Parentheticals

There will usually be some SPEAKING verb introducing any segment of direct speech. This can come at the end of the direct speech, or it can interrupt it after the subject or after the first word (or a later word) of the auxiliary; or, less usually, it could come at the beginning. The word preceding a clause-internal parenthetical bears major stress (shown by 0 ), and there is appositional intonation (shown in writing by commas) on the parenthetical. Thus:

(1a) ‘John has been drinking absinthe again,’ Mary remarked

(1b) ‘0 John’, Mary remarked, ‘has been drinking absinthe again’

(1c) ‘John 0 has’, Mary remarked, ‘been drinking absinthe again’

(1d) Mary remarked: ‘John has been drinking absinthe again’

Direct speech can always be encoded as indirect speech, using a THAT complement clause, as in (2). And there are many THAT complement constructions which do not have any direct speech correspondents, as in (3).

(2) Mary remarked (that) John had been drinking absinthe again

(3) I suspect (that) John has been visiting the fortune teller

(The that complementiser may optionally be omitted when it immediately follows a transitive verb, as in (2) and (3).)

Now there is another construction type which shows some similarities to—but also important differences from—the THAT complement construction:

(4a) ‘ John, I suspect, has been visiting the fortune teller

(4b) John 0 has, I suspect, been visiting the fortune teller

(4c) John has been visiting the fortune teller, I suspect

There are exactly parallel sentences relating to (2): Mary remarked could be inserted after John, or after John had, or after the whole of John had been drinking absinthe again.

In (4a–c) the complement clause, from (3), has become the main clause and the original subject-plus-main-verb, I suspect, becomes a parenthetical insert which can come at any of the positions normally open to a clause introducing direct speech, as in (1a–c)—after the subject, or after the first auxiliary verb (or perhaps after a later auxiliary verb, or after the entire auxiliary constituent and before the main verb), or at the end of the sentence. The parenthetical insertion must be set off from the rest of the sentence—by commas in writing, or by appositional intonation when speaking; and, as for a direct speech introducer, the preceding word is stressed for a clause-internal parenthetical. The positional possibilities are similar to those for a contrastive linker such as however or moreover. There is a significant difference between parentheticals and contrastive linkers, on the one hand, and sentential adverbs.

A parenthetical may not normally come at the beginning of the sentence and remain parenthetical. If it occurs initially then it becomes the main clause and what was the main clause in (4a–c) becomes a complement clause, as in (3); the whole sentence is now a single intonation unit. (The verb reckon—in the sense ‘think’, not the sense ‘calculate’—may for many speakers only occur in a parenthetical. In this case the parenthetical can occur sentence-initially, e.g. I reckon he’s crazy; note that that may not be included before he’s crazy here.)

A parenthetical construction can parallel any kind of sentence which includes a THAT complement clause coming after the verb. It could be one in object function, as in (4a–c), or one in post-object function, as in:

(5a) He promised me (that) the building will be ready on time

(5b) The building ‘ will, he promised me, be ready on time

Or a THAT complement clause which has been extraposed from subject function, as in (6a–b), or even from derived passive subject function, as in (7b–c) (a corresponding active is given in (7a)):

(6a) It is correct that Mary is a genius

(6b) Mary ‘ is, it is correct, a genius

(7a) People suspect (that) John has visited the fortune teller

(7b) It is suspected (that) John has visited the fortune teller

(7c) John ‘ has, it is suspected, visited the fortune teller

There is a difference in meaning between sentences like (3) and (4a–c). Sentence (3) asserts a suspicion and details what it is (through a complement clause). Sentences (4a–c) assert that John has been visiting the fortune teller and then qualify the assertion by I suspect, which has a similar function to an adverb such as allegedly, presumably or probably.

The difference in meaning can be shown by a specific example. Suppose that a lady customer storms into the manager’s outer office and tells his secretary that she has been short-changed. The secretary listens, and forms her own judgement. Then she takes the customer into the manager, and might say either (8a) or (8b):

(8a) This lady complains (that) she has been short-changed

(8b) This lady ‘ has, she complains, been short-changed

By uttering (8b) the secretary would be asserting that the customer had been short-changed, i.e. the manager would gather that the secretary was convinced that the complaint was a valid one. But if (8a) were uttered the secretary would be making no judgement at all, merely reporting the complaint.

A parenthetical is most often short, consisting of subject and verb or, just occasionally, of subject, verb and object (as in (5b) and in The last person to leave ‘ must, the boss has instructed Fred, turn out the lights). Subject and object are likely to be short—consisting just of a pronoun, or proper name, or article plus common noun. This is simply because a long parenthetical would be likely to provide too severe a disruption of the main clause, and make the listener lose track of what is happening. (Thus, one is most unlikely to encounter a parenthetical of the length of The apartment ‘ will, our absentee landlord who lives in Florida and usually only communicates with us through his agent told my absent-minded but well-meaning roommate, be sold after Christmas.)

A parenthetical generally provides a simple statement, and is very unlikely to have a negative predicate; in (4a–c) I suspect could not be replaced by I didn’t suspect. The most common situation is for the verb in a parenthetical to be in generic tense. But past tense is also possible (as in the parenthetical versions of (2), with Mary remarked ), as are previous and/ or imperfective aspect (for, example, She ‘ is, we have been assuming, available on those dates). We also find imperative parentheticals, e.g. Tomorrow ‘ is, don’t forget, a public holiday, corresponding to the THAT complement construction Don’t forget (that) tomorrow is a public holiday!; and interrogative parentheticals, e.g. Has ‘ he, I wonder, enough stamina for the task?

Every verb that occurs in parentheticals takes a THAT complement clause, but not vice versa. Thus, a syntactic analysis that derived parentheticals, like (4a–c), from complement clause constructions, such as (3), would be perfectly valid so long as due account was taken of the semantic differences involved.

We can now turn to the question of which verbs occur in parentheticals, dealing first with Primary and then with Secondary types. It appears that almost every verb in a Primary type—other than LIKING and ANNOYING— which takes a THAT complement clause can be used parenthetically. There is one qualification—the verb must have a positive meaning. Thus, just as we cannot have an overt negative in a parenthetical (*I didn’t suspect) so we cannot have a verb that is inherently negative, such as forget or doubt. We can, however, get a ‘double negative’, in the form of not plus a negative verb, e.g. don’t forget, exemplified in the last paragraph but one, and don’t doubt, in Mary ‘ is, I don’t doubt, a good doctor.

Primary verbs that are used in parentheticals include all those from ATTENTION which take a THAT complement (except watch and listen, which have a special sense of the THAT construction, e.g. see, hear, notice, discover, witness; from THINKING, e.g. think, imagine, suppose, speculate, dream, remember, know, learn, understand, conclude, argue, believe; from DECIDING, e.g. decide, resolve, choose; and from SPEAKING, e.g. shout, read, say, joke, report, regret, explain, suggest, undertake, promise, instruct, warn.

It appears that very few verbs from the ANNOYING type may felicitously be used in parentheticals, e.g. not *He ‘ is, it annoys/delights me, going to France on vacation corresponding to It annoys/delights me that he is going to France on vacation; however, we do get He ‘ is, it might interest you to know, going to France on vacation. LIKING verbs which take a THAT complement generally include the impersonal pronoun it before this constituent. Two verbs that do not are fear and rejoice, and they appear to be the only members of the type to occur in parentheticals.

Turning now to the Secondary type WANTING, parentheticals are possible with hope, expect, pretend and perhaps with plan and intend (and with wish only when there is an impersonal subject, e.g. one might wish) but not with other members of this type such as desire and require. Consider:

(9a) I hope (that) he will come today

(9b) He ‘ will, I hope, come today

Sentence (9a) simply conveys a hope, and the addressee has no way of knowing what chance there is of it becoming realized. But on hearing (9b) one would infer that there is a very good chance of his coming—this is an assertion that he will come, quantified by the parenthetical I hope.

Now compare (9a) with sentences that show no corresponding parenthetical construction:

(10) I desire (that) he should come today

(11) I require that they (should) report at the office on arrival

Hope describes the Principal’s thought that something may happen, and they may also have a good idea that it is likely to happen (as in (9b)). In contrast, desire simply comments on the Principal’s eagerness that something should happen, and require on their opinion that something should be done—in neither case is there likely to be any degree of expectation that the something will eventuate. It is this expectation which is necessary for a WANTING verb to be used in a parenthetical, as in (9b).

Only ensure from the MAKING type accepts a THAT complement clause and this may be used as a parenthetical, e.g. The property ‘ will, the contract ensures, revert to its original owner. The Secondary-D verb matter can never be in a parenthetical.

Of the adjectives that may take a THAT complement, the VALUE and HUMAN  PROPENSITY types (many of whose members have a similar meaning to LIKING and ANNOYING verbs) are not found in parentheticals. Most QUALIFICATION adjectives which take THAT complements may be used in parentheticals, e.g. The King ‘ will, it is definite/probable/true/likely/certain/ correct/right, visit this province in the spring. (As before, negative forms such as improbable, untrue and wrong are excluded from parentheticals.)

Both probable and possible may occur in a parenthetical, e.g. He ‘ will, it is probable, announce an election for next month and He ‘ may, it is possible, announce an election for next month. Note that probable, implying a high chance, is compatible with modal will in the main clause, whereas possible, implying a much smaller chance, is more compatible with may.

Verbs of the SEEM type may appear in a parenthetical with an appropriate adjective (those exemplified in the last paragraph but one), e.g. The King ‘ will, it seems definite/likely/etc., visit this province in the spring. Seem, happen and appear may also appear alone in a parenthetical, e.g. John ‘ is, it seems/appears/happens, a very polite person.

Parentheticals may occur at the same syntactic positions as sentential adverbs and often have a similar semantic effect. Thus, definitely may be substituted for it is definite with very little change in meaning, and also probably, certainly, hopefully. Some adverbs are roughly equivalent to parentheticals with first person subject, or with subject coreferential with main clause subject, e.g. She will, regrettably, have to sell her car could relate to She ‘ will, I regret, have to sell her car or to She ‘ will, she regrets, have to sell her car but scarcely to She ‘ will, Fred regrets, have to sell her car. Some are roughly equivalent to parentheticals with third person subject, e.g. reportedly to he/she reports but not to I report or You report.

Many verbs and adjectives used in parentheticals do not have a corresponding adverb. And for some which do have, the adverb has a quite different meaning. Compare The King ‘ will, it is correct, enter by the front door (i.e. this is a correct statement of what he will do) with The King will, correctly, enter by the front door (he will act in a correct manner).