The three ranks

/.../ We have now to consider combinations of words, and here we shall find that though a substantive always remains a substantive, there is a certain scheme of subordination in connected speech which is analogues to the distribution of words into “parts of speech” without being entirely dependent on it.

In any composite denomination of a thing or a person /.../ we always find that there is one word of supreme importance to which the others are joined as subordinates. This chief word is defined /qualified, modified/ by another word, which in its turn can be defined /qualified, modified/ by a third word, etc.

We are thus led to establish different “ranks” of words according to their mutual relations as defined or defining. In the combination extremely hot weather the last word weather, which is evidently the chief idea, may be called primary, hot, which defines weather – secondary, and extremely, which defines hot – tertiary. Though a tertiary word may be further defined by a /quaternary/ word, and this again by a /quinsy/ word, and so forth, it is needless to distinguish more than three ranks, as there are no formal or other traits that distinguish words of these lower orders from tertiary words. Thus, in the phrase a certainly not very clever remark the word certainly though defining the following word, is in any way grammatically different from what it would be as a tertiary word in a certainly clever remark, not a clever remark, a very clever remark. If now we compare the combination a furiously barking dog /a dog barking furiously/, in which dog is primary, barking, secondary, and furiously – tertiary, with the dog barks furiously it is evident that the same subordination obtains in the latter as in former combinations. Yet there is a fundamental difference between them, which calls for separate terms for the two kinds of combination: we shall call the former kind junction, and the latter – nexus. /.../ It should be noted that the dog is primary not only when it is the subject, as in the dog barks furiously, but also when it is the object of a verb, as in I see the dog, or of a preposition, as in he runs after the dog. As terminology regards, the words primary, secondary and tertiary are applicable to nexus as well as to junction, but it will be useful to have special names: adjunct for a secondary word in a junction, and adnex for a secondary word in a nexus. For tertiary we may use the term subjunct, and quarternary words, in the rare cases in which a special name is needed, may be termed sub – subjuncts /.../.

/.../ There is a certain correspondence between the tripartition substantive, adjective, adverb, and the three ranks /.../ but the correspondence is only partial, not complete. The “part of speech” classification and the “rank” classification represent different angles from which the same word form may be viewed, first as it is in itself, and then as it is in combination with other words.

Questions:

1. What is there in connected speech that is analogues to the distribution of words into parts of speech?

2. What do we always find in any composite denomination of a thing or a person?

3. What term is used for the chief /primary/ word defined?

4. According to what relations are we led to establish different “ranks” of words?

5. Why is it needless to distinguish more than three ranks?

6. Did O. Jespersen accept the same subordination in “a furiously barking dog” and in “the dog barking furiously”?

7. Is there a fundamental difference between them?

8. What does this difference call for?

9. Are the words primary, secondary, tertiary applicable to nexus as well as to junction?

10. What special names will it be useful to have for a secondary word in a junction and for a secondary one in a nexus?

11. What term may we use for tertiary word?

12. What do the “part of speech” classification and the “rank” classification represent?