|
ESL Forum:
Techniques and methods
in Language Teaching
Games, activities
and teaching ideas
Grammar and
Linguistics
Teaching material
Concerning
worksheets
Concerning
powerpoints
Concerning online
exercises
Make suggestions,
report errors
Ask for help
Message board
|
ESL forum >
Grammar and Linguistics > SVOC sentence help
SVOC sentence help
|
Kaylarr11
|
SVOC sentence help
|
Hello everyone,
I �m teaching basic sentence patterns and I understand them for the most part, but on some of them my brain gets a little hung up. I could use some help.
I know SVOC sentences are when the object is modified to become the complement.
E.g.: I made spaghetti for dinner. the spaghetti becomes dinner, hence SVOC.
Versus: I made dinner for her. Dinner doesn �t become her.
But, what about the following sentence.
[I have a friend called Tom.]
Is this an SVOC sentence? I don �t know why, but my brain is saying it �s not somehow, even though my friend "is" called Tom, because SVOC sentences are usually transformative in that the subject of the sentence acts upon the object to change it. I dyed my hair pink. I named my cat Fluffy. I turned the colour red, etc. However, in the case of [I have a friend called Tom.] Nothing has been acted upon as it is a description of a state.
I would really appreciate anyone �s thoughts on the matter who have taught this before.
|
25 Aug 2014
|
|
|
|
Zora
|
|
If I understand this correctly this is a rather curious (and new to me) way to explain the Passive Voice. The Passive Voice is when the object (direct or indirect) of the sentence becomes the new subject.
i.e.
I made a pie. - A pie was made (by me). I gave Rose a flower. - Rose was given a flower (by me). OR... A flower was given to Rose (by me).
That said, when sentences in the Active Voice (SVOC) use certain verbs like "to be" or "to have" - Stative Verbs usually -, you can �t always transform them directly into the Passive Voice.
So the answer to your question is no. You cannot turn that sentence into the Passive form because as you deduced it is a description of state, i.e. a Stative verb, and not a Dynamic verb such as verbs like make, play, buy, etc.
|
26 Aug 2014
|
|
|
yanogator
|
|
No, Linda, it isn �t quite Passive.Kaylarr11, I �m guessing that SVOC stands for subject-verb-object-complement, so I think your first example actually isn �t this form because of the prepositional phrase "for dinner". Something like "I made the spaghetti tasty by adding oregano" would be SVOC, as I understand it. As you said, it is a transformation, and "I made spaghetti for dinner" isn �t a transformation. Neither is "I have a friend called Tom". As Linda pointed out, stative verbs can �t be used in SVOC sentences, because there isn �t any change. Your other examples definitely are SVOC. An example with Tom would be "I call my friend Tom, even though his name is Bartleby". Bruce |
26 Aug 2014
|
|
|
chrissmolder
|
I am not sure if this helps, but "I have a friend called Tom" actually contains a reduced relative clause. It is reduced from "I have a friend who is called Tom" so it does in a sense contain BE and is passive (though I don�t think an SVOC sentence is supposed to be passive). But if you look at it this way it also contains two clauses and does not follow the pattern you describe anyway.
|
26 Aug 2014
|
|
|
Kaylarr11
|
Hey everyone,
Thank you so much for your comments!
I have been researching and I think the general idea of SVOC as a fundamental sentence type is that the pattern SVOC is one where C cannot be removed from the sentence without making the sentence either a) gramatically incorrect or b) changing its meaning.
So actually, my above examples of:
I made spaghetti for dinner.
and
I have a friend named Tom.
are both SVO sentences because in both cases the ending of the sentence can be taken away and the sentence still makes grammtical sense and retains its basic meaning. For example:
I made spaghetti.
I have a friend.
Two real examples of an SVOC sentence would be the following:
The news made everyone happy.
He called his cat Kitty.
In the above two cases, removing the complement at the end will make the first sentence ungrammatical "The news made everyone", and as for the second sentence, removing the complement changes the verb �s meaning from "giving a name" to "calling out for" or the grammatical though somewhat nonsensical "calling his cat on the phone".
However, just in case anyone else has the same stuff to teach, be forwarned that a lot of textbooks provide examples of supposed SVOC sentences that aren �t, in actuality, SVOC. That �s why it �s really easy to become confused. :-/
Now to tackle SVOO. lol
|
2 Sep 2014
|
|
|
chrissmolder
|
|
Thank you for the follow up! That is a handy tip.
|
13 Sep 2014
|
|
|
