Theoretical Grammar of English

Compound Sentences

The compound sentence was not felt to be a sentence proper. There were at least three methods, as L. Iophic and Chahoyan (17) state, employed by the grammarians to find a way out of this difficulty: (1) to explain it away by the complete independence and the possibility of isolating each member of a compound sentence without any change of its meaning or intonation; (2) by employing new terms to express more exactly the grammatical peculiarity of this combination of sentences. The terms “double”, “triple” and “multiple” sentences were used by E. Kruisinga (36) in “A Hand-book of Present day English” and H.R. Stokoe (41). (3) by excluding this concept from the structural classification of sentences.

The analysis of compound sentences show that clauses of a compound sentence are usually connected more closely than independent sentences. According to M. Blokh (7) “in these sentences the clauses are arranged as units of syntactically equal rank, i.e. equipotent” (p.296). But more close examination of these type of sentences shows that:

1. 
   The order of clauses is fixed.
   
   1. 
      He came at six and we had dinner together.
      
   2. 
      The two women understood one another very well, but Paul seemed to be left outside this conversation.
      
   3. 
      Every drawer in every room had been taken out, the contents spilled, the bed had been ripped apart, pictures were off their hooks and (they) were lying on the floor.
      

One cannot change order of the clauses in these sentences.

2. 
   Between clauses of compound sentences there exist certain semantic relations. And these relations are defined by conjunctions and connectives:
   
   1. 
      Harmony or agreement (copulative relation):
      

Her lips trembled and she put up her hand as if to steady them with her fingers.

2. 
   Contrast or opposition. This relation is usually expressed by adversative conjunctions but, yet: The conjunctions are not numerous but they are of very frequent occurrence.
   
3. 
   The choice or alternation (disjunctive conjunction- or): Is that historically true or is it not?
   
4. 
   Reason or consequence (or conclusion) for, so... E.g.
   

He had apparently been working, for the table was littered with papers. There's no car available, so I shall go on foot.