<commit_before>---
layout: base
title:  'Simple Clauses'
permalink: u/overview/simple-syntax.html
udver: '2'
---

# Simple Clauses

The UD annotation assumes the clause as one of the basic structures that we expect to find in all languages. A simple clause minimally consists of a predicate together with its core argument dependents, but may be extended with oblique modifiers. Core arguments are typically nominals, while oblique modifiers are either (oblique) nominals or adverbial modifiers. (In [complex clauses](complex-syntax.html), both core arguments and oblique modifiers can also be realized as subordinate clauses.) Finally, the predicate may be associated with function words that express different types of grammatical information such as tense, mood, aspect, voice, evidentiality, or type of subordination.


* [Intransitive and transitive clauses](#intransitive-and-transitive-clauses)
* [Nonverbal clauses](#nonverbal-clauses)
* [Non-core dependents](#non-core-dependents)
* [Function word dependents](#function-word-dependents)


## Intransitive and Transitive Clauses

In most clauses, the predicate takes the form of a verb, which may be intransitive or transitive.

~~~ sdparse
she left
nsubj(left, she)
~~~

~~~ sdparse
she left a note
nsubj(left, she)
obj(left, note)
~~~

An intransitive verb takes a single argument (usually referred to as S in the literature on linguistic typology) with the [u-dep/nsubj]() relation. A transitive verb in addition takes an argument with the [u-dep/obj]() relation. When deciding which relation to use with which argument in a transitive clause, the [u-dep/nsubj]() relation should be used with the argument that most resembles the proto-agent (often called A in linguistic typology) and that satisfies additional language-internal criteria for subjecthood based on case-marking, agreement and/or linear position with respect to the predicate. The [u-dep/obj]() relation should be used for the argument that most resembles the proto-patient (often called O or P in linguistic typology) and that satisfies relevant language-internal criteria. Note that, while case-marking (whether morphological or analytic) can provide important evidence in specific languages, case alignment should not be used to decide the assignment of core argument roles. Thus, in ergative languages, the patient-like argument of a transitive verb (O/P) will take the the [u-dep/obj]() relation despite the fact that it carries the same case marking as the [u-dep/nsubj]() argument (S) of an intranstive verb.

Some languages allow extended transitive clauses, where more than two dependents are realized as core arguments. The additional core arguments then receive the [u-dep/iobj]() relation (for "indirect object"), while the [u-dep/obj]() relation
is reserved for the most patient-like non-subject argument. The criterion for deciding whether an additional dependent is a core argument is whether it has the typical encoding of a core argument with respect to case-marking, agreement and word order. For example, the English double object construction qualifies as an extended transitive clause because all three nominals appear without prepositions:

~~~ sdparse
she left him a note<commit_msg>Trying to wake up Jekyll.<commit_after>---
layout: base
title:  'Simple Clauses'
permalink: u/overview/simple-syntax.html
udver: '2'
---

# Simple Clauses

The UD annotation assumes the clause as one of the basic structures that we expect to find in all languages. A simple clause minimally consists of a predicate together with its core argument dependents, but may be extended with oblique modifiers. Core arguments are typically nominals, while oblique modifiers are either (oblique) nominals or adverbial modifiers. (In [complex clauses](complex-syntax.html), both core arguments and oblique modifiers can also be realized as subordinate clauses.) Finally, the predicate may be associated with function words that express different types of grammatical information such as tense, mood, aspect, voice, evidentiality, or type of subordination.


* [Intransitive and transitive clauses](#intransitive-and-transitive-clauses)
* [Nonverbal clauses](#nonverbal-clauses)
* [Non-core dependents](#non-core-dependents)
* [Function word dependents](#function-word-dependents)


## Intransitive and Transitive Clauses

In most clauses, the predicate takes the form of a verb, which may be intransitive or transitive.

~~~ sdparse
she left
nsubj(left, she)
~~~

~~~ sdparse
she left a note
nsubj(left, she)
obj(left, note)
det(note, a)
~~~

An intransitive verb takes a single argument (usually referred to as S in the literature on linguistic typology) with the [u-dep/nsubj]() relation. A transitive verb in addition takes an argument with the [u-dep/obj]() relation. When deciding which relation to use with which argument in a transitive clause, the [u-dep/nsubj]() relation should be used with the argument that most resembles the proto-agent (often called A in linguistic typology) and that satisfies additional language-internal criteria for subjecthood based on case-marking, agreement and/or linear position with respect to the predicate. The [u-dep/obj]() relation should be used for the argument that most resembles the proto-patient (often called O or P in linguistic typology) and that satisfies relevant language-internal criteria. Note that, while case-marking (whether morphological or analytic) can provide important evidence in specific languages, case alignment should not be used to decide the assignment of core argument roles. Thus, in ergative languages, the patient-like argument of a transitive verb (O/P) will take the the [u-dep/obj]() relation despite the fact that it carries the same case marking as the [u-dep/nsubj]() argument (S) of an intranstive verb.

Some languages allow extended transitive clauses, where more than two dependents are realized as core arguments. The additional core arguments then receive the [u-dep/iobj]() relation (for "indirect object"), while the [u-dep/obj]() relation
is reserved for the most patient-like non-subject argument. The criterion for deciding whether an additional dependent is a core argument is whether it has the typical encoding of a core argument with respect to case-marking, agreement and word order. For example, the English double object construction qualifies as an extended transitive clause because all three nominals appear without prepositions:

~~~ sdparse
she left him a note
{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.06349206349206349, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0003082139004469102, 'mean_word_length': 5.157495256166983, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 3, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 3, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
{'dir': 'git-commits-cleaned', 'id': '3074002', 'n_tokens_mistral': 1667, 'n_tokens_neox': 1566, 'n_words': 875}