised to do y;
x = y ': In the relative construction [ib] we have two occurrences of the same variable:
"x (he phoned home every day); he'd promised to do x". The end result is the same
in the two constructions, just as we saw that same+ as can be equivalent to same+
relative (5 .1). Nevertheless, there are pragmatic and syntactic differences between the
two constructions.
The informational content of the comparative clause is backgrounded, whereas the

~.f

5.5 As

(she vs I) and contrasting objects (me vs my wife), and so on. But as with scalar comparisons of equality (She's as fit as she is because ... ) the subordinate clause need not
contain new or contrastive lexical material:
[32] i If the aim is to create disunity, [as it is_,] we should reject his proposal.
ii She suggested he hadn't been honest with her, [as indeed he hadn't_].
iii The deadlock is a disappointment coming [as it does J after such a promising start.
What makes these possible is that the matrix does not state that the proposition is
true, whereas the comparative clause does. The latter does therefore introduce a new
feature, but it is not a matter of the lexical content. In [i] the aim is to create disunity is
complement to if and hence merely entertained conditionally, rather than stated, in the
matrix. Similarly in [ii] the xvariable is expressed by the complement of suggested, and
hence is not entailed. And [iii] has non-finite coming, which is not itself a construction

1149

1150

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

know and what Europeans do know. Only the adjunct of comparison interpretation is
possible if the as phrase is placed before how: They don't know, as Europeans do, how to
go about complaining.
Predicative

Here there is a comparison between two kinds or states:

[3 5] i His behaviour was [as we'd expected it to be_].
ii Make sure you leave everything [as you find it_].
iii The design of the building is [as_ shown_ in Figure 12].
These fit the familiar analysis: "His behaviour was x, we'd expected it to be y; x = y",
with the variables representing predicative complements. Example [ii] is equivalent to
a relative construction with the noun state as head: leave everything in the state in which

As if and as though
These introduce phrases with the same range of functions as those discussed above for
as alone, except that they do not function as dependents to a noun:

[3 8] i He had scurried up the hatch as if we were abandoning ship.

11 They were treated as if they were Commonwealth citizens.
m There was a ragged edge to her voice now, as if she'd been crying.
IV The effect is as if he had materialised out of nowhere.
The as if phrase is a manner adjunct in [i], a manner complement in [ii], an adjunct
of comparison in [iii], and a predicative complement in [iv].

As if and as though as compound prepositions

In the examples of [38] it is possible to fill out the construction, inserting material

1152

Chapter

13

Comparative constructions

change in meaning. In this construction the as if reinforces or harmonises with the modal
rn;eaajng.expressedinthe verb (essentially medium strength epistemic modality, in the sense
ofCh;'3> 9) "-thus; rppgqly, "Judging from appearances, it is likely that we have offended
them;'.
. . .
. . ()thei verbs of similar meaning likewise take a complement of this form: appear, feel,
~dr.{M,:tdste, and alsc, be.'fo irt addition to the impersonal construction of [ 4oiv] we find
ordin'aryUbje~ts, as in (vi'.'
Finally, ( 4ovi] involves a special use of as if !though, where the matrix clause presents some
sitafom(ls a.further .instance of something, normally something bad - in this example, of
fui-tp~rl)ad~ews.Ip this use.the as if always has a negative complement, and again it is less
~ma'ttc::rof~omparison than of the status of the content clause. This time the construction
}~giMt.~~~?t. tqe cbntent.clause is true (not merely likely): this news wasn't bad enough (i.e.

