ABSTRACT: Syntax refers to the rules that govern how words combine to create meaningful utterances. Morphemes combine to form words, words combine into phrases and phrases combine according to set rules into clauses.

Sequencing Morphemes

An understanding of morphology demonstrates that there is an accepted sequential order for the addition of bound morphemes to free morphemes. So, the following sequences are acceptable.

re-organise

dis-organise

dis-organise-ation

However, the following constructions are not permitted by the sequential rules governing the placement of bound morphemes.

organise-re

organise-dis

ation-organise-dis

In other words, re- and dis- may only function as prefixes and -ation may only function as a suffix.

Sequencing Words

In just the same way that sequencing rules apply to morphemes, similar sequencing rules also apply at the word level. To illustrate, what does the following word mean?

blind

Two common interpretations would probably be either, ‘without the power of sight’ or ‘a screen for a window’. Now, what does this word mean?

Venetian

Did you interpret this as meaning ‘a native or inhabitant of Venice’? Perhaps you again considered it to mean, ‘a screen for a window’? But now consider the following.

Venetian blind

Is this the same as the following?

blind Venetian

It should be obvious that a Venetian blind is not the same as a blind Venetian!

This simple example illustrates very well the notion of syntax. It is apparent that the correct sequencing of words is crucial to convey the appropriate meaning. Syntactic rules, then, govern which words can be associated with which other words in a language, and in what order. Failure to follow the rules of syntax can result in meaningless word combinations, e.g.

to colleague not estranged my chose phone I

[cf. I chose not to phone my estranged colleague]

In contrast, an appropriate application of syntactic rules can lead to a variety of utterances, all of which convey the same essential meaning:

These examples of the plodding ploughman appear in an anonymous book written in 1883 entitled ‘English as She is Wrote’ – download a free copy here

Phrases

Now, as you might expect, words also combine to form larger units. Consider the utterance the boy hugged the dog. Notice that the words in this syntactically correct structure appear to combine into three units: (1) the boy, (2) hugged, and (3) the dog, i.e.

These units are known as phrases. Phrases represent an intermediate level of organisation between the word and what is known as a clause, i.e. words do not combine immediately into clauses but, rather, into smaller units known as phrases. This key property of language is known as structure-dependence. We see that it is possible to change elements of phrases, e.g.

In addition, the phrases can be modified and expanded, e.g.

It should be evident that these phrases could be expanded and amended almost indefinitely. However, we have already noted that syntactic rules govern which words may be combined with which others. Similarly, there are rules which govern how phrases may combine to create meaningful utterances. For example, the following is an acceptable combination:

But the following is not:

It is arguable that this may still be interpretable but it does not conform to the syntax of English and, to a native speaker, this construction does not appear to be well-formed.

Clauses

We seen then how phrases may combine to construct larger units, e.g. we + are going + to Judy's + for dinner = we are going to Judy's for dinner. These larger units are known as clauses. Phrases function differently in different clauses, giving rise to seven basic clause structures in English. Clauses may be further combined in spoken language into so-called clause complexes, e.g.