The study of how words combine to create utterances is known as syntax. Similar to how morphemes combine to make words, words combine to form sentences that convey a specific meaning. When words are combined to create structures in syntax, it is important to consider how those words relate to one another. (Lardiere 364). There are syntactical categories because of the possibility that words within a structure may share connections to the point where some cannot be distinguished. For instance, a prepositional phrase is a syntactic component, just like verb and word phrases. Below follows a list of prepositional phrases in sentences and an explanation on why each is considered a syntactic constituent.
The ball is under the table.
We haven't met since last year.
James stays beyond that hill.
The book is hidden beneath the suitcase.
Stacy traveled without her parents.
Explanations
In sentence 1, the underlined phrase is a constituent. When one poses the question: Where is the ball? The underlined phrase: under the table, becomes the answer. Again, the words making up the PP cannot be further split because meaning will be lost. The interdependence between the words in the phrase demonstrates that it is a syntactic constituent with a defined role to play in the grammatical entity within which it is found.
In sentence 2, the underline structure; since last year is a PP. One of the natures of constituents is that they can change positions within the same structure without interfering with the original meaning. For example, sentence two can be rewritten as; Since last year, we have not met. Note that the underlined words were initially sentence-final. However, they now appear at the beginning of the sentence and play the role of the subject. The meaning of the sentence remains intact.
In sentence 3, the underlined phrase is a PP. The fact that the phrase beyond the hill can be substituted with another and still retain the meaning of the sentence is proof that the underlined structure is a syntactical constituent. Example, James stays at Michigan. Note that the initial underlined phrase has been replaced by another that was not part of the structure and the sentence remains meaningful.
In sentence 4, the underlines structure is a syntactical constituent. The structure cannot be broken down within itself by addition of an adverb. For example; ‘The book is hidden often beneath the suitcase.', and ‘The book is often hidden beneath the suitcase. ‘Consider the positions of the adverb written in bold on both sentences; you will note that the second sentence retains its initial meaning while the first loses its meaning. The explanation for this is that a constituent does not allow for splitting using other words within structures in which they appear. They, however, repel such words and force them to take positions elsewhere in the structure as witnessed above.
Taking sentence 5, the claim that the underlined phrase passes as a PP can be best supported by the fact that the structure, cannot be broken apart. The phrase; ‘without her parents' cannot be broken down into the constituent words since meaning will be lost. If at all the determinant ‘her' in the PP is to be omitted, the resultant sentence is rendered ungrammatical. For example, Stacy traveled without parents. Note that the phrase has omitted the determinant of the noun- ‘parents’. The sentence becomes ungrammatical. Therefore, PP cannot be broken down further to its building constituents, or treat them separately and still retain their meaning. Traditionally, a PP is always followed by an NP, where, the NP is made up of a determinant and a noun. When any of the three constituents is missing or is treated in isolation, the meaning of the phrase disappears or changes altogether.
Works Cited
Lardiere, Donna. "Dissociating syntax from morphology in a divergent L2 end-state grammar." Second language research 14.4 (1998): 359-375.