5.5 As

The natural interpretation of [i] is that he was treated like a Commonwealth citizen
although he wasn't one. Exampie [ii], however, doesn't imply that he wasn't remembering
painful things: on the contrary, it suggests that he was or appeared to be. In [i] we could
have as if he had been a Commonwealth citizen, with the perfect marking backshift (or
past time) and the preterite marking modal remoteness; it is, however, much more usual
in such contexts to have an irrealis or simple preterite after as if/though than a preterite
perfect.
The irrealis in [ 43 ii] does not appear to be semantically motivated: certainly if we had
a simple preterite in this context we would have no reason to regard it as a modal preterite.
This were is therefore probably best regarded as belonging with the 'extended' uses of the
irrealis discussed in Ch. 3, i.7. Like them, it has the flavour of a hypercorrection: was
is a less formal variant of were in modal remoteness constructions like [i], so that some

1153

1154

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

the one where if is head of the complement of the as marking scalar comparison of
equality.

5.6 Like
Like occurs with a comparative sense in a wide range of constructions. We look first at
those where it has an NP as complement, then in 5.6.2 at the use of like with finite clause
complements, and then review summarily a variety of other constructions in 5 .6.3. For
the distinction between like as an adjective and as a preposition, see Ch. 7, 2.2.

5.6.1 like+ NP complement

With an NP as complement, like rather than as is used in non-scalar term comparisons

5.6.1 Like+ NP complement

thought him like his father, *This got him like a raving lunatic, and so on). In [iv] like this
is a predicative adjunct.

(b) Manner complement

[ 48] i Liz is behaving like a prima donllfl.

ii Jill treated Max like the others.

iii You shouldn't treat her like that.
The few verbs that take a manner phrase as complement readily allow it to have the
form of a like phrase. Thus [i] expresses resemblance between Liz and a prima donna
with respect to the way or manner in which Liz is behaving. Example [ii] is ambiguous,
in that the primary term in the comparison can be either Jill or Max: "Jill treated Max
in the same way as the others treated him" or "Jill treated Max in the same way as she

1155

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

"Max is a keen gardener, but his brother is not". With clausal negation we have (changing
the content of the propositions

for greater naturalness):

[51 J i Like his brother, Max had not received a distribution from the family trust.
ii Max had not, like his brother, received a distribution from the family trust.
iii Max had not been to university like his brother.
In [i] the like is outside the scope ofnegation: Max and his brother are alike in that they
had both not received a distribution from the family trust. Example [ii] is ambiguous:
like can be outside the scope of negation, giving the same meaning as for [i]: or it can be
inside the scope of negation, so that Max and his brother are not alike - Max's brother
had received a distribution, but Max himself had not. In abstraction from prosody, the
same ambiguity applies in [iii]. If the sentence is read as a single intonation phrase, the

1157

"These birds don't walk in the same way/manner as human beings" ;.,.the implicature is that
the birds do walk, but in a different way from humans. As with manner complements, the
NP following like can itself refer to a manner: You should do it like this. The comparison
here is between the way you should do it and 'this'.
Again, the primary term in the comparison is not invariably expressed by the subject:
[5 5 J i He loved her like a sister.
11

Bergs will simply rip through sea ice like tissue-papa if the overall current is at
variance to the top few metres of the watermass.

Less specific likeness

[5 6] i The girls shrieked their applause like a mob of cockatoos.
ii The afternoon sun shone through her chestnut hair like a fiery halo.

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

5.6.2 Like+ finite clause

Like may take either a comparative clause or a content clause as complement:
[58]

WITH COMPARATIVE CLAUSE

He wanted to see if she was really like [she always seemed to be_ in his dreams].
11 You talk like [my mother talks_].
Ill You didn't look both ways before crossing the road like [you promised_].
iv She was pushing a pram, a high-riding one with large wheels like [you see_ in
English movies].
[59]

WITH CONTENT CLAUSE

11

It looked like [the scheme would founder before it was properly started].
You look like [you need a drink].

