1

Sentence:

The car is the best mode of transportation but requires lots of gasoline, making it expensive to operate.

I think this is a grammatical sentence but am not sure what the proper concepts are to describe its components. What kind of phrase is "making it expensive to operate"? e.g., is it a participial phrase that modifies the verb phrase "requires lots of gasoline"?

KillingTime
  • 6,206
gjirsogjsojgs
  • 27

5 Answers5

3

Labels vary, but "making it expensive to operate" can be called an appendage, a category of supplement (the other category being an interpolation, which occurs in the middle of a sentence).

A supplement modifies (or expands) the whole sentence, from which it is structurally separate, reflected in the fact that it is separated from the sentence by punctuation.

In this particular case, it is of the non-finite (participle) clause type. Other types of include relative clauses, noun phrases or verbless clauses (appositives and absolute phrases) and adjectival, adverbial, and prepositional phrases.

References:

1: A Student's Introduction to English Grammar [Huddleston and Pullum]

2: ThoughtCo: Sentence-expanding Grammar Exercises [Nordquist]

3

What kind of phrase is "making it expensive to operate"? e.g., is it a participial phrase that modifies the verb phrase "requires lots of gasoline"?

The phrase is headed by the participle making, so you could call the phrase a "participial phrase" or a "participial clause" (i.e., a non-finite clause). But I wouldn't say it "modifies" requires lots of gasoline. The phrase making it expensive to operate isn't combining with requires lots of gasoline to form a larger constituent conveying a modified meaning. Rather, it's merely explaining a drawback of requiring lots of gasoline. Syntactically, this is expressed with the comma before making it expensive to operate. And this kind of phrase is often called a supplement.

Note also that the same meaning can be conveyed with a supplementary relative clause as follows:

The car is the best mode of transportation but requires lots of gasoline, which makes it expensive to operate.

Here, we don't say the relative clause "modifies" requires lots of gasoline, because it's not combining with requires lots of gasoline to form a larger constituent conveying a modified meaning, either.

JK2
  • 6,553
2

The car is the best mode of transportation but requires lots of gasoline, [making it expensive to operate].

You're on the right lines.

I'd say that the bracketed element is simply a gerund-participial clause functioning as an adjunct in clause structure (i.e. a modifier in the VP).

Note that the connective "thus" could be inserted at the start of the clause making it semantically a result adjunct.

BillJ
  • 12,832
  • Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed. – tchrist Apr 13 '23 at 20:29
1

You have a reduced sentence relative clause (warning: grammar terms vary) . . .

Unreduced: The car is the best mode of transportation but requires lots of gasoline, which makes it expensive to operate.

Reduced: The car is the best mode of transportation but requires lots of gasoline, making it expensive to operate.

Unlike the usual relative, the sentence relative refers not to a noun but to the whole of the preceding proposition.

See: Grammaring — Sentential relative clause

 

Tinfoil Hat
  • 17,008
  • 1
    "Making it expensive to operate" is not some kind of 'reduced' relative clause, even if there were such a thing (which there isn't), since there is no relativised element anaphorically related an antecedent. It's actually a gerund-participial clause functioning as an adjunct (possibly result) in clause structure. – BillJ Apr 08 '23 at 07:43
  • 1
    @BillJ — For the benefit of our guests, you should note that you refer exclusively to CGEL’s grammar framework and terminology. – Tinfoil Hat Apr 08 '23 at 14:49
  • 1
    Not so. The syntax is so obviously different that it makes no sense to call it a 'reduced relative clause'. Relative clauses are either modifiers to a noun or nominal, or supplements (non-modifying, non-integrated adjuncts). By contrast, gerund-participial clauses like the one being discussed here are integrated into clause structure as adjuncts. – BillJ Apr 08 '23 at 16:50
1

In the example sentence

The car is the best mode of transportation but requires lots of gasoline,
making it expensive to operate.

there are four main verbs (boldfaced above), which means four clauses, of different types. Since these include subordinate clauses, this is a complex sentence. Since they also include coordinate clauses, it's also a compound sentence. Being both at once makes it a compound-complex sentence. This is all one normally learns about such sentences in grammar school. But there's plenty more.

First, let's sort out the clauses. As is normal for English compound-complex sentences, many potential constituents don't appear but can be identified nonetheless, like the subject of Get out of here! I'll put them (back) in with parentheses marking optionality below:

  1. The car is the best mode of transportation (first conjoined clause, no deletions)
  2. but (the car/a car/it) requires lots of gasoline,
    (second conjoined clause, deleted subject from Conjunction Reduction, comma for non-restrictive clause)
  3. making it expensive comes from a non-restrictive relative which makes it expensive
    (but the dummy it shows something else has been done -- Extraposition has moved clause (4) to the end)
  4. (for indef) to operate (a car) (this clause is the subject of (be) expensive in (3). What's expensive? Operating a car. Who's operating it? We don't care.)

(4) gets pushed to the end to avoid the following train wrecks of sentences without Extraposition:

  • The car is the best mode of transportation but requires lots of gasoline, making to operate it expensive.
  • The car is the best mode of transportation but requires lots of gasoline, which makes to operate it expensive.
John Lawler
  • 107,887
  • 1
    It's easier and more logical to say "making it expensive to operate" is a gerund-participial clause functioning as an adjunct in clause structure. Note that "thus" could be inserted, making it more specifically a result adjunct. – BillJ Apr 08 '23 at 16:55
  • 1
    @BillJ If you say so. As noted in comments above, you use your own standards for ease, logic, and terminological desirability. – John Lawler Apr 08 '23 at 17:07
  • Extraposition? Surely 'expensive to operate' is one element, a predicate AdjP containing a hollow to-infinitival, and 'it' has 'the car' as referent - The car is expensive to operate. Your last example sentence suggests as much as you've added 'it' into the to-infinitival clause; were it extraposition, this would be unnecessary. – DW256 Apr 09 '23 at 01:49
  • 1
    If it's a unit, how come it's got two predicate slots that can be freely substituted: cheap/easy/dangerous to operate/buy/sell/talk about? It's two constructions consisting of two clauses, each with its main predicate (expensive, operate). Otherwise you hafta recognize upwards of 100,000 "predicate AdjP" combinations and filter out the ones that don't make sense. – John Lawler Apr 09 '23 at 16:22
  • @John Lawler That's how complementation works - a certain subset of adjectives, when used predicatively, allow hollow to-infinitival clauses. Surely you wouldn't argue that there's extraposition in The car is expensive to operate or The need for lots of gasoline makes the car expensive to operate; so why argue for it here? – DW256 Apr 10 '23 at 01:10
  • 1
    "Hollow infinitive clauses" Interesting theoretical concept. The car is expensive to operate is not extraposition (which always leaves a dummy it subject), but rather Tough-Movement, a minor cyclic movement rule governed by a small group of mostly adjectival predicates like tough, expensive, easy, etc. You can get the list of predicates that govern Tough-Movement on the web. Tough-Movement works just like Subject-Raising, a major rule governed by a large number of predicates, except that, instead of raising its subject, it raises the infinitive's object. – John Lawler Apr 10 '23 at 13:39