THE NOUN PHRASE NOUN MODIFICATION

THE NOUN PHRASE NOUN MODIFICATION

1. The basic noun phrase can be expanded with noun modifiers. Premodifiers, like attributive adjectives, occur before the head noun. Postmodifiers, like relative clauses, occur following the head noun. In total, noun phrases can be composed of four major components: determiner + premodifiers + head noun + postmodifiers All noun phrases include a head, while determiners, premodifiers, and postmodifiers are optional.

   • A pronoun can substitute for a noun or a complete noun phrase. As a result, noun phrases can have a pronoun instead of a noun as the head. Pronoun-headed phrases usually do not include a determiner or premodifiers, but they may have postmodifiers
     • there are different levels of embedding within noun phrases. That is, postmodifiers of a first-level noun phrase can include complex noun phrases (NP) with pre- and postmodification.

2. Types of noun modification

   • Survey of noun modifier types
     • There are several different types of premodifiers and postmodifiers. Premodifiers include adjectives, participials, and other nouns
       • Adjective as premodifier: A special project An internal memo
       • Participial premodifiers: Written reasons Detecting devices
       • Noun as premodifier: The bus strike The police report
       • There are also several different types of postmodifiers, including both clauses and phrases. Clausal postmodifiers can be either finite or non-finite. Non-finite postmodifier clauses have three forms: to-clauses, ing-clauses, and ed-clauses
         • Relative clause as postmodifier: A footpath which disappeared in a landscape of fields and trees Beginning students who have had no previous college science courses
         • Appositive clauses as postmodifier: A message that he would be late arrived by special delivery. The suggestion that the new rule (should) be adopted.
         • To-infinitive clause as postmodifier: The way to get to our house Enough money to buy proper food
         • Ing-clause as postmodifier: The imperious man standing under the lamppost Rebels advancing rapidly southwards
         • Ed-clause as postmodifier: Fury fanned by insensitive press coverage Products required to support a huge and growing population
         • Phrasal postmodifiers consist of two main types: prepositional phrases and appositive noun phrases. Adjective phrases can also be postmodifiers, but they are less common.
           • Prepositional phrase as postmodifier: Doctors at the Johns Hopkins Medical School Compensation for emotional damage
           • Appositive noun phrase as postmodifier: The Indian captain, Mohammed Azharuddin Margaret Mitchell´s novel Gone with the Win
           • Adjective phrase as postmodifier (not common): President Bush will reiterate he wants a smooth transition and will cooperate in [any way possible]. [The extremely short duration varieties common in India] were not used in West Africa.
           • Occasionally, adverbs can also be premodifiers or postmodifiers in noun phrases: Adverb as premodifier: The nearby guards Adverb as postmodifier: A block behind
             • Noun complement clauses are different from post modifiers in structure and meaning, although they also occur following noun heads. They involve primarily special kinds of that- and to- clauses: The idea that he was completely cold and unemotional A chance to do the right thing

3. Premodification

   • Types of premodifiers
     • general adjective
     • ed-participial modifier
     • ing-participial modifier
     • noun: staff room, pencil case
   • Premodifiers are condensed structures. They use fewer words than postmodifiers to convey roughly the same information.
     • Most adjectival and participial premodifiers can be re-phrased as a longer, postmodifying relative clause
       • General adjectives, functioning as attributive adjectives, are the most common form of noun premodifiers.
       • Nouns are also extremely common as premodifiers, especially in newspaper language and academic prose. Noun + noun sequences can represent many different meaning relationships, but there are no signals to indicate which meaning is intended in any given case.
         • To rephrase noun + noun sequences as postmodifiers  requires a wide range of function words (different prepositions and relative  pronouns) together with different verbs. Thus consider the range of meaning  relationships expressed by the following noun + noun sequences
         • Meaning relationships expressed by noun + noun sequences
           • contain only content words, with no function word to show the meaning relationship between the two parts.
             • present information densely. It also means they rely heavily on implicit meaning, because the reader must infer the intended logical relationship between the modifying noun and the head noun.
