Clauses: A Hunka Hunka Burning Love

Ah, Valentine's Day. A holiday about relationships. About independence. And that makes me think of clauses....

My last post set out the difference between clauses and phrases. Now we are going to narrow our focus somewhat and only look at clauses. In fact, we are going to try to separate all the clauses there are into just two categories. You may ask, "So why is there a picture of Elvis?" Don't worry, I'll explain.

There are a bunch of different ways to categorize anything, and clauses are no different. However, for our purposes all you really need to know is that there are two kinds of clauses in this class: independent and dependent (aka subordinate).

Both independent and dependent clauses are clauses (duh), so they must, by definition, contain both a subject and a verb. "Independent clause" is actually just a fancy name for a simple sentence, in fact, and as you remember from the school house ballad of Mr. Morton, simple sentences contain both a subject and a verb.

However, Mr. Morton's song doesn't point out the following fact: not everything that has a subject and a verb is a sentence. In order for a group of words to be a sentence, it must also be able to stand alone.

If this were an equation, it might look like this:

Subject + verb= clause

and then

Subject + verb + a complete thought = simple sentence = independent clause

Here's an example: "Elvis was processed into the Army at Fort Chaffee, Arkansas." Here's another: "Fort Chaffee is just outside Fort Smith." Simple, huh?

So, now that you know that independent clauses CAN stand alone, you've probably already figured out the following: A group of words with a subject and a verb that CANNOT stand alone (in other words, a groups of words that doesn't express a complete thought) is a dependent (or subordinate) clause.

Here are a couple of examples: "Because Elvis had to get a buzz cut." And: "Even though Elvis's buzz cut made his female fans cry." See how they can't stand alone. It's like waiting for the other shoe to...well, you know...drop.

The nuts and bolts of it are not complicated: something has been added to our basic simple sentence, and the addition of this one thing is what makes the dependent clause incapable of standing on its own. That addition?
A subordinating conjunction. It's like having a cast added to your leg: suddenly, you can't stand on your own. You need crutches. Same sort of thing.

Think of it this way: dependent clauses can't function on their own... just like a subordinate in the army relies upon the commands of his or her superiors. And this gets us back around to why this post contains a photo of one of the most famous US Army privates in history, Elvis Presley. He might have been the King, but he was still a subordinate in the army, and just like any private, when he was told to do something, like shave his hair, he followed orders. Privates depend upon commanders, and dependent clauses depend upon independent clauses.

And so this really has all been about relationships: dependent clauses need to be connected to independent clauses. Ahhhhh....