appositive relative clause or adjunct of reason/cause?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{
margin-bottom:0;
}
In the syntactic analysis of the following sentence I doubt:
"They then took the matter to a three-person jury of appeal, specially convened to hear the protest"
The last part in bold (speacially convened to hear the protest) could be 1) an adjunct of reason/cause since it is seprated from the main sentence by a comma. Or on the other hand it could be 2) an appositional relative clause that is post modifying the noun head "jury".
Can you help me? Thanks in advance!
relative-clauses adjuncts
asked May 28 at 17:29
BeaLOBeaLO
6
add a comment
|
In the syntactic analysis of the following sentence I doubt:
"They then took the matter to a three-person jury of appeal, specially convened to hear the protest"
The last part in bold (speacially convened to hear the protest) could be 1) an adjunct of reason/cause since it is seprated from the main sentence by a comma. Or on the other hand it could be 2) an appositional relative clause that is post modifying the noun head "jury".
Can you help me? Thanks in advance!
relative-clauses adjuncts
asked May 28 at 17:29
BeaLOBeaLO
6
2
Possible duplicate of Implicit "which is " [(traditional) Answer: Reduced Relative Clause]
– Edwin Ashworth
May 28 at 18:28
add a comment
|
In the syntactic analysis of the following sentence I doubt:
"They then took the matter to a three-person jury of appeal, specially convened to hear the protest"
The last part in bold (speacially convened to hear the protest) could be 1) an adjunct of reason/cause since it is seprated from the main sentence by a comma. Or on the other hand it could be 2) an appositional relative clause that is post modifying the noun head "jury".
Can you help me? Thanks in advance!
relative-clauses adjuncts
asked May 28 at 17:29
BeaLOBeaLO
6
In the syntactic analysis of the following sentence I doubt:
"They then took the matter to a three-person jury of appeal, specially convened to hear the protest"
The last part in bold (speacially convened to hear the protest) could be 1) an adjunct of reason/cause since it is seprated from the main sentence by a comma. Or on the other hand it could be 2) an appositional relative clause that is post modifying the noun head "jury".
Can you help me? Thanks in advance!
relative-clauses adjuncts
relative-clauses adjuncts
asked May 28 at 17:29
BeaLOBeaLO
6
asked May 28 at 17:29
BeaLOBeaLO
6
asked May 28 at 17:29
BeaLOBeaLO
6
asked May 28 at 17:29
BeaLOBeaLO
6
asked May 28 at 17:29
BeaLOBeaLO
6
6
2
Possible duplicate of Implicit "which is " [(traditional) Answer: Reduced Relative Clause]
– Edwin Ashworth
May 28 at 18:28
add a comment
|
2
Possible duplicate of Implicit "which is " [(traditional) Answer: Reduced Relative Clause]
– Edwin Ashworth
May 28 at 18:28
2
2
Possible duplicate of Implicit "which is " [(traditional) Answer: Reduced Relative Clause]
– Edwin Ashworth
May 28 at 18:28
Possible duplicate of Implicit "which is " [(traditional) Answer: Reduced Relative Clause]
– Edwin Ashworth
May 28 at 18:28
add a comment
|
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Here is an answer to your question about this:
"They then took the matter to a three-person jury of appeal [that was] specially convened to hear the case."
[I am changing protest to case, but that does not affect the grammar]. The comma would make "that was" irrelevant.
my answer on ELL
The two criteria for appositives are: they must be right after the noun with which they are identified, and they must have the same grammatical structure.
There are times that an appositive can be out of place (as the one in the link) but in your case, "specially convened to hear the case" describes the three-person jury of appeal, it is not a "renaming"of it.
It is a non-restrictive postmodifier phrase describing the jury of appeal.
I guess some might consider it a relative clause if one wishes to see it as "that was specially convened to hear the case."
post modifier
edited Jun 14 at 1:43
aparente001
16k5 gold badges37 silver badges76 bronze badges
answered May 28 at 18:16
LambieLambie
8,7721 gold badge11 silver badges37 bronze badges
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f500003%2fappositive-relative-clause-or-adjunct-of-reason-cause%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Here is an answer to your question about this:
"They then took the matter to a three-person jury of appeal [that was] specially convened to hear the case."