               • Composition (N2 is made from N1; N2 consists of N1)
               • Purpose (N2 is made for the purpose of N1; N2 is used for N1)
                 • Pencil case = a case used for pencils  Brandy bottle, patrol car, Easter eggs, picnic ham, chess board, safety device,  search procedure, worship services, war fund, extortion plan
               • Identity (N2 has the same referent as N1 but classifies it in term of different attributes)
                 • Identity (N2 has the same referent as N1 but classifies it in term of different  attributes):  Women algebraists: women who are algebraists  Conventionalist judge, men workers, consultant cardiologist, member country,  exam papers, grant aid 
               • Content (N2 is about N1; N2 deals with N1)
                 • Algebra text=a text about algebra  Probability profile= profile showing probability  Market report, sports diary, prescription chart, success rates, credit agreement,  intelligence bureau
               • Objective (N1 is the object of the process described in N2, or of the action performed by the agent described in N2):
                 •  Objective (N1 is the object of the process described in N2, or of the action  performed by the agent described in N2):  Egg production= X produces eggs   Taxi driver: X drives a taxi  Waste disposal, paddy cultivation, root development, curio sellers, corn farmer,  computer users 
               • Subjective (N1 is the subject of the process described in N2; N2 is usually a nominalization of an intransitive verb)
                 • Child development=children develop  Leaf appearance, eye movement, management buy-out 
               • Time (N2 is found or takes place at the time given by N1)
                 • Summer conditions=conditions that occur during summertime  Sunday school, Christmas raffle 
               • Location (N2 is found or takes place at the location given by N1)
                 • Corner cupboard:  cupboard that is located in the corner  Roof slates, Paris conference, church square, surface traction, tunnel trains
               • Institution (N2 identifies an institution for N1)
                 • Insurance companies=companies for (selling) insurance  Ski club, egg industry 
               • Partitive (N2 identifies parts of N1)
                 • Cat legs= legs of a cat  Rifle butt, family member
               • Specialisation (N1 identifies an area of specialization for the person or occupation given in N2; N2 is animate)
                 • Finance director= director who specializes in finance  Education Secretary, gossip columnists, football fans, estate agent, management  consultant    
               • In addition, many noun + noun sequences do not fit neatly into any of the above categories.
           • Premodifying nouns that occur with many head nouns
             • A few premodifying nouns are especially productive in that they combine with many different head nouns
               •  For example, the noun family is used with a wide range  of head nouns representing many different kinds of semantic relationships:  Family affair, family barbecue, family doctor, family argument, family car,  family entertainment, family background, family company, family friend  In conversation, only a few nouns are productive as premodifiers. The combinations  that do occur reflect the everyday-life topics of conversation. For example:   Car + accident, door, insurance, keys, park, seat, wash   School + book, children, clothes, fees, holidays, trips  In contrast, newspaper language makes extensive use of noun + noun sequences.  Many of the most productive premodifying nouns identify major institutions,  especially government, business, and the media. For example:   Government + action, agencies, approval, bonds, control, decision   Business + administration, cards, community, dealings, empire, ideas   TV + ads, appearance, cameras, channel, crew, documentary license  Some premodifiers that are productive in conversation are also productive in news.  However, in news they usually have an institutional meaning. For example:   Water + authorities, bill, companies, industry, levels, privatisation The extremely productive use of noun + noun sequences in newspaper language  results in a very dense presentation of information. These forms save space, since  each noun + noun sequence conveys a complex meaning in condensed form.  Nonetheless, the dense use of these forms can place a heavy burden on readers,  who must infer the intended meaning relationship between the modifying noun and  head noun. 
             • Plural nouns as premodifiers
               • occur especially in newspaper language. A few nouns are commonly found in both American and British English
                 • Arms + race, scandal, supplier, treaty Sales + force, gain, increases, tax Savings + account, banks, deposits, institutions Women + candidates, drivers, ministers, voters However, there is a much larger set of plural nouns used frequently in British English but rarely in American English. For example: Drugs + administration, ban, business, companies, problem, trade Jobs + crisis, losses, market Animals shelter, careers office, highways department In addition to the overall dialect differences, there are two factors that are associated with the use of a plural premodifying noun. The first is when the noun premodifier only has a plural form, or has a special meaning associated with the plural: Arms accord, customs officer, explosives factory
                   • Arms + race, scandal, supplier, treaty   Sales + force, gain, increases, tax   Savings + account, banks, deposits, institutions   Women + candidates, drivers, ministers, voters  However, there is a much larger set of plural nouns used frequently in British  English but rarely in American English. For example:   Drugs + administration, ban, business, companies, problem, trade   Jobs + crisis, losses, market   Animals shelter, careers office, highways department  In addition to the overall dialect differences, there are two factors that are  associated with the use of a plural premodifying noun. The first is when the noun  premodifier only has a plural form, or has a special meaning associated with the  plural:   Arms accord, customs officer, explosives factory
               • However, some nouns which have only a plural form do lose the plural ending in noun + noun constructions: Scissor kick, trouser leg
                 • The second factor is when the noun modifier itself contains more than one word: [1] At Tesco’s you’ve got fifty feet of [[baked beans] shelves]. [2] A bit more will be said of particular features of the metalinguistic and [[possible worlds] proposals].