5.6.3 Other constructions

(b) NP+ PP

Like is often followed by the sequence (<let) + nominal + PP, and it may be unclear
whether the PP is a post-head modifier of the nominal (with the whole sequence therefore
forming a single NP), or a separate element (with the sequence forming a verbless clause).
Compare the bracketed word sequences in these examples:
[ 6z] i
ii
iii
iv
v

[single NP]
He looks like [a guy in my tutorial].
She took to it like [a duck to water].
[NP+ PP]
At every problem he goes running to the sergeant like [a child to its mother].
Hate rose in him like [mercury in a thermometer].
There were countless boats bobbing up and down like [corks in a bathtub].

The two possible structures are illustrated in the first two examples respectively. In [i],

1159

1160

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

We noted in 4.5 a number of places where sequences containing scalar than or as have
been reanalysed as modifying expressions: [ 64] illustrates a similar reanalysis with nonscalar like. Example [i] cannot be analysed in the same way as, for example, We have
nothing like this specimen, where nothing is head of the object NP and like this specimen
is modifier. Rather, the bracketed sequence is complement of perfect have, so its head
must be finished, with nothing like a modifier; the example may be compared with We
haven't [even nearly finished]. Similarly, in [ii] anything like is a modifier of as, and in
We found something like thirty major errors the sequence something like is a modifier of

thirty.

(e) Like as a noun and attributive adjective

[ 65] i I'd never seen the like ofit.

6 Scalar set comparison

vi Unlike other fruits, one cannot eat the skin of an avocado.

vu Unlike in Europe, very few popular books about the natural world were printed in
in Australia.

In [i-iv] it is an adjective (attributive, predicative, or postpositive), in [v-vii] a preposition. Example [iii] matches [47ii] above, with unlike interpreted as "uncharacteristic
of'. The modifier use in [ 67v-vii] matches the 'likeness of predication' use of like, with
[ v] illustrating the most usual pattern. Example [vi] departs from this pattern in that the
primary term in the comparison is not expressed by the subject but by the complement
of a preposition (an avocado) within the object NP - compare [53] for like.
Unlike does not take a finite clause as complement, but it is sometimes found with a
PP, as in [ 67vii]. The acceptability status of this matches that of the corresponding like

1161

1162

to elephants. Note, moreover, that it is possible to express comparison in accompanying

phrases: Sam is a good student compared with the others in the class. The point remains,
however, that the plain grade does not itself express comparison.39
Example [iii] is an instance of what we are calling term comparison; the terms in the
comparison are either Pat and Sam (if we take the complement of than to be simply an
NP) or the degree x to which Pat is good and the degree y to which Sam is good (if we
take the complement of than to be a reduced clause). Example [iii] is a set comparison:
the comparison is between the members of the set of three, with Kim ranked at the top
of the scale of 'goodness' for that set.
Non-scalar set comparison has been dealt with in 5, and scalar set comparison of
equality (as in Kim and Pat are equally guilty) needs no further discussion: our concern

6.2 Comparative grade in set comparison

denotes a subset who are above the mean age. In general, older.covets a larger range
of the scale of age than the plain form old: women of fifty, for example, might well be
regarded as older women, but not as old.

The lexical comparatives upper, inner, and outer

These forms transparently contain the comparative suffix er, but it is here better regarded
as a derivational suffix than as an inflectional one. Upper, inner, and outer are adjectives
restricted to attributive position, whereas up, in, and out are prepositions, not adjectives.
These comparatives do not license a than phrase (cf. "I'd rather live in an outer suburb
than this), and do not express term comparison.
However, in some uses at least, they express a type of set comparison over two-member
sets. In such comparisons, upper is contrasted with lower (an inflectional comparative

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

to be used for the last-named of a larger set - a manifestation of the weak degree of
grammaticalisation of the dual category in English. An alternative to latter in such cases
is last, and the ordinal numerals can also be used in a similar way.

