M. Iriskulov, A. Kuldashev a course in Theoretical English Grammar Tashkent 2008

part-of- speech classification of notional words. From this point of view all 
subordinate clauses are divided into 3 categorial groups. 
The first group is formed by the substantive-nominal clauses. It 
includes clauses that name an event as a certain fact. They are also called noun-

---

140 
clauses and are similar to the nominative function of a noun. Their noun-like 
nature is easily revealed by substitution, e.g.: I thought up what we could do under 
the circumstances. – the clause can be substituted by “the plan”- I thought up the 
plan.
The second group of clauses is called qualification-nominal or 
adjective clauses. They name an event as a certain characteristic of another event. 
The adjective-like nature of these clauses can also be proved by substitution, e.g. 
The man whom you saw in the hall was our client. – That man was our client; 
e.g.: Did you find a room where we could hold a meeting? – Did you find such 
kind of room?
The third group of clauses can be called adverbial. They name an event 
as a dynamic characteristic of another event. Adverbial clauses are best tested by
transformations, e.g.: They will meet us half way if we follow the agreement.- 
They will meet us half way on condition that we follow the agreement; e.g.: I could 
hardly make up any plan, as I did not know the details.- I could hardly make up 
any plan for the reason that I did not know the details.
In conclusion it should be noted that the discussed principles of classification 
(functional and categorial) are mutually complementary (for details see: Bloch 
M.Y.
A Course in Theoretical English Grammar.- p. 311).
III. Other classifications of complex sentences in Modern English. 
Complex sentences can also be classed according to the intensity of 
connection between the principal and the subordinate clauses. Within the cognitive 
approach this criterion of complex sentences classification is viewed as principle of 
conceptual integration of clauses (see, for example, J.R. Taylor’s classification of 
clauses in: Taylor J.R. 2002).
The classification of complex sentences based on the intensity of connection 
between clauses has been introduced by N.S. Pospelov, who divided all 
subordinate clauses and their connections into obligatory and optional, and on this 
account all complex sentences of minimal structure are classed into one-member 
complexes, appearing in obligatory subordinate connection and two-member 
complexes with an optional connection.
The obligatory connection is characteristic of subject, predicative and object 
clauses. It means that without the subordinate clause the principal clause can not 
exist as a complete syntactic unit, e.g.: The thing is that they don’t know the facts. 
– you can’t just say: “The thing is…”
The optional connection is typical of adverbial clauses and attributive clauses 
of descriptive type. These clauses can be easily deleted without affecting the 
principal clause as a self-dependent unit of information, e.g.: He chose a large 
room which overlooked the sea.
Extending this classification to all complex sentences, not only to those of 
minimal structure M.Y. Bloch introduced the notions of monolythic and 
segregative types of sentence structures. Monolythic constructions are built upon 
obligatory subordinative connections while segregative complexes are based upon 
optional subordinative connections. M.Y. Bloch discriminates 4 basic types of 

---

141 
monolythic complexes according to the degree of syntactic obligation and its 
reasons complementary (for details see: Bloch M.Y. A Course in Theoretical 
English Grammar. - p. 330).
It should be also noted that complex sentences with two or more subordinate 
clauses can be of two types of subordination arrangement: parallel and 
consecutive. Parallel subordination is observed when subordinate clauses 
immediately refer to one and the same principal clause, e.g.: I knew that he would 
like the trip and that his wife would approve of the idea. – both the clauses refer to 
the principal clause. 
Consecutive subordination presents a hierarchy of clausal levels. In this hierarchy 
one subordinate clause is subordinated to another, e.g.: I thought you knew how 
to react under the circumstances.
The syntactic arrangement classification of complex sentences is definitely 
useful. It gives the evaluation of the “depth” of subordination – one of the essential 
syntactic characteristics of the complex sentence. 
Thus, the traditional (structural) linguistics suggests the interpretation of
the complex sentence based on the analysis of its semantico-syntactic properties.
The complex sentence is viewed as a subordinative arrangement of clauses, one 
being the principal and the rest subordinate. The existing classifications of 
complex sentences are built up around the semantic difference of clauses, the 
essence and intensity of the subordinate connection.