Syntagm - SpeedyLook encyclopedia

General information on the syntagm

A syntagm is a whole of Mot S forming only one catégorielle and functional unit, but whose each component, because dissociable (contrary to the made up Mot), preserves its own significance and its syntax. A syntagm thus constitutes a occasional association , free, whereas the made up word is a permanent association (when a syntagm solidifies, it becomes a detached compound of course, that is to say a phrase).

the components of a given syntagm can be new syntagms of lower level (of the under-syntagms ), structured following the example syntagm which includes them. In its turn, each one of these under-syntagms will be able if necessary, hierarchically to contain other syntagms subordinates ( under-under-syntagms , all in all), and so on.

Consequently, whatever the level of a given syntagm, this one can virtually be included in a syntagm of higher level ( principle of regrouping ), but can as well include a syntagm of lower level ( principle of division ):

It bought a modest house de bricks rouges.

the syntagm “ a modest house of red bricks ” is included in the higher syntagm, i.e., the complete sentence. But this same syntagm “ a modest house of red bricks ” includes among its elements, the lower syntagm “red brick ”, complement of the name “ house ”.

This double principle of regrouping and division (that is to say, the principle of inclusion ) and this identity of structure make syntagm the true syntactic component of the sentence .

the syntagm has the catégorielle and functional unit indivisible word. An analysis of the syntagm will thus take place in three times:

- to find its catégorielle unit ( noun phrase , verb phrase , etc);

- to find its functional unit (on which higher unit it depends, and which is its precise function);

- to find its constituent , namely, its core (who inherits his natural and its function) and its satellite (lower units included in him).

Components of the syntagm

The components of the syntagm are: on the one hand the core , on the other hand one or more satellite .

a syntagm reduced to its only core, i.e. without any satellite, is not really any more a syntagm but an isolated category. It is however possible (and sometimes, practical) to consider that an isolated unit (Nom, Pronom, Verbe, Adverbe, qualifying adjective) is a syntagm with single element . In other words, “ any syntagm can contain of zero with several satellites ”.

Core of the syntagm

The core (or team leader , or support ) is the central element of a syntagm. The core always transmits its category and its function to the syntagm of which it is the component main thing.

the core of a syntagm can be a basic category (simple word or made up word), but also a syntagm, i.e., a under-syntagm compared to the syntagm of reference:

a chemise in velours torn.

In this noun phrase, the core is “ shirt out of velvet ”, this last being itself a syntagm, having for core the name “ shirt ”.

When two cores (or more) are present in the same syntagm, pertaining to the same category and having the same function, they are known as parallel . Two parallel cores are, either juxtaposed (i.e., literally put one beside the other ), or coordinated, i.e., connected by one or more coordinating:

It always carries un pantalon and une chemise passed by again perfectly.

In the noun phrase “ pants and a shirt perfectly passed by again ”, the core double, is consisted of the noun phrases “ pants ” and “ a shirt ”, syntagms coordinated. The single satellite of this syntagm is the adjectival syntagm “ perfectly passed by again ”, epithet of the double core.

Satellites of the syntagm

In a syntagm, a satellite is component depend on the core of this syntagm.

In the place of the satellite word , some grammairiens prefers speech expansion , of subordinate (with a very general direction), or, of complement (but this last term poses a problem, since it is already employed in traditional grammar with a precise direction).

Contrary to the core, all the satellites of a syntagm, without exception, whatever their size and their aspect, can belong to any category (name, article, conjunction…) :

What a spectacle moving!

the name “ spectacle ” is the core of this noun phrase. The satellites are: the exclamative adjective “ which ” and the qualifying adjective “ moving ”.

Jacques a pleasantly invité Nathalie.

the verb “ invited ” is the core of this proposal (or verbal group). The satellites are: two proper names “ Jacques ” (prone of the verb) and “ Nathalie ” (C.O.D. of the verb), and the adverb “ pleasantly ”.

Any satellite can thus be an ordinary category (simple word or made up word), but also a syntagm, i.e., a under-syntagm compared to the syntagm of reference:

a cheap chemise.

the name “ shirt ” is the core of this noun phrase. The satellites are: the indefinite article “ a ” (simple word) and the qualifying adjective “ cheap ” (adjectival phrase).

the voiture that I bought.

the name “ car ” is the core of this noun phrase. The satellites are: the definite article “ the ” (simple word) and the verb phrase “ which I bought ” (relative Subordinate clause).

the same word can be core of several concentric syntagms:

nice a petit chat.