6.3 Superlatives
6j.1 Inflectionaland analyticsuperlatives

The formation of superlatives is very similar to that of comparatives. They can be marked
inflectionally, with the suffix -est corresponding to comparative -et, or analytically, with
the adverbs most and least corresponding to comparative more and less. Again we add
subscript 'a' to indicate the analytic marker use:

 6j .. 2

Non-superlative uses of most

Most, and least, also function as adjunct of degree in clausestructure, but unlike
comparative more, and less, they are not used in the grading of count singular nominals:
[12] i Kim enjoyed it the most.Ileasti.
ii *Of all my teachers Kim was the mostil leas ti of a scholar.
Adjectival least
Least, is not only a determinative but also an adjective:
[13] i Its attractiveness as an investment is least during periods of high inflation.
11 [Even the least alteration to the plan] could prove fatal.
iii That's [the least of my worries].
iv She didn't seem [the least bit] interested in what they were saying.
Least here is the opposite of greatest, and means "smallest/slightest". Example [i] illus-

Chapter

1166

13 Comparative constructions

There is no corresponding use of least. This one is least useful, for example, is unambiguous, meaning "This is the least useful one among them", not "This one is not very
useful".
iii!

Proportional quantifier
[15] i
ii
m
iv
v

Most people think he's guilty. }

I agree with most of your points.
Kim had interviewed most candidates.
Kim had interviewed the most candidates. }
Kim had interviewed (the) least candidates.

[proportional quantifier]
[superlative or proportional)
[superlative only]

Most in [i-ii] means "more than half, the majority": it expresses a kind of proportional
quantification (Ch. 5, 7.11). Many and much, by contrast, are non-proportional: I agree

6.3-4 The structure of superlative phrases

job here, then, is not the most difficult in an absolute sense, but only relative to the jobs
assigned to members of the team. The difference can be brought out by comparing these
set comparisons with equivalent term comparisons:
[ 17] i Kim lives in a smaller house than any other house in England.
ii Kim had a more difficult job than any other member of the team.
In [ii] any other member of the team means "any other member than Kim": Kim is involved
in the comparison in [ii] but not in [i].
Most in [reii] is the analytic marker; the determinative mosti, by contrast, is virtually
always relative:
[ 18]

Kim scored the most points.

[relative]

An absolute use of this most might be Kim scored the most possible points, but this is quite

1168

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

The superlative phrases in [i] are incorporated into the structure of an NP, marked by
the bracketing- more precisely they occur before the head ( [ a-d]) or fuse with it ( [ e-f]).
Those in [ii] are either not contained within an NP at all ([b--d]) or are in post-head
position ([al).
In [z iia-c] the superlative phrase constitutes all or part of a modifier of the head of
the NP. The the in [ia-b J does not form part of the superlative phrase but is determiner
in NP structure: it can be separated from the superlative by another modifier, as in
[ia], and can be replaced by other definite determiners, such as the genitive in [ic] or a
demonstrative (this most recent edition).
The most of [zrid], however, is the inflectional superlative of many, and here the most
forms a DP functioning as determiner in the NP; this the is optional and cannot be
replaced by a genitive or demonstrative.

6.3-4 The structure of superlative phrases

The is obligatory in [ i-ii], optional in the others. In [ i] competitor is a count singular noun
and hence requires a determiner by the general rules of NP structure: the only effect of
the superlative youngest is to add the requirement that the determiner be definite. In [ii]
the impossibility of dropping the is not attributable to the head noun, but to the fact that
omission of the would make two the determiner: this would mark the NP as indefinite,
which is incompatible with the inherent definiteness conferred by the superlative.
No such factors apply in [zj iii-v], and here the can be omitted. Note, however, that
its omission does not result in a change of meaning - in particular, there is no change
from definite to indefinite. In [v] the is part of the DP, as in [z iid] above.
~ Relative clauses

One distinctive property of superlatives is that they can take integrated relative clauses

1169

1170

Chapter 13 Comparative constructions

from the bottom in the case of comparisons of inferiority, as in the third least expensive
models. In [zyii], for example, there is just one person younger than Kim. The fact that
the items in [zeii] precede the means that with incorporated superlatives such as that in
[zziv] they function as peripheral modifier in the structure of the NP rather than in the
structure of the superlative phrase itself (see Ch. 5, 13 ).