                   • The plural form in these sequences provides a clear signal of the structure of the complex noun phrase. In writing, some of these premodifiers are hyphenated (as in 2 above). Some plural nouns, such as affairs, relations, resources, rights, and services are almost always premodified themselves, and retain the plural form when used in premodification: The State Department’s [[consular affairs] bureau] Labour’s chief [[foreign affairs] spokesman] The [[customer relations] department]
                 • Noun phrases with multiple premodifiers
                   • premodifying sequences usually have embedded relationships, with some words modifying other premodifiers instead of the head noun.
                     • Both of these noun phrases show an adverb (quite and mutually) modifying a following adjective (pale and perpendicular) instead of the head noun (skin and directions). In a few cases, the meaning relationships among constituents are truly ambiguous.
                       • The number of possible meaning relationships increases dramatically with each additional premodifier.
                   • The order of multiple premodifiers
                     • Although there are no absolute rules, there are a few general tendencies governing the order of words in a premodification sequence
                       • Adverb + adjective + head Adverbs almost always precede adjectives. This is because adverbs usually modify the following adjective rather than the head noun directly.
                         • Adverb + adjective + head  Adverbs almost always precede adjectives. This is because adverbs usually modify  the following adjective rather than the head noun directly. Examples include:  A really hot day An extremely varied and immensely pleasing exhibition  A thoroughly satisfactory reply A rather blunt penknife 
                       • Adjective + noun+ head
                         • When a noun phrase has both an adjective and a noun as premodifiers, the adjective usually precedes the noun.
                           • Adjective + noun + head Mature rice grain, thick winter overcoat, true life stories, bright canvas bags
                           • Colour adjective + noun + head: Black plastic sheet, black leather jacket, red address book
                           • Participial adjective + noun + head An experienced woman worker, broken bicycle wheels, an increasing mortgage burden
                     • This order can sometimes be reversed, especially with participial adjectives. This is when the premodifying noun modifiers modifies the participial adjective (rather than the head noun)
                       • Noun + participial adjective + head noun: [information processing] activities, [hypothesis testing] process In most cases, this kind of sequence of premodifiers is hyphenated. In fact, such sequences may be considered as adjectival compounds: English-speaking world, self-fulfilling prophecy, tree-lined avenues, egg-shaped ball
                       • Adjective + adjective+ head A related principle for multiple adjectives as premodifiers is that descriptors tend to precede classifiers: Stronger environmental regulation, any major industrial nation Colour adjectives tend to follow other adjectives. For example: Adjective + colour adjective + head noun Dry white grass, clear blue eyes, shabby black clothes
                   • Coordinated premodifiers
                     • coordinated premodifiers make the logical relationships among premodifiers explicit, since each part directly modifies the head noun: Black and white cat Hot and hardening mud Arrogant and unattractive man Physical and sexual abuse
                       • However, these structures have their own kinds of indeterminacy. In most cases, premodifiers coordinated with and are used to identify two distinct attributes that are qualities of a single referent: Precise and effective solutions Pleasing and efficient surroundings Complex and technical legislation
                       • With plural and uncountable heads, however, and-coordinated premodifiers can also be used to identify two different (mutually exclusive) referents, such as: Spoken and written styles Male and female workers British and American spelling
                       • Or-coordinated premodifiers can also have two interpretations. In some cases, either one, or both, of the two attributes can be applied to a given referent: Racial or religious cohesion Familiar or preplanned activities
                         • In other cases, though, the coordinator connects two attributes that are mutually exclusive, so that only one can characterize a given referent. Dead or dying larvae Petroleum or coal-based hydrocardon matrices
                           • In general, coordinated premodifiers are most common in academic writing. Certain adjective + adjective combinations are especially common, often referring to complementary demographic or institutional characteristics
   • Postmodification
     • The structures that can postmodify a head noun are: relative clauses, appositive clauses, appositive noun phrases, non-finite clauses (-to infinitive clauses, ing clauses, and ed-clauses) and prepositional phrases
       • Relative clauses
         • A relative clause is a group of words related to a noun (or a pronoun). It comes after the noun it relates to, and it has its own subject and verb.
