My dictionary defines it as " a constituent of a meaningful grammatical relation that cannot be analyzed into smaller meaningful features and that may be marked by features of word order, selection of allomorphs, agreement with finite verb forms, and elaboration by preceding adjectival modifiers ."
22.
Jakobson opposes the view that " an average reader " uninitiated into the science of language is presumably insensitive to verbal distinctions : " Speakers employ a complex system of grammatical relations inherent to their language even though they are not capable of fully abstracting and defining them " ( 30 ).
23.
In particular, in parents child-directed speech the clausal core is built in the most part by Anglo-Saxon verbs, namely, almost all tokens of the grammatical relations subject-verb, verb-direct object and verb-indirect object that young children are presented with, are constructed with native verbs.
24.
In making up a situation where the ( prescriptivistically speaking )'incorrect'sentence would be OK, you're making exactly my point that the grammatical relations are not untouchable, and that other factors do have a say also . & mdash; & # 9998; 08 : 40, 7 November 2005 ( UTC)
25.
The extreme formalist would study language as abstracted away from the people who speak it and independent of speech ( and not pay much attention to Gumperz, Goffman, Halliday, etc . ) . ( also, note that " functional " here doesnt mean " functional " in the sense of grammatical relations as in Relational Grammar ) . & ndash; ( speak ) 19 : 43, 19 April 2008 ( UTC)
26.
(The label P is sometimes used in place of O . Note that while the labels S, A, O, and P originally stood for " subject ", " grammatical relations " subject " and " object ", and from the thematic relations " agent " and " patient " : an A or S need not be an agent or subject, an O need not be a patient, even in a language where they usually are .)
27.
In this context, transformational rules are not strictly necessary for the purpose of generating the set of grammatical sentences in a language, since this can be done using phrase structure rules alone; but the use of transformations provides economy in some cases ( allowing the total number of rules to be reduced ), and also provides a way of representing the grammatical relations that exist between sentences, which would not otherwise be reflected in a system consisting of phrase structure rules alone.
28.
74.105.132.151-- Frequently in agglutinating languages, morphemes are composed of sound sequences which can't really stand alone as separate words by themselves; while in isolating languages, the words which indicate grammatical relations are not really arranged in strict paradigms ( the way affixes in agglutinating languages often are ), and have more freedom of positioning than do affixes in agglutinating languages, etc . So it's not the case that agglutinating languages and isolating languages are just the same thing, with fewer word boundaries recognized vs . more word boundaries recognized.
29.
Some nouns change their form depending on whether they have a possessor or not, alternating between absolute and construct states, such as absolute " kunet ", construct "-kunew "'child'; this is reminiscent of how verbs may change their forms depending on their transitivity ( i . e . whether they take an object or not ), e . g . intransitive " waki ", transitive "-watza "'dry', transitive " miki "'die', transitive "-miktia "'kill', etc . Once again, it is changes in the head that determine the nature of the grammatical relation between the head and its dependent ( s ).
