A Student's Introduction to English Grammar

5.7 Coordinators

§5.8 Subordinators 21

The central members of the coordinator category are and, or, and but -
in traditional grammar they are called 'coordinating conjunctions'. Their function is
to mark the coordination of two or more expressions, where coordination is a rela­
tion between elements of equal syntactic status. This syntactic equality is typically
reflected in the ability of any one element to stand in place of the whole coordina­
tion, as in:

[16] We need a long table and at least eight chairs.

ii a. We need a long table. b. We need at least eight chairs.

In [i] we have a coordination of a long table and at least eight chairs, each of which
can occur in place of the whole, as evident from the two examples in [ii]. Precisely
because the elements are of equal status, neither is head: coordination is not a
head + dependent construction.

5.8 Subordinators

(a) Function

The most central members of the subordinator category are that, whether, and one
use of if- the one that is generally interchangeable with whether (as in I don 't know
whether/if it's possible). These words serve to mark a clause as subordinate.
Compare, for example:

[17] MAIN CLAUSE SUBORDINATE CLAUSE

a. He did his best. b. I realise [that he did his best].

He did his best in [a] is a main clause, one which, in this example, forms a sentence
by itself. Addition of the subordinator that changes it into a subordinate clause.
Subordinate clauses characteristically function as a dependent element within the
structure of a larger clause. In [b] that he did his best is a dependent of the verb
realise, and hence is part of the larger clause I realise that he did his best. That is
often optional: in I realise he did his best the clause he did his best is still subordi­
nate, but it is not overtly marked as such in its own structure.

(b) Differences from traditional grammar

One minor difference is that we follow most work in modern linguistics in taking

subordinators and coordinators as distinct primary categories, rather than sub­

classes of a larger class of 'conjunctions'. More importantly, we will argue

in Ch. 7, §2.1, for a redrawing of the boundaries between subordinators and

prepositions - but again we will in the meantime confine our examples to those

where our analysis matches the traditional one in respect of the division between

the two categories.