This noun phrase has as a core, not the name “ cat ”, but the noun phrase “ kitten ”, this last being in its turn made up of a core (the name “ cat ”) and of a satellite (the epithet qualifying adjective “ small ”).

Following the example what this master key for the core, when two satellites (or more) of the same syntagm belong to the same category and have the same function, they are known as parallel . Two parallel satellites are known as coordinated if they are joined together by a Mot-outil (a coordinating), and juxtaposed (i.e., literally put one beside the other ), in the contrary case:

You as mangé of salad, a pizza pie bought at the market, cherries which my neighbor offered to me.

the three syntagms “ of the salad ”, “ a pizza pie bought at the market ”, and “ of the cherries which my neighbor offered to me ”, are juxtaposed parallel satellites; all the three are noun phrases, and their function is C.O.D. of the verbal core “ ace eaten ”.

the voisin of which I spoke to you and who offered cherries to me, would like to meet you.

the two verb phrases “ about which I spoke to you” and “ which offered cherries to me”, are coordinated parallel satellites (connected by the coordinating conjuction “ and ”); both are relative subordinate clauses, and their function is complement of the antecedent “ the neighbor ”.

Various types of syntagms

Only a full word (or with the rigor, a pronoun ) can be the core of a syntagm, therefore, according to the category of the core, one will be able to distinguish only five types of syntagms.

Noun phrase

A noun phrase is a syntagm whose core is a Nom:

small the chien white of my neighbor barked all the night.

the noun phrase “ the white puppy of my neighbor ” has as a core the name “ dog ”.

the email is probably the service more used by the Net surfers.

Pronominal syntagm

A pronominal syntagm is a syntagm whose core is a Pronom:

has midday, we ate something of good.

the pronominal syntagm “ something of good ” has as a core the pronoun “ something ”.

Adjectival syntagm

A adjectival syntagm is a syntagm whose core is a qualifying adjective:

a garden all plein of odorous pinks.

the adjectival syntagm “ very full with odorous pinks ” has as a core the full qualifying adjective “ ”.

Adverbial syntagm

A adverbial syntagm is a syntagm whose core is a Adverbe:

They had to pay a fine conformément with the law.

the adverbial syntagm “ in accordance with the law ” conformément has as a core the adverb “ ”.

Verb phrase

A verb phrase is a syntagm whose core is a Verbe. Consequently, the verb phrase corresponds, according to the case, with a proposal or with a Phrase:

It a travaillé courageously all the weekend.

the verb phrase “ It worked all the weekend courageously” has as a core the verb “ worked ”.

When the core of a verb phrase is a verb not conjugated, one can specify, according to the mode of the verb core: infinitive group , group takes part present or group takes part last .

Remarks

Some grammairiens also speak about prepositional syntagms . To say that the preposition is the core of a prepositional group is of course absurd since a Mot-outil employed only, could not have direction, and that a syntagm, let us recall it, must constitute a unit semantic. In fact, of two things one:

- is, a prepositional syntagm is a syntagm whose core is well a full word, but which is simply “ introduced by a preposition ”. In this case, one will speak more precisely, of prepositional nominal group , prepositional verbal group , etc (it is besides in this direction that the expression prepositional syntagm is generally employed nowadays), and the preposition never constitutes the core;

- is a prepositional syntagm is a syntagm whose core is indeed a preposition, but whose satellites in fact are limited to adverbs (for example: completely above , or: quite front ) modifying or reinforcing the function word (the preposition, or sometimes, the conjunction) with which it combines. But in this case, it is rather of a phrase and not about a syntagm.

Thus and once again, put aside the case of the pronoun, a grammatical category (a function word) never constitutes the core of a syntagm.

For some grammairiens, the verb phrase does not include all the proposal, but the proposal minus the noun phrase (or pronominal) prone . There thus exists for this reason, two designs:

- proposal = verb phrase (the subject is a satellite of the verb core, as well as the other satellites);

- proposal = verb phrase + prone syntagm (the satellites of the subject are distinct from those of the verb).

Limit between made up word and syntagm

The syntagm, whose components are generally autonomous (for example, a “ apple of my garden ”), must be carefully distinguished from the made up word, of which the components are indissociable, indivisible, and whose order remains generally fixed (for example, a “ potato ”).

