0

In John Seely's Oxford A–Z of grammar and punctuation, he gave the following sentence as an example of a complex sentence:

She told him that she did not play again for over a week.

'She told him' is the main clause and 'she did not play again for over a week' is the subordinate clause, according to him. My question is how this subordinate clause is dependent on the main clause? To me, the main clause feels dependent and the subordinate one seems independent. What am I doing wrong?

anotherone
  • 101
  • Depends on your definition of "dependent". – Hot Licks Apr 08 '20 at 21:01
  • 2
    It's the direct object of the verb told. Being dependent is not a matter of feeling; it means that it's not a complete sentence as it stands; in this case, that she did not play again for over a week is not a complete sentence; it's a subordinate (non-main) clause. – John Lawler Apr 08 '20 at 21:01
  • Thank you. I was thinking without the that. – anotherone Apr 08 '20 at 21:20
  • 1
    Yes, it is complex, but "she told him" is just part of the main (matrix) clause, which in your example is the whole sentence. The clause that she did not play again for over a week is marked as subordinate by the subordinator "that". And, of course, it cannot stand alone as a sentence. – BillJ Apr 09 '20 at 11:31

0 Answers0