[I am changing protest to case, but that does not affect the grammar]. The comma would make "that was" irrelevant.
my answer on ELL
The two criteria for appositives are: they must be right after the noun with which they are identified, and they must have the same grammatical structure.
There are times that an appositive can be out of place (as the one in the link) but in your case, "specially convened to hear the case" describes the three-person jury of appeal, it is not a "renaming"of it.
It is a non-restrictive postmodifier phrase describing the jury of appeal.
I guess some might consider it a relative clause if one wishes to see it as "that was specially convened to hear the case."
post modifier
edited Jun 14 at 1:43
aparente001
16k5 gold badges37 silver badges76 bronze badges
answered May 28 at 18:16
LambieLambie
8,7721 gold badge11 silver badges37 bronze badges
add a comment
|
Here is an answer to your question about this:
"They then took the matter to a three-person jury of appeal [that was] specially convened to hear the case."
[I am changing protest to case, but that does not affect the grammar]. The comma would make "that was" irrelevant.
my answer on ELL
The two criteria for appositives are: they must be right after the noun with which they are identified, and they must have the same grammatical structure.
There are times that an appositive can be out of place (as the one in the link) but in your case, "specially convened to hear the case" describes the three-person jury of appeal, it is not a "renaming"of it.
It is a non-restrictive postmodifier phrase describing the jury of appeal.
I guess some might consider it a relative clause if one wishes to see it as "that was specially convened to hear the case."
post modifier
edited Jun 14 at 1:43
aparente001
16k5 gold badges37 silver badges76 bronze badges
answered May 28 at 18:16
LambieLambie
8,7721 gold badge11 silver badges37 bronze badges
add a comment
|
Here is an answer to your question about this:
"They then took the matter to a three-person jury of appeal [that was] specially convened to hear the case."
[I am changing protest to case, but that does not affect the grammar]. The comma would make "that was" irrelevant.
my answer on ELL
The two criteria for appositives are: they must be right after the noun with which they are identified, and they must have the same grammatical structure.
There are times that an appositive can be out of place (as the one in the link) but in your case, "specially convened to hear the case" describes the three-person jury of appeal, it is not a "renaming"of it.
It is a non-restrictive postmodifier phrase describing the jury of appeal.
I guess some might consider it a relative clause if one wishes to see it as "that was specially convened to hear the case."
post modifier
edited Jun 14 at 1:43
aparente001
16k5 gold badges37 silver badges76 bronze badges
answered May 28 at 18:16
LambieLambie
8,7721 gold badge11 silver badges37 bronze badges
Here is an answer to your question about this:
"They then took the matter to a three-person jury of appeal [that was] specially convened to hear the case."
[I am changing protest to case, but that does not affect the grammar]. The comma would make "that was" irrelevant.
my answer on ELL
The two criteria for appositives are: they must be right after the noun with which they are identified, and they must have the same grammatical structure.
There are times that an appositive can be out of place (as the one in the link) but in your case, "specially convened to hear the case" describes the three-person jury of appeal, it is not a "renaming"of it.
It is a non-restrictive postmodifier phrase describing the jury of appeal.
I guess some might consider it a relative clause if one wishes to see it as "that was specially convened to hear the case."
post modifier
edited Jun 14 at 1:43
aparente001
16k5 gold badges37 silver badges76 bronze badges
answered May 28 at 18:16
LambieLambie
8,7721 gold badge11 silver badges37 bronze badges
edited Jun 14 at 1:43
aparente001
16k5 gold badges37 silver badges76 bronze badges
edited Jun 14 at 1:43
aparente001
16k5 gold badges37 silver badges76 bronze badges
edited Jun 14 at 1:43
aparente001
16k5 gold badges37 silver badges76 bronze badges
16k5 gold badges37 silver badges76 bronze badges
answered May 28 at 18:16
LambieLambie
8,7721 gold badge11 silver badges37 bronze badges
answered May 28 at 18:16
LambieLambie
8,7721 gold badge11 silver badges37 bronze badges
answered May 28 at 18:16
LambieLambie
8,7721 gold badge11 silver badges37 bronze badges
8,7721 gold badge11 silver badges37 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f500003%2fappositive-relative-clause-or-adjunct-of-reason-cause%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
Possible duplicate of Implicit "which is " [(traditional) Answer: Reduced Relative Clause]
– Edwin Ashworth
May 28 at 18:28