Preliminaries 1173

1172

5.6 Further remarks on the form-types 1240

5.6.1 To-infinitival vs gerund-participial 1240

5.6.2 The minor form-types; bare infinitivals and past-participials

1244

Hollow non-finite clauses 1245

6.1 General properties 1245

6.2 Gerund-participials 1246
6.3 Hollow to-infinitivals 1246

Non-catenative complements in clause structure 1251

7.1 Subject and extraposed subject 1252

7.2 Object and extraposed object 1255
7-3 Predicative complement 1255
8 Further complement uses of non-finite clauses 1256

1173

1.1

Preliminaries
Matters of form and function

1174

Chapter 14 Non-finite and verbless clauses

complements of the preceding verb):

[3 J

i Max wanted [to changf his name].

ii I remember [locking the door].
iii His father got [charged with manslaughter].

[infinitival]
[gerund-participial]
[past-participial]

Precisely because it is only the plain form that can occur in both finite and nonfinite clauses, it is only for [i] that we need a label that is not simply derived from
the name of the inflectional form of the verb. For [ii-iii] we use gerund-participle
and past participle for the verb-forms, gerund-participial and past-participial for the
clauses.
Subtypes of infinitival: to-infinitivals and bare infinitivals
Infinitivals are subdivided into to-infinitivals and bare infinitivals according to the pres-

.1.1

Matters of form and function

~ Subjectless non-finites
The great majority of non-finite clauses have no subject, as in:
(8]
11

m
iv

Kim was glad[_ to reach home].

It has been a pleasure[_ meeting you].
Anyone (_ living nearby] will be evacuated.
The sum [_spent on gambling] was extraordinary.

Whereas the subject is an obligatory element in canonical clauses, there are no nonfinite constructions in which a subject is required.2 There are, moreover, many constructions where it is impossible to add a subject, as in [iii-iv], or the examples of (4]
above.
Jt~l.lb~,!'!Vfqen,t from t):i.is formulation that we take the subject to be an optional element in

1175

1176

.
.
of non-finite clauses
Distribution
occur as dependent or supplement in a wide range of constructions.3
Non-finite cl~u~e:tion we draw is between non-finites in complement function, and
The major distill pleinent function (modifiers or supplements); these are illustrated for
those in non-co~ i respectively:
infinitivals in (121-11
. . .
[comp in clause structure]
. was to intimidate us.

l]
[ 12 l 1 a His mm
[comp in AdjP structure]
[keen to regain contra .
b She is
[comp in NP structure]

. ed [the opportunity to have my say].

I' e miss
[comp in PP structure]
c. v ft at six [in order to catch the early train].
d. She left at six to catch the early train.
[modifier in clause structure]
ii a She le h/1rlatan, to put it bl unt l y.
[supplement to a clause]
b H's a c .,.
[modifier in NP structure]
e fi
d [a box to keep the tapes in].

i.z The catenative construction

We will argue in 4.1, however, that the differences between these do not carry over
to [ 13 via-c], so that the latter cannot satisfactorily be regarded as containing respectively an object, a predicative complement, and the complement of a prepositional verb.
Instead, we analyse the underlined clauses in [ijvi] as examples of a distinct type of
complement realised exclusively by non-finite clauses; we refer to them as catenative
complements.
The term 'catenative' applies to a large class of constructions where a verb has a
non-finite internal complement. The name reflects the fact that the construction can be
repeated recursively, yielding a concatenation ('chain') of verbs:
(16) i I wanted to arrange for Kim to do it.

ii She intends to JI)'. to persuade him to help her redecorate her flat.
In [i) we have a chain of three verbs, with for Kim to do it complement of arrange and

1177

Chapter 14 Non-finite and verbless clauses

Four subtypes of the (active) complex construction can then be distinguished:

[re] i I arrangedfm: them to go by bus.
I rely Q/1 them to look after themselves.
11
iii I resented their being given such favourable treatment.
iv I want .Jh_gm to be happy.
}
v I resented them being given such favourable treatment.

