The Analytical IC Model of the Sentence

Charles Fries has suggested the following diagramme for the analysis of the sentence which also brings forth the mechanism of generating sentences. The largest IC of a simple sentence are the NP and the VP. The boundary between them goes between the word of Class 1 and the word of Class 2. The NP in English has two IC – the determiner and Class 1 word (N). The vertical lines must show the boundary inside the phrase. If the word of the first class has an attribute to it (as is the case in our sentence below), this small phrase must be again divided into the IC (‘recommending’ and ‘committee’ in our sentence). The VP comprises two IC: the verb itself, and either NP (if the V is transitive), or a word of Class 4 (if the V is intransitive). Thus we must show the boundary between the V and the NP (‘his promotion’), then analyze the NP – ‘his promotion’.

The recommending committee approved his promotion

Layer 3

Layer 2

Layer1

The deeper the layer of the phrase (the greater its number), the smaller the phrase, and the smaller its IC.

The analysis is begun with the largest IC and comes down to the smallest phrases. If the sentence is complex the largest IC are the sentence included into the complex construction.

The diagramme may be drawn somewhat differently without changing its principle of analysis. This new diagramme is called a ‘candelabra’ diagramme:

The man hit the ball

S

When the analytical IC model was created and diagrammed there was left only one step to its understanding as a generative model, a model by which sentences can be built (or generated).

In fact, if we turn the analytical (candelabra) diagramme upside down, we get a new diagramme which is called a ‘derivation tree’, because it is fit not to analyse sentences, but shows how a sentence is derived (or built, or generated) from the IC.

Не нашли, что искали? Воспользуйтесь поиском: