This chapter addresses secondary predicates (SPs), those elements conveying an additional predication on top of the first predication featured by the main verbal form. Slavic secondary predicates follow the regular pattern, typical of most Indo-European languages, of a non-verbal element related to an argument in the clause. Having defined the concept, the author discusses the following types of this phenomenon in Slavic languages: (a) depictive secondary predication and (b) regular (final state) and trajectory resultative constructions. She also presents non-verbal predicates in argument position, which share some features with secondary predication.

There is, typically, some resistance when the word grammar is mentioned, especially if it is in the context of a textbook. That is because grammar is often seen as something that must be forced on students. As with most ideas of freedom, compulsion in grammatical education is resisted when people see no value in it. Another reason for resistance to grammar is because formal grammar (beyond a few basics) was dropped from the education system in many English-speaking countries around 30 years ago, and it is thus unfamiliar, or even ‘strange’. Generations of students have been convinced that they do not need to ‘do’ grammar, since they can already speak the language quite fluently. There is even the belief, articulated by people who are most typically monolingual in English, which is that grammar is only for people who need to be taught how to speak English; that is other people.

Chapter 1 of Discourse Syntax introduces the concept of discourse syntax and connects this topic to what students likely already know from a basic introduction to English syntax, like parts of speech, basic principles of canonical word order in English and basic patterns of grammatical variation, such as syntactic movement. It emphasizes that patterns of variation are systematic and often rooted in the surrounding discourse. The chapter also introduces corpora of English, such as the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA), and the notion of reference grammars.

Chapter 3 targets the theoretical issues underlying non-finiteness. It is argued that spoken and written language should be distinguished because they require different grammars. With the wisdom in current literature and with the focus on written language, this chapter elaborates on cryptotype and cline, metafunctions as universal categories, process as the basic semantic unit, clause as the basic syntactic unit, ideational grammatical metaphor as the mechanism, two principles in constructional tendency, the difference between rankshifting and embedding, and a new definition of non-finiteness. Thus, the answer is provided to the question: In what way is the finite/non-finite distinction universal?

Here, we look at a number of syntactic differences that are used for different pragmatic purposes, specifically the characteristic but imperfect relations between the following clause types and speech acts: declarative clauses for making statements, closed interrogative clauses for asking closed questions, open interrogative clauses for asking open questions, imperative clauses for issuing commands, and exclamative clauses for uttering exclamations. These relations exist for both main and subordinate clauses.

Declarative clauses are the basic clause type that we’ve been describing so far. Interrogatives have a number of characteristics differences, including subject–auxiliary inversion and the use of interrogative words and fronting of the interrogative phrase in open interrogatives. The exclamatives are always marked by an initial exclamative phrase that begins with either adjective ‘what’ or adverb ‘how’. Imperatives characteristically lack a subject and use the plain form of the verb. We conclude with a brief description of a few minor clause types.

The clause is a special kind of phrase with a verb phrase (VP) as its head, also called its predicate. The subject is an external complement (outside the VP). Though traditional definitions of the subject fail, subjects have some characteristic properties. Notably, they usually precede the VP, but some interrogative constructions feature subject-auxiliary inversion, in which the subject is preceded by an auxiliary verb; subject pronouns are usually nominative case. Semantically, subjects are typically the predicand, a semantic term for what a predicate applies to. Objects are internal complements, and pronoun objects are usually accusative case. Some verbs license two objects: direct and indirect. The verb ‘be’ and a few others take predicative complements. Like objects, predicative complements are internal complements. Unlike objects, they can be adjective phrases and they never correspond to any passive subject. There are ascriptive and specifying uses of ‘be’. Internal complements also include various subordinate-clause and preposition-phrase complements.

If you’re coming to this book from a traditional grammar or with little or no background in grammar, or if you plan to read only individual chapters, then this chapter was written to orient you to our approach and make your life easier.

We start by discussing words, different senses of what a word is, and the ways that words are categorized. Then show how words can be combined into phrases with heads and dependents, where each phrase category is named after the category of its head word. These phrases build into a special larger phrase called a clause.

With this framework in hand, we move into the core of the chapter. Beginning with §2.3, each of the sections corresponds with a chapter. So, Ch. 3 and §2.3 are Verbs and verb phrases, Ch. 4 and §2.4 are Complements in clauses, etc.

The chapter also includes an appendix explaining the book’s notational conventions.

In this chapter, we take paradigmatic reasoning as point of departure and describe axial relations for interpersonal clause systems in Brazilian Portuguese. We reason axially about MOOD types first in relation to discourse-semantic systems and then by agnating clause structures. Our description is text-based and privileges the view from above as it investigates how exchanges are enacted in language through the discourse-semantic systems of NEGOTIATION, SPEECH FUNCTION and ENGAGEMENT – which in turn are realised by MOOD and ASSESSMENT in the grammar. A corpus based on a range of text types forms the basis of the study. The core of interpersonal grammar comprises the functions of Predicator, Finite and Subject realising MOOD – responsible for dialogic interaction and negotiation. Positioner is the function realising ASSESSMENT – the grammatical system responsible for assessing the roles of speaker and listener, thus managing their voices in the negotiation of moves.

This chapter gives an introductory overview of the strategies used in mainland Southeast Asian languages for making verbal predications in the core of clauses. There is an overview of verbal marking including patterns of negation, aspect, and modality. An important feature of the area’s languages is the heavy reliance on serial verb constructions (or multi-verb constructions) for packaging information in clauses and sentences. The chapter surveys various sub-categories of multi-verb construction, including depictive/adverbial constructions and complementation strategies. The chapter closes with a section on valency-changing strategies, including syntactic causatives, reflexives, and reciprocals.