Let us compare the following compound sentences which differ only in the order of their constituents:

(a) Now she is my collegue, two years ago she was my student.

(b) Two years ago she was my student, now she is my colleague.

The total meaning of (a) is not absolutely the same as that of (b).

We cannot fail to see that two sentences (a) and (b) differ in emphawhich is due to relative position of the given utterances.

The same is true of all other types of composite sentences in coordination and subordination.

We have seen throughout our previous discussion that the position of words in syntactic structures relative to one another is a most import-ant part of English syntax. Relative position seems to bear relation to the meaning of sentences as well. That grammar must take account of "sentence-order" as well as word-order can hardly leave any doubt.

It seems perfectly reasonable to distinguish here two lines of lingui-stic development: 1) one-member complex sentences and 2) two-member complex sentences with subordinate clauses (further abbreviated as "sub-clauses") of cause or result, purpose and time, conditional and concessive sub-clauses. Logically interrelated, with one idea or subordito another, the constituents of such sentences make up a single complex syntactic unit.

Examples are:

But she'd had heard his name until she saw it on the theatres. (Mansfield)

As soon as he had become a director, Winifred and others of his family had begun to acquire shares to neutralise their income-tax. (Galsworthy)

What can you do if you are thirty and, turning the corner of your own street, you are overcome, suddenly by a feeling of bliss — absolute bliss! (Mansfield)

Laurie agreed with the others, then it was bound to be all right. (Mansfield)

It was so big that the carter and Pat carried it into the courtyard. (Mansfield)

Although Bertha Young was thirty she still had moments like this when she wanted to run instead of walk. (Mansfield).

The first to be mentioned here are complex sentences with relative sub-clauses, attributive in their meaning. In such sentences pronominal-demonstrative elements are organically indispensable and are readily reinstated in the principal clause. Examples are:

It was the same ship as that in which my wife and the correspondcame to England. (Galsworthy)

The fellow, with his beard and his cursed amused way of speaking — son of the old man who had given him the nickname ,,Man of Pro(Galsworthy)

But at night in his leisure moments he was ravaged by the thought that time was always flying and money flowing in, and his own fuas much ,,in irons" as ever. (Galsworthy)

So she slept and dreamed, and smiled in her sleep, and once threw out her arm to feel something which was not there, dreaming still. (Mansfield)

Further examples of one-member complex sentences are those in

which a sub-clause expresses the object or the subject felt as missing in

the principal clause, e. g. :

Aunt Juley was sure that dear Val was very clever. (Galsworthy) Did not Winifred think that it was much better for the young

people to be secure and not run any risk at their age? (Gals worthy)

What's done cannot be undone (Proverb)

Cf. Ukrainian;

Here belong also sub-clauses which extend some part of the princi-pal clause: subject, predicative, attribute, object or adverbials with demonstrative pronouns, present or readily understood, e. g.: All is well that ends well. He is the one you wanted to see.

COORDINATION

The process of coordination, simply stated, involves the linking of structures of equal grammatical rank — single words and phrases in elementary compound groups or independent clauses in compound senThe coordinative conjunctions and the correlatives serve to pro-duce this coordination by joining the grammatically equivalent elements in question. Two or more clauses equal in rank can together be given the status of a single sentence. Such co-ordinated units make up a comsentence:

Gerald was disappointed, for he had wanted a son, but he nevertheless was pleased chough are his small black-haired daughter… (M. Mitchel).

Coordination within a multi-clause sentence is a means of joining a series of parallel subordinate clauses in joint dependence upon a subor-dination centre in the leading clause, or a means of connecting two or more independent main clauses, which jointly subordinate, a common member, mostly expressed by a dependent clause. In other words, coorin this monograph is recognized»as a syntactic means of conthe constituent parts of multi-clause sentences only when it is made use of in the same way as in single-clause sentences, which contain a member in common subordinating or subordinated by coordinated syntactic elements. In all other cases independent coordinated subject predicate units are viewed as syntactically independent though contextually related sentences, regardless of the marks of punctuation which divide them .

The patterns of multi-clause sentences containing more than two clauses (from three to twelve or thirteen) are based upon two fundamental principles of connection. The first is the principle of consecutive (step-wise) subordination, according to which in each clause (except the last one)