[for-complex]
[oblique-complex]
[genitive-complex]
[plain-complex]

In the for-complex construction the intervening NP is preceded by the subordinator for;

it is subject of the non-finite but in accusative (or plain) case. The oblique-complex is
found with certain prepositional verbs: the intervening NP is an oblique complement
of the matrix verb, i.e. complement of the preposition that the verb selects. In the
enitive-complex the intervening NP is in the genitive case and functions as subject of
the non-finite clause. Finally, in the plain-complex the intervening NP is in plain or

1.3 T~-infinitivals with and without a subject

unless introduced by for the asterisked examples here are as bad jn the version without
for as in the one where for illicitly appears.
f~!

The catenative construction not an exception

At first glance examples like the following might appear to cast doubt on the rule that
to-infinitivals with a subject require for:
[23 J i They arranged for the performance to begin at six.
ii They expected the performance to begin at six.
iii They intended (for) the performance to begin at six.

[for required]
[for excluded J
[for optional]

For is required after arrange, excluded after expect, and optional after intend. The structural difference between [i] and [ii], however, is not just a matter of the presence or
absence of the subordinator for: in [i] the performance is subject of the infinitival clause,

1179

1180

Chapter 14 Non-finite and verbless clauses

w:ll~I1 . tb.eq'!)s
either:
. . .

a p:r~1;eqing adjunct, but does not allow passivisation in the for construction

[26} i 'Theyhqdrvantedallalongfortheperformance to begin at six.

: .it Whpd been wanted all along for the performance to begin at six.
: _r.~>,;, ~<-;t_<_.:;{"~-:,_-

_ ,,'-,'(,'.,;:.,

-~- - ,-.

.:

. :

~hiss~gfe~ts.tb.atthe
deviance of [25ii] is due to a property of the verb want, not to the
st:r~cwre oftb.eactiveclause [25i] .
. iY'fii;iffi}f~rtantpoint, then, is that while there are verbs which exclude passives like [ 24iii],
tp~reare none that accept those like [z aii]: the latter is grammatically impossible because
!ll,e'eq~ep.~eNP + to-iI}finitival does riot form a constituent and thus cannot function as
e*4PQ$~i~ubject .ail.Y more than it can function as an ordinary subject.
''-'"l-'',,--_-,.,,,

_ ,- ..

,",I

-.

..

'

'

-.

\B)~~~~ti,O,~R!1~1Npcis

..

>, ...

. ..

-~ 1.4 The structure of infinitivals

. ,,!l~.ih~re, is a direct syntactic relation between the matrix verb and the NP: the
. cp'}#p)elllent of the verb. Note by contrast that in the for construction,
~-:~_gi~smplem~Npf the matrix verb, it can normally be readily omitted
:,-. .: .c: -.'

'

g~~;!Ptfj(imto see a solicitor.

geqitq see a.solic;itor .

. );'.~~~~~['.~~q~~n:siocancel the performance.

/, . . S}ff'al_'iillfo suggestthat the students to cancel the performance is a single

1182

Chapter14 Non-finite and verbless clauses

Syntactic reflection of the prepositional source ofjor

(a) Case
Accusative rather than nominative forms of personal pronouns are used for the subject:
(34)

He arranged for her/*she to be interviewed first.

(b) Subject must immediately follow for

No clause element can come between for and the subject NP:
[3 5) i It's important
ii "It's important

fu XQ1i to read the first one immediately.

fu the first one )'..Q.Y to read immediately.

Note the contrast here between for and the finite subordinator that: It's important that

the first one you read immediately.

