An Introduction to English Sentence Structure

by Andrew Radford

This new edition of Andrew Radford's outstanding resource for students is a step-by-step, practical introduction to English syntax and syntactic principles, written by a globally-renowned expert in the field. Assuming little or no prior background in syntax, Radford outlines key concepts and how they can be used to describe various aspects of English sentence structure. Each chapter contains core modules focusing on a specific topic, a summary recapitulating the main points of the chapter, and a bibliographical section providing references to original source material. This edition has been extensively updated, with new analyses, exercise materials, references and a brand-new chapter on adjuncts. Students will benefit from the online workbook, which contains a vast amount of exercise material for each module, including self-study materials and a student answerbook for these. Teachers will value the extensive PowerPoints outlining module contents and the comprehensive teacher answerbook, which covers all workbook and PowerPoint exercises.

Genres: Linguistics, Nonfiction

436 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2009

Reviews

[tryitonotis · Rating 5 out of 5]

A reviewer found certain parts in this book illogical.

I disagree. This book has been nothing but logical in its progression into the depth of English sentence structures and Universal Grammar principles.

Some examples might be tiresomely described but prove most welcoming when you return to the book after not continuing reading it for a period of time. In this regard, the glossary makes a great reference tool too.

Just a shame there are typological and grammatical errors here and there, but nothing too distracting from the wealth of knowledge within this book.

Highly recommended for those interested in X-bar theory, Universal Grammar, and English syntax and grammar in general. Not light reading unless you’ve always been itching to know why certain rules are observed in English language but not others e.g. why “I’d’ve” would be frowned upon by the pedantic.

[Xiaozhen · Rating 2 out of 5]

eh a lot of illogical parts. guess maybe the field is too much of a niche.

[Yabbasi381gmail.Com · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good