Английского

§ 5. Semi-complex sentences of attributive complication are de-
rived from two base sentences having an identical element that oc-
cupies the position of the subject in the insert sentence and any no-
tional position in the matrix sentence. The insert sentence is usu-
ally an expanded one. By the semi-complexing process, the insert 
sentence drops out its subject-identical constituent and is trans-
formed into a semi-predicative post-positional attribute to the ante-
cedent element in the matrix sentence. E.g.: 
The waves sent out fine spray. + The waves rolled over the dam. → 
The waves rolling over the dam sent out fine spray. I came in late 
for the supper. + The supper was served in the dining-room. → I 
came in late for the supper served in the dining-room. 
The analogy between post-positional attributes (especially of a de-
tached type) and attributive subordinate clauses has always been 
pointed out in grammar-books of various destination. The common 
pre-positional attribute is devoid of a similar half-predicative char-
acter and is not to be considered as forming a semi-composite con-
struction with the 

---

346
dominant predicative unit. Cf.: The bored family switched off the 
TV. — The family, bored, switched off the TV. 
As for the possible detachment of the defining element (construc-
tion) in pre-position, this use is rather to be analysed as adverbial, 
not attributive, the circumstantial semantic component prevailing 
over the attributive one in this case. Cf.: Bored, the family 
switched off the TV. → As the family was bored, it switched off 
the TV. 
, Naturally, the existence of some intermediary types cannot be ex-
cluded, which should be exposed in due course by the correspond-
ing contextual observation. 
As is seen, the base syntactic material for producing attributively 
complicated semi-composites is similar to the derivation base of 
position-sharing semi-composites. The essential difference be-
tween the constructions, though, lies in the character of joining 
their clausal parts: while the process of overlapping deprives the 
position-sharing expansion of any self-dependent existence, how-
ever potential it might be, the process of linear expansion with the 
attributive complication preserves the autonomous functional role 
of the semi-clause. The formal test of it is the possibility of insert-
ing into the construction a relative conjunctive plus the necessary 
verbal element, changing the attributive semi-clause into the re-
lated attributive pleni-clause. E.g.:' This is a novel translated from 
the French. → This is a novel which has been translated from the 
French, 
This test resembles a reconstruction, since an attributive complica-
tion in many respects resembles a reduced clause. The position-
sharing expansion does not admit of this kind of procedure: the 
very process of overlapping puts it out of the question. The other 
factor of difference is the obligatory status of the position-sharing 
expansion (even in constructions of'"free"''object-sharing) against 
the optional status of the attributive complicator. 
The attributive semi-clause may contain in its head position a pre-
sent participle, a past participle and an adjective. The present parti-
cipial attributive semi-clause corresponds to the attributive subor-
dinate clause with a verbal predicate in the active. E.g.: We found 
dry ground at the base of a tree looking toward the sun. → We 
found dry ground at the base of a tree that looked toward the sun. 
Naturally, the present participial semi-clause of the attributive type 
cannot express an event prior to the event 

---

347
of the dominant clause. So, an attributive clause of complete predi-
cative character expressing such an event has no parallel in a parti-
cipial attributive semi-clause. E.g.: The squad that picked me up 
could have been scouts. → (*) The squad picking me up... 
The past participial attributive semi-clause corresponds to the pas-
sive attributive subordinate clause. E.g.: You can never rely on the 
information received from that office. → You can never rely on the 
information which is received from that office. 
The adjectival attributive semi-clause corresponds to the nominal 
attributive subordinate clause. E.g.: We admired the lilies white 
against the blue water. → We admired the lilies which were white 
against the blue water. 
Semi-complex sentences of participial attributive complication 
formed by introducer constructions resemble subject-sharing semi-
complex sentences. Cf.: 
There is a river flowing through the town. → There is a river which 
flows through the town. This is John speaking. → This is John who 
is speaking. 
Still closer to the subject-sharing semi-composite sentence stands 
the peculiar introducer or demonstrative construction whose at-
tributive semi-clause has a finite verb predicate. This specific semi-
complex sentence, formed much on the pattern of common subject 
overlapping, is called the "apo-koinou" construction (Greek "with a 
common element"). E.g.: 
It was you insisted on coming, because you didn't like restaurants 
(S. O'Casey), He's the one makes the noise at night (E. Heming-
way). And there's nothing more can be done (A. Christie). 
The apo-koinou construction is considered here under the heading 
of the semi-complex sentence of attributive complication on the 
ground of its natural relation to the complex sentence with an at-
tributive subordinate clause, similar to any common semi-complex 
sentence of the type in question. The apo-koinou construction 
should be classed as a familiar colloquialism of occasional use.