 1-4.2

The infinitival subordinator to

~~~~it1t'.~~.~~*~!;ln~t:'.!)(:CllF3S complement in a for PP, and the same applies to numerous NPs

~ii::~~~m~rt,s#~~lt~~~r~

to be no misunderstanding on this point.

7{~;;' :iifo/I.t!~fh1l~dfffr"close1abs
to be kepton the new recruits.

Hst:filt'tuf e . . .

f'ti!'.M;N'Ji'~

r e.< .:
VP'forms a constituent - the subject of (38i], for example, is
un'C?,ntfQVer&iilllyfor you to give up now, and similarly for the other examples cited.8 Within
!l}is ~f<;LY,~l,l<;e_!ht!re is no reason to. say that the NP combines directly with for; rather the NP
~~~(:Vfi''~ofh~i,ri~ t6fotri1 a. clause nucleus showing the same range of contrasts as a main
;,!,/~>:~")Si>'s\("f\.:i; ...;;~.::-.~' -'?1. .-.-:._ . . .
; 'r/ -;
"''- .:}':o(asacl.~se nucleus following the subordinator that:
:~t'f07:J,~?~:;.: ~-'t~~~ '. :' _: ::. .-J.:,_ ~;~ .) : . :~_,_., I:. '. ; .. .
.
.>: '.

---

t-~fi{~~~~~S,39!):,,[fm:b~~h your parents to sign the form].

ii It's ~ecessary [for the form to be signed by both your oarents].

Chapter 14 Non-finite

and verbless clauses

Lend him the money acts as a constituent in [i]. It is separated from to and occupies
prenuclear position. In [ii] lend him the money as a whole is ellipted. And in [iii] it is
coordinated with another constituent of the same category,find a solicitor for him. 9
Traditional grammar treats to lend as a form of the lexeme lend, as if to were an
inflectional prefix, comparable to the inflectional suffix that marks the infinitive in such
languages as Latin and French. This is quite inappropriate for English. The evidence
from [42] shows that to is not syntactically in construction with the verb base, let alone
morphologically bound to it.
tlfi

Syntactic reflection of the prepositional source of to

Likefor, to derives historically from the homophonous preposition. This source is again
reflected in the present properties of the construction - though to a much lesser extent

q.2 The infinitival subordinator to

the complement of prepositional to (although I agreed [to it] and I agreed [to gQ] are
both grammatical, *J agreed [to it and gQ] is not); and the phrases it introduces cannot
be systematically substituted for PPs or vice versa. It is quite clear that the distribution
of to-infinitivals has to be described independentlyof that of PPs.
Reanalysis ofto as a VP subordinator
To introduces phrases that function as predicate in clause structure, and all the evidence
is compatible with these phrases being of the same category as phrases functioning as
predicate in canonical clauses. That is, to lend him the money can be assumed to be a VP.
And as already noted, to combines with a VP to make this larger VP. We can therefore
assume the partial structure in [ 46].

1185

1186

Chapter
1The'y

14 Non-finite

and verbless

clauses

could BE _; and parallelling these, You HAVE to _ is strongly preferred over You have
Irith.is'respect, to and the secondary forms of auxiliaries appear to function alike.

Infespbnsitclthis argument, however, note that there are special conditions on the
stranding of to that do not apply to clear cases of auxiliaries (see Ch. 17, 7.3, on contrasts
like .Not-to: !Yould be a mistake vs *To would be a mistake). Some special mention of to is
nec~s.s#rejt~er way: either.it is the only subordinator that can be stranded under ellipsis of
tliec~Hsiit&eht itintr6'aiices, or itis the only auxiliary verb subject to these special conditions
011 stranding. And the stress facts are expressible in a different way: we can say that it is
sM~glt prJferr~d for a stranded item that is stressed to bear tense.
Tlk~~cbn<i'acknowledged difference between to and clause subordinators is that to does
notahvays occupy absolute initial position in the constituent it marks:

[4~li

sh'e t~ught her children always to tell the truth.