           • three key components
             • the head noun
               • the noun modified by the relative clause.
             • the relativizer
               • the word, such as who or that, that introduces the relative clause. It refers to the same person or thing as the head noun.
                 • there exist eight different relativisers
                   • Relative pronouns WHICH, WHO, WHOM, WHOSE, THAT
                     • Relative pronouns substitute for a noun phrase in the relative clause (subject, direct object, etc.), while relative adverbs substitute for an adverb phrase. For example, the relative pronoun whom stands for the direct object of the verb knew in the following structure
                       • Relative pronoun choices
                         • Three relative pronouns stand out as being particularly common in English: who, which, and that. The zero relativiser is also relatively common.
                           • the relative pronouns that begin with the letters wh- are considered to be more literate. In contrast, the pronoun that and the zero relativiser have a more colloquial flavor and are preferred in conversation. These register differences are related to other structural and functional considerations. For example, newspaper texts commonly discuss the actions of people, resulting in a frequent use of relative clauses with who, such as: A 20-year-old woman who has been missing for a week
                             • In contrast, academic prose focuses on inanimate objects or concepts, resulting in a much greater use of the relativiser which.
                               • The choice among relative pronouns is influenced by a number of other factors, including gap position, and restrictive v. non-restrictive function. In general, that is usually used only with restrictive relative clauses, while which is used with both restrictive and non-restrictive clauses.
                                 • Who v. which with human and non-human head nouns
                                   • Of the four most common relativisers (who, which, that, and zero), two (who and which) are most sharply distinguished: Who occurs almost exclusively after human heads. Which occurs most often after inanimate heads.
                                     • Especially in the written registers, there is a very strong tendency for a relative clause with a human head noun to use who rather than which (or that)
                                 • That and zero with human and non-human head nouns
                                   • Relative clauses with that or zero are flexible in that they can be used with both inanimate and animate head nouns. In conversation, that freely occurs with animate heads. In fact, for many head nouns referring to humans, that is almost as common in conversation as who: All those poor people that died
                                     • These same head nouns also commonly take a zero relativiser in conversation: Who’s the ugliest person you’ve ever seen? I thought of a girl I used to know called Louise.
                                 • Whom and who v. that with human head nouns
                                   • The relativisers who and whom are both used with animate head nouns, but the choice between them is pretty clear-cut: who is usually used with subject gap positions, while whom is used with non-subject gaps
                                     • Who with subject gap: This gentleman is the doctor who examined the body.
                                     • Whom with non-subject gap: They lived in America and had one child, a girl whom they idolized.
                                     • With non-restrictive relative clauses, there is a very strong preference to use who/whom rather than that or zero: Donal Lenihan, who had been named as captain, has also withdrawn after injuring a shoulder.
                                       • With restrictive relative clauses, that is a general-purpose relative pronoun. It occurs with animate and inanimate heads, and with gaps in subject or non-subject position. It is an alternative to whom for animate head nouns and non-subject gaps. The choice of that over whom is especially preferred in informal discourse (like conversation and fiction). It avoids the formal overtones of whom, and possibly avoids the choice between who and whom: There might be people that we don0t know of. She took up with the first boy that she came near to liking.
                                         • Which v. that in detail
                                         • Whose v. of which
                                           • The relativiser whose is used to mark a possessive relationship between a human head noun and some other noun phrase
                                             • In fact, whose can be used to mark possessive relationships with completely inanimate, sometimes abstract head nouns. This use is especially common in academic prose
                                               • A variant way of introducing a relative clause with of which is to front only the prepositional phrase of which, leaving the rest of the noun phrase to follow it in its normal position in the relative clause
                                                 • Finally, similar meanings can be expressed in two other ways: (1) relative clause with which or that and the verb have, or (2) a postmodifying prepositional phrase with the preposition with. For example, compare: [8] He joined a dining-club which had the motto… [9] He joined a dining-club with the motto…
                         • Zero relativiser
                           • Speakers and writers often omit the relativiser altogether in restrictive relative clauses. This alternative is possible in standard English whenever the gap is not in subject position. For example: The only shiny instrument he possessed The way the man used to watch him
                             • it has colloquial associations and is therefore especially characteristic of conversation and fiction.
