sentence analysis

[hela]

Dear teachers,

Would you please tell me if my analysis is correct ?

1) In the morning, the large black dogs hungrily chase the tiny brown rabbits into the woods.

In the morning = (optional) adverbial of time
the large...dogs = subject

hungrily chase = complex-transitive verb
OR
hungrily = adverbial of manner
chase = complex-transitive verb (?)

the tiny brown rabbits = direct object
into the woods = (obligatory) adverbial of place


2) Not only red but also green looks good on you.

Not only...green = subject
looks = intensive verb

good on you (?) = subject-related complement
OR
good = subject-related complement
on you = obligatory adverbial (??)

Thank you for your help.

 

[Frank Antonson1]

I am not sure if I speak your language of sentence analysis, but in:
"Not only red but also green looks good on you." I would say that "red" and "green" are both part of the compound simple subject.
"Not only...but also" is what I would call a correlative conjunction, like "either...or".

 

[MikeNewYork]

Dear teachers,

Would you please tell me if my analysis is correct ?

1) In the morning, the large black dogs hungrily chase the tiny brown rabbits into the woods.

In the morning = (optional) adverbial of time
the large...dogs = subject

hungrily chase = complex-transitive verb
OR
hungrily = adverbial of manner
chase = complex-transitive verb (?)

the tiny brown rabbits = direct object
into the woods = (obligatory) adverbial of place


2) Not only red but also green looks good on you.

Not only...green = subject
looks = intensive verb

good on you (?) = subject-related complement
OR
good = subject-related complement
on you = obligatory adverbial (??)

Thank you for your help.

In your first, "hungrily" is an adverb modifying the verb "chase". I am not sure how you define a complex-transitive verb, but this appears to be a regular transitive verb. "Into the woods" is an adverbial prepositional phrase, modifying the verb "chase". There is nothing obligatory about it.
In its simplest form, the sentence is "Dogs chase rabbits" (subject-verb-direct object).

In your second, I agree with Frank's analysis of the subject and the conjunction "not only...but also". You refer to "looks" as an "intensive verb". Others would call it a "linking verb" or a "copular verb/copula". The word "good" can be called a subject complement or a predicate adjective. The preposition phrase "on you" is adverbial. Whether it is obligatory is debatable.

 

[hela]

In your first, "hungrily" is an adverb modifying the verb "chase". I am not sure how you define a complex-transitive verb, but this appears to be a regular transitive verb. "Into the woods" is an adverbial prepositional phrase, modifying the verb "chase". There is nothing obligatory about it.
In its simplest form, the sentence is "Dogs chase rabbits" (subject-verb-direct object).

In your second, I agree with Frank's analysis of the subject and the conjunction "not only...but also". You refer to "looks" as an "intensive verb". Others would call it a "linking verb" or a "copular verb/copula". The word "good" can be called a subject complement or a predicate adjective. The preposition phrase "on you" is adverbial. Whether it is obligatory is debatable.

Hello MikeNewYork,

1) Do you consider "hungrily" as an adverbial of manner then ?
I thought that if "into the woods" was an obligatory adverbial the verb "chase" would be complex-transitive because followed by a direct object and an adverbial. But according to you it's optional, right?

2) What kind of adverbial is "on you"? And why wouldn't it be obligatory in this sentence?

Many thanks and best wishes.

 

[MikeNewYork]

Hello MikeNewYork,

1) Do you consider "hungrily" as an adverbial of manner then ?
I thought that if "into the woods" was an obligatory adverbial the verb "chase" would be complex-transitive because followed by a direct object and an adverbial. But according to you it's optional, right?

2) What kind of adverbial is "on you"? And why wouldn't it be obligatory in this sentence?

Many thanks and best wishes.

I don't consider a verb to be complex because it has an object and as adverbial. But terminology varies. That is a major problem with language discussions.

I don't consider "on you" obligatory because the sentence works without it.

A: Which dress should I wear?
B: Either red or green looks good. "On you" is assumed. One is not talking about "on the hanger".

 

[hela]

To sum up:

1) Do you think that the first sentence has 3 optional adverbials?
"In the morning, " (adverbial of time), "hungrily" (adverbial of manner), and "into the woods" (adverbial of place)?

=> In the morning (Ap), the large black dogs (S) hungrily (Am) chase (Trans V) the tiny brown rabbits (DO) into the woods (Ap).


2) Not only red but also green (S) looks (Link V) good (Cs) on you (Adverbial of what?).


3) How would you analyse "at the car", please?
The big dog (S) barked (Intrans V) loudly (Adverbial of manner) at the car (??).

Thanks again.

 

[MikeNewYork]

To sum up:

1) Do you think that the first sentence has 3 optional adverbials?
"In the morning, " (adverbial of time), "hungrily" (adverbial of manner), and "into the woods" (adverbial of place)?

=> In the morning (Ap), the large black dogs (S) hungrily (Am) chase (Trans V) the tiny brown rabbits (DO) into the woods (Ap).


2) Not only red but also green (S) looks (Link V) good (Cs) on you (Adverbial of what?).


3) How would you analyse "at the car", please?
The big dog (S) barked (Intrans V) loudly (Adverbial of manner) at the car (??).

Thanks again.

I am not in the habit of naming adverbials. And I don't know why you fuss over them. "At the car" is an adverbial prepositional phrase. This sufficient,