Linguistics: TestAS practice testlets

Syntax studies how words combine into phrases and sentences. Its central insight is that sentences are not simply strings of words but have a hierarchical structure: words group into larger units, called constituents, which group into still larger ones. In "The old dog chased the cat", "the old dog" and "the cat" are noun phrases, and "chased the cat" is a verb phrase.

Linguists identify constituents with tests. A group of words is likely to be a constituent if it can be replaced by a single word such as a pronoun (substitution test: "the old dog" can be replaced by "it"), if it can be moved as a unit (movement test: "The cat, the old dog chased"), or if it can serve as the answer to a question ("Who chased the cat? The old dog."). "Dog chased" passes none of these tests and is therefore not a constituent.

Sentences are also analysed by grammatical function. The subject is typically the element that agrees with the verb and, in active sentences, often names the agent. The direct object is affected by the action. Adverbials give circumstances such as time, place or manner and can often be left out without making the sentence ungrammatical.

Hierarchical structure explains structural ambiguity, in which a sentence has two meanings because its words can be grouped in two ways. "I saw the man with the telescope" can mean that I used a telescope to see the man, if "with the telescope" belongs to the verb phrase, or that the man had a telescope, if it belongs to the noun phrase "the man with the telescope". The words are the same; only the structure differs.

Languages differ in their basic word order. English is an SVO language: subject, verb, object. Japanese and Turkish are SOV languages. German has a special pattern: in main clauses, the finite verb always stands in the second position (verb-second, or V2), while any constituent, not only the subject, can come first ("Morgen fährt sie nach Berlin"). In subordinate clauses introduced by a conjunction such as "dass" or "weil", the finite verb moves to the end ("..., weil sie morgen nach Berlin fährt").

Why do people say "Could you possibly open the window?" when "Open the window" would convey the same request in fewer words? Pragmatics explains such choices with theories of politeness. The most influential was developed by Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson in 1978, building on the sociologist Erving Goffman's concept of face.

Face is the public self-image that every person wants to maintain. Brown and Levinson distinguished two aspects. Positive face is the wish to be liked, approved of and included. Negative face is the wish to be free from imposition, to act without being hindered by others. Many ordinary speech acts threaten one of these. A request or an order threatens the hearer's negative face, because it imposes on their freedom. Criticism or disagreement threatens the hearer's positive face. An apology threatens the speaker's own positive face, since it admits a fault.

Speakers use strategies to soften such face-threatening acts. Positive politeness addresses the hearer's wish to be appreciated: compliments, expressions of common ground, informal address and inclusive "we" ("Let's have a look at your essay together"). Negative politeness respects the hearer's freedom: indirect questions, hedges such as "perhaps" or "a little", apologies for the imposition and giving options ("I'm sorry to bother you, but could you possibly…"). The most indirect strategy is the hint, or off-record act, where the request is only implied: "It's rather warm in here." The choice depends, according to the theory, on the social distance between the speakers, the power of the hearer over the speaker and how great the imposition is.

Languages grammaticalise politeness in different ways. German, French and many other languages distinguish between a familiar and a polite form of address, du and Sie, tu and vous, known as the T/V distinction. Japanese has an elaborate system of honorific verb forms. Critics of Brown and Levinson argue that their model reflects Western, individualistic values, and that in some cultures face is more a matter of the group than of the individual, while directness may be expected rather than impolite.