                               • In fiction, zero relativiser occurs both in the quoted speech of fictional characters and in fictional narrative
                                 • In all registers, the zero relativiser is more likely to be used when the subject of the relative clause is a personal pronoun. This is because most pronouns distinguish between subject (nominative) and object forms (e.g. I, we, she, he, v. me, us, her, him), and so the presence of a subject pronoun unambiguously marks the beginning of a relative clause, even without the relativiser: The only choice we’ve got The kind of organization she likes The way we acquire knowledge
                         • Relative clauses with adverbial gaps
                           • When relative clauses have adverbial gaps, speakers and writers have four choices for the use of relativisers, as shown below. The time when I began
                             • Relative adverbs: where, when, why
                               • These relative adverbs substitute for an entire adverbial phrase.
                                 • Occasionally where and when are used to mark an abstract “location” rather than physical locations or times.
                                   • The use of relative adverbs is limited because there are many types of adverbial gaps that do not have a corresponding relative adverb. For example, there is no standard relative adverb for manner adverbials: *the way how I look at it.
                             • Preposition + relative pronoun which
                               • The second option is to use the relative pronoun which preceded by a preposition that marks the adverbial element in the relative clause. For example: The apartments in which no one lives The endless landscape from which the sand is taken In these constructions, the preposition + relative pronoun stands for the adverbial prepositional phrase in the relative clause. Thus, the relative clause in 1 has the meaning “no one lives in the apartments.” This choice is recommended by many usage handbooks.
                             • Stranded preposition
                               • A third option for adverbial gaps is to leave the preposition stranded in the relative clause, marking the site of the gap. The relativiser can be which, that, or zero with this option (the stranded preposition is underlined): The one that old James used to live in Some of the houses I go to
                               • Omitted preposition
                                 • The last option is to omit the preposition altogether, providing no surface marker of the adverbial gap. The relativiser may also be omitted in these structures: [1] The time that I began [2]The way I look at it [3] A place I would like to go In these structures the preposition has to be inferred from the information in the head noun and the main verb of the relative clause.
                                 • Manner adverbial gaps and way
                                   • As already mentioned, there is no relative adverb available for relative clauses with manner adverbials gaps. Instead, these structures almost always use the same head noun: way. For example: They’re not used to the way that we’re used to living. It is not the only way in which a person can be brought before a court. Because way as a head noun is so strongly associated with a manner adverbial gap, these relative clauses usually occur with both the relativiser and the preposition omitted. This tendency holds for academic prose as well as for the more colloquial registers. For example: That’s not the way you do that. (…) the way the book is used
                   • Relative adverbs WHERE, WHEN, WHY
                     • the relative adverb where stands for an entire prepositional phrases that expresses and adverbial of place
                   • In addition, in many cases the relativiser can be omitted (but not with subject gaps, discussed below), resulting in a zero relativiser
                     • To some extent, the choice of relative pronoun is determined by structural factors like the position of the gap in the relative clause. The relativisers that, which, and who are the most flexible in their gap positions. As a result, they are by far the most frequent forms. The most common use of all three pronouns is with subject gaps:
                       • In contrast to that, which, and who, the other relativisers are rarer. They are restricted to a specific gap position: Whom occurs only with non-subject noun phrase gaps. Whose occurs only with possessive/genitive gaps. Where, when, and why occur only with adverbial gaps. The choice of the specific relative adverb is determined by the adverbial meaning of the gap: where for place/location; when for time; why for reason. Zero occurs only with non-subject gaps in restrictive relative clauses. Thus, it would be impossible to omit the relative pronoun in a subject-gap relative clause such as:
                         •  Subject gaps:  [1] Do you want a cup of tea that’s been brewing for three days?  [2] The lowest pressure ratio which will give an acceptable performance is always  chosen.  [3] There are merchant bankers who find it convenient to stir up apprehension.  All these three relative pronouns can also be used with other gap positions:     Direct object gaps:  [4] She came up with all sorts of things that she would like for the new  development.  [5] Ralph trotted into the forest and returned with a wide spray of green which he  dumped in the fire.  [6] He took an instant dislike to Leroy, who he attacked twice.   Adverbial gaps   [7] You have to pay for it in the year that you don’t make any profit. (time adverbial)  [8] Well, that’s the only way that this can be assessed. (manner adverbial)  Complement/object of a preposition gaps   [9] (…) the mustard pot, which he had been sitting on.   [10] They are statements of a kind about which readers can readily agree.  [11] (…) the guy who I buy the Mega stuff off. 