If the made up words are recognized by the language (one says that they are lexiconized ) and thus constitute necessary associative blocks , the syntagms on the contrary, is the subject of a free combination on behalf of the speaker, and thus constitutes simple contingent associations .

With regard to the compound words, it should be noted as a preliminary that the orthography of the unified made up , of the composed with apostrophe and of the composed with hyphen, not being parcelled out by spaces, these three types appear well on paper like basic, indivisible entities. In fact, only the detached lexical compounds, i.e., the phrases , can pose problem, since there is conflict between their parcelled out appearance and their necessary unit (only one category, only one function, only one significance).

In practice, the main difficulty is thus to be able to distinguish a phrase from a syntagm. How to proceed?

Comparison between these two types of units

A syntagm, just like a phrase, are a whole of words, associated with only one category and only one function. Syntagms and phrases can thus be regarded as satellite always depending on the core of the syntagm to which they belong.

But, if the components of a phrase are always indissociable, it is always possible on the contrary, to subdivide a syntagm to analyze its components, core and satellites.

With regard to the phrase, one should not analyze the function of its various components nor to seek a direction to them (only the direction and the function of the phrase count), while the various components of a syntagm have a whole a given function and a quite precise direction (at least with regard to the lexical elements).

Means practices to distinguish them

In a syntagm, the components were freely combined, according to the rules of syntax, whereas in a phrase, it does not have there free combination: the phrase is selected by the speaker like a block ready with employment, and inside this one, there is no necessarily syntax.

Let us take for example the segment “ splendid landscape ”. One notices that each one of his two elements has a distinct and locatable direction, distinct the total significance from the segment. By modifying one of the two elements of the segment, we can obtain an infinity of new segments: “ languid landscape ”, “ mysterious landscape ”, “ imposing landscape ”, etc, or, “ splendid film ”, “ splendid spectacle ”, “ splendid castle ”, etc One will note that if the general significance of the segment is well changed, the initial syntactic reports/ratios, them, are not modified. Indeed, there are always two distinct elements having each one its own function, and especially, its own direction. Consequently, “ splendid landscape ” constitutes a true syntagm.

On the other hand, if we make the same thing with the segment “ garden pea ”, we note first of all that we cannot modify the word order, because “ small pea ” does not have the same direction. Then we notice that each element of this segment does not have a clean direction (a “ garden pea ”, indeed, is not a pea of small size, but a type of particular vegetable which one thus invites in order to distinguish it from other connected vegetables, such as the “ greedy peas ”, for example). Consequently, “ garden pea ” is well a composed name, that is to say, a nominal phrase.

It is often the context which only makes it possible to decide if one deals with syntagm or with phrase. For example, if we use the segment “ Russian mountains ”, to literally indicate “ mountains located in Russia ” (as one can say: “ flat Russian ”, “ Russian rivers ”, “ Russian cities ”, etc, or, “ Chinese mountains ”, “ European mountains ”, “ French mountains ”, etc), it acts indeed of a formed nominal group of a noun and its attributive adjective. On the other hand, if we use this same segment to indicate the toboggan of the fun fair (lexiconized metaphor), it is not then any more of a syntagm, but about a nominal phrase, formed of indissociable elements.

Difficulty of the distinction

But it should be recognized that in practice, the limits between the phrase and the syntagm, are often fuzzy.

For example, the segment “ great man ” (i.e., a large man by its qualities and its actions), is a noun phrase (divisible in common noun preceded by an epithet) or a phrase?

If it is about a simple noun phrase, one must be able to say, for example, by preserving a similar significance, “ Marie Curie was a large woman ”. However, it is not the case.

If it is about a phrase, one must be able to say, for example, by preserving a similar significance, “ Marie Curie was a great man ”. However, it is not the case either.

One can conclude from it, that the segment “ great man ” is not completely any more an ordinary noun phrase, but is not yet completely a phrase (between phrase and syntagm, will be necessary it to invent the concept of semi-phrase ?).

syntagm

List of the concepts used in linguistics
morphosyntaxic Analysis
Lexiconizing
Lexicon
Word
Sentence
Syntax

Simple: phrases

Random links:

Elementary school in France | Asparagales | Brownish Michel (paleoanthropologist) | Park Library François Mitterrand | Autonomous power station of the workers of Peru