             • the gap.
               • the location of the missing constituent in the relative clause. All relative clauses have a missing constituent, which again corresponds in meaning to the head noun.
                 • Thus, consider the relative clause construction: The diamond earrings that Mama wore ^ The head noun is earrings. The relativiser is that, referring to the “earrings.” The gap occurs in the direct object position, after the verb wore. The underlying meaning of the relative clause is that “Mama wore [the earrings].”
     • Postmodification by non-finite clauses
       • There are three major types of non-finite postmodifying clauses: ing-clauses, ed clauses, and to-clauses. The first two types are also called participle clauses, and the third is also called an infinitive clause or a to-infinitive clause. Participle clauses as postmodifiers always have subject gap positions. They can often be paraphrased as a relative clause
         • Most non-finite clauses do not have a stated subject. However, with to-clauses the subject is sometimes expressed in a for-phrase
           • Participle clauses as postmodifiers
             • Both ed-clauses and ing-clauses can function as postmodifying participle clauses
               • Ed-clauses: [1] The US yesterday welcomed a proposal made by the presidents of Colombia, Peru and Bolivia.
               • ing-clauses: [3] A military jeep travelling down Beach Road at high speed struck a youth crossing the stree
                 • The verbs in ed-clauses correspond to passive verbs in finite relative clauses. Thus, for 1 and 2, equivalent relative clauses would be: [1a] a proposal that was made by the presidents of Colombia, Peru and Bolivia [2a] the assumptions that were given above In contrast, the verbs in ing-clauses do not always correspond to finite progressive aspect verbs.
                   • Most ing-participles and passive verbs occur in participle clauses rather than relative clauses, even when relative clauses could be used. That is, a postmodifying participle clause is the expected choice whenever an ing-form or a passive verb occurs in a postmodifying clause. Ed- clauses can usually be rephrased as a full relative clause with a passive verb, by inserting which is or something similar. So participle clauses serve the interests of efficiency: they convey the same meaning in fewer words.
               • To-clauses as postmodifiers
                 • Postmodifying to-clauses are more flexible than participle clauses for two reasons: they can occur with both subject and non-subject gaps, and they can occur with an overt subject noun phrase.
                   • To-clauses with subject gap: Its absence was a factor to be taken into account. (note: this is a passive construction equivalent to “a factor is to be taken into account”)
                   • To-clauses with object gaps: Papa dressed in his Sunday suit and was a sight to see. There is one further matter to confess.
                   • To-clauses with adverbial gaps: They’d take a long time to dry. We shall have to find a way to associate numbers with our operators.
                   • To-clauses with prepositional object gap (and stranded preposition): She’s had a lot to put up with.
                   • To-clauses with an overt subject (introduced by for): That’ll be the worst thing for us to do. There was no possible way for the pilot to avoid it (manner adverbial gap).
                 • Postmodification by prepositional phrases
                   • Prepositional phrases are the most common type of postmodifier in all registers, although they are especially common in news and academic prose.
                     • Prepositional phrases with of
                       • Over half of all postmodifying prepositional phrases begin with the preposition of. This is due to the extremely wide range of functions for this preposition. Many functions of of-phrases include: After quantity nouns: loads of work After unit nouns: a piece of cake After container nouns: our bottle of champagne After nouns denoting shape: a pile of money After species nouns: these kinds of question In addition, of-phrases can express many more specialized meaning relationships. Some of these could be paraphrased as noun + noun sequences
                         • However, many expressions with of-phrases cannot be easily rephrased in this way
                     • Prepositional phrases with in and other prepositions
                       • Prepositional phrases beginning with in are also moderately common. They express meanings that cover physical location, time meanings, and logical relationships
                         • Physical location: The mess in his bedroom The third largest trucking firm in the Midwest
                         • Time/durational meaning The longest touchdown in the history of the school Maintenance of health in the long term
                         • More abstract meanings: The co-chairman’s faith in the project The rapidly deteriorating trend in cashflow A resulting decrease in breeding performance
                     • Postmodification by appositive noun phrases
                       • Appositive noun phrases have equivalent status with the preceding (head) noun phrase. That is, the order of head noun phrase + appositive noun phrase can normally be reversed to produce an equally grammatical construction with essentially the same meaning: Former secretary of state Jim Baker= Jim Baker former secretary of state
                         • Appositive noun phrases are usually non-restrictive in meaning. They provide descriptive information about the head noun, but they are not needed to identify the reference of the head noun. One exception to this is with nouns that refer to words, phrases, or expressions: The word gossip itself actually means “God’s kin.” Here the appositive is restrictive in function, identifying which “word.”
                           • Like prepositional phrases, appositive noun phrases are an abbreviated form of postmodifier. In contrast to relative clauses, appositive noun phrases include no verbs at all. Not surprisingly, these postmodifiers are by far most common in the registers with the highest informational density.
                             • Proper noun + descriptive phrase: Dr. Jan Stjernsward, chief of the World Health Organisation Cancer Unit Vladimir Ashkenazy, one of the world’s greatest pianists
                             • Descriptive phrase + proper noun: The editor of The Mail on Sunday, Mr Stewart Steven The Labour Party’s housing spokesman, Mr. Clive Soley In academic prose, appositive noun phrases have a wider range of use. In many cases, the appositive noun phrase is given in parentheses following the head noun. Appositive noun phrases are commonly used in five ways:
                               • To provide an explanatory gloss for a technical reference: The mill (a term introduced by Babbage) The optical propagation direction (z-direction)
                               • To introduce acronyms: IAS (Institute of Advanced Studies) SLA (Second Language Acquisition)
                               • To introduce short labels for variables, parts of diagrams, etc.: The valves on the pressure side (V1 and V2) A point P
                               • To name chemical or mathematical formulas: Fayalite, Fe2SiO4 Hydrogen chloride, HCI
                               • To list items included in some class: Essential nutrients (manganese, copper and zinc) The various life-history events (i.e. oviposition, hatching and maturation)
                   • Postmofication by appositive clauses
                     • Appositive clauses v. relative clauses
                       • On the surface, noun appositive clauses can appear to be identical to relative clauses with that: The fact that it can be done is important. However, appositive clauses and relative clauses are actually very different structures. Their differences are summed up as follows:
                         • The relative clause in example 1 identifies which “report” Peter is reaching for. It has a gap in subject position, which corresponds to the head noun report. The underlying meaning of the relative clause is that the report lay behind him,” but that takes the place of the report in the relative clause. In contrast, in example 2 the noun complement clause gives the actual content of the “report”: that “the trade group’s leading indicator fell.” The noun complement clause is complete structurally. It does not include a reference to the head noun in any way (i.e. it does not have a gap corresponding in meaning to the head noun). In addition, the complementiser that cannot be omitted in this or any other appositive clause. Finally, report is one of the few nouns that can be modified by complement clauses.
                       • Structural types of appositive clauses
                         • There are two main types of appositive clauses: finite that-clauses and non-.finite to-infinitive clauses
                           • Note that while the to-clauses have missing subjects that can be reconstructed from the context, they do not have gaps corresponding to the heads permission or plans. In addition, ing-clauses and wh-clauses sometimes occur as noun complement clauses
                             • In addition to the simple pattern noun + wh-clause shown above, there are two other structural options for the wh-interrogative clauses. The first uses the preposition of followed by a wh-clause. The second uses the preposition as to followed by the wh-clause. This option is used primarily with the wh-interrogative word whether.
                     • Restrictive and non-restrictive functions
                       • it should be noted that appositive clauses can be used in non-restrictive functions, where they serve a parenthetical function
                         • These non-restrictive appositive clauses are used when the writer assumes that most readers already know the content of the head noun (e.g. the “allegation” or the “contrary assumption”), but they want to spell it out to avoid uncertainty.
                       • Head nouns with appositive clauses
                         • Unlike relative clauses, appositive clauses occur with a small set of head nouns. Many of the head nouns with noun complement clauses express a stance towards the proposition in the complement clause. For example, these head nouns can be used to indicate the certainty of the proposition or the source of the information: fact, claim, and report.
                           • Appositive clauses with head nouns that convey stance are especially common in news and academic prose. In conversation and fiction, similar functions are more commonly served by complement clauses following verbs or adjectives. In many cases, the same roots can be used to control both noun and verb complement clauses. For example: [1] (…) there is every hope that this will continue. [2] I just hope that I’ve plugged it in properly.
                             • Each structural type of noun complement clause occurs with a different set of head nouns. The following sections survey these head nouns and the associated functions for each type.
                               • Head nouns complemented by that- clauses
                                 • That-clauses functioning as appositive clauses are one of the primary devices use to mark stance in academic prose. In these constructions, the that-clause reports a proposition, while the head noun reports the author’s stance toward that preposition. Two main kinds of stance are expressed by the most common head nouns. The first is an assessment of the certainty of the proposition in the that clause. Typical nouns are: Fact, possibility, claim, notion, assumption, hypothesis, rumor
                                   • The second kind of stance is an indication of the source of the information expressed in the that-clause. Three primary sources and their typical nouns can be distinguished:
                                     • Linguistic Communication / Cognitive Reasoning / Personal belief
                                       • Many of these head nouns are nominalized equivalents of verbs or adjectives that can control that-appositive clauses. Most of these nouns have corresponding verbs that also control that-clauses. For example: [6] What’s your feeling about his claim that someone’s trying to kill him? (compare: The nuns claim that their eggs have never been associated with an outbreak of food poisoning.)
                                         • As illustrated by the above examples, appositive clauses often express stance in an abstract way, without a clear agent. With verb complement clauses, the subject of the controlling verb mentions a person, so that the stance reported by the verb can be attributed directly to that person. In contrast, the stance conveyed by a controlling head noun is not normally attributed to anyone. For example, the examples above include head nouns such as possibility, belief, assumption and possibility.
                                           • Readers must infer whose attitude towards the information is reported. Verb complement clauses are preferred in conversation while appositive clauses are preferred in academic writing. This distribution reflects major differences between the registers in structure and function:
                                             • Conversation tends to use verb constructions that directly and prominently attribute stance to participants. Academic writing uses appositive clauses that tend to give more prominence to the information; the stance is backgrounded and not directly attributed to the author.
                                 • Head nouns complemented by to-infinitive clauses
                                   • Unlike that-clauses, the head nouns with to-clauses do not typically present a personal stance. Instead, nouns commonly taking to-clauses represent human goals, opportunities, or actions: chance, attempt, effort, ability, opportunity, decision, plan, bid
                                     • A second difference from that-clauses is that to-clauses are especially common in newspaper language (instead of academic prose). The meanings of the head nouns taking to-clauses fit the purposes of news, with a focus on human goals and actions rather than on stance towards propositions: [1] We need to give decent people a chance to elect a sensible council.
                                       • Yet the head nouns taking to-clauses are similar to those taking that-clauses in that many of them are nominalised equivalents of verbs or adjectives controlling to complement clauses. Nouns with corresponding verbs + to-clauses: attempt, decision, desire, failure, intention, permission, plan, proposal, refusal, tendency Nouns with corresponding adjectives + to-clauses: ability/inability, commitment, determination, willingness Thus compare: [4] He chastises Renault for their failure to respond to BMW’s challenge. [5] He failed to notice that it made Wilson chuckle. [6] Such an order should be made only where there is evidence of the defendant’s ability to pay. [7] I’ve never been able to determine that for sure.
                                   • Head nouns complemented by of- + ing- clauses
                                     • Several of the head nouns that take of- + ing-clauses can also take another type of complement clause. The following head nouns occur with both of- + ing-clauses and with that-clauses: idea, hope, possibility, sign, thought
                                       • Fewer head nouns can take both an of- + ing-clause construction and a to-clause, but they include two of the most common nouns with both constructions –chance and intention: [3] Also one increases the chance of revealing similarities between superficially distinct objects.
                                         • Finally, some head nouns can control only of + ing-clauses, such as cost, task, and problem: [5] They presented the move as a contribution by the Government to the huge cost of improving water quality.
                                     • Head nouns complemented by wh-interrogative clauses
                                       • Wh-interrogative clauses are much less common than the other types of noun complement clause. They are restricted mostly to occurrence with the head noun question. The of- + wh-clause variant is actually more common than simple wh-clauses as noun complements, especially in news and academic prose. Further, it occurs with a wider range of head nouns. These include nouns referring to