Conditional &

Syntactic
Structures
“We opted for a simple PPT presentation to enhance clarity and
readability, reflecting our commitment to ensuring you
understand the lesson. We apologize if the presentation appears
plain, but we believe this approach is worthwhile if it helps you
grasp the material effectively.”
 What is Conditional Construction & Syntactic Structure?

Conditional constructions and syntactic structures are key elements of language

that influence how we express ideas and relationships. Conditional
constructions are sentences that describe situations or events reliant on specific
conditions or circumstances. They often follow an "if-then" format, enabling
speakers to delve into hypothetical scenarios, cause-and-effect relationships, or
predictions. Syntactic structures, in contrast, pertain to the rules and patterns
that dictate how words and phrases are organized within a sentence. Together,
these linguistic components create a framework for crafting clear and coherent
statements that communicate meaning, logic, and intention. A deeper
understanding of these elements enhances our appreciation of the versatility
and complexity of language.

Let’s discuss the topic separately, shall we?

 Part 1:
Conditional
Construction
 Conditional Construction

Conditional constructions are grammatical structures used to discuss

situations and their possible outcomes. They often involve an "if-clause"
(condition) and a main clause (result), indicating that the result is
dependent on the condition being met. For example, in the sentence, “If it
rains, I will stay home,” the outcome of staying home is conditional on the
event of rain.
 Types of Conditionals

1. Zero Conditional

Usage: Describes general truths or scientific facts.

Structure: If + present simple, present simple.
Example: “If you heat water to 100°C, it boils.”
Explanation: This type of conditional is used when the result is
always true whenever the condition is met.
 Another Example:

Structure: If + present simple, present simple.

Example: “If you mix blue and yellow, you get green.”

Now How About This?

“If you drop an object, it falls due to gravity.”

Is it still a Zero Conditional?

Yes, it is!
 Let’s Now Consider This Example

“If I win the lottery, I will buy a new car.”

Does it still follow a Zero Conditional?

No, not anymore!

This is not a Zero Conditional because it doesn’t describe a

general truth or scientific fact that is always true. Instead,
it describes a possible future event that may or may not
happen. The structure follows a First Conditional, which
is used to talk about real or possible conditions in the future
and their likely results.
 Types of Conditionals

2. First Conditional

Usage: Talks about real and possible situations in the future.

Structure: If + present simple, will + base verb.
Example: “If you study hard, you will pass the exam.”
Explanation: This structure is used to express a future event that is
likely to happen if the condition is fulfilled.
 Another Example:

Structure: If + present simple, will + base verb.

Example: "If it rains tomorrow, we will cancel the picnic."

Now How About This?

“If you study hard, you will pass the exam.”

Is it still a First Conditional?

Yes, it is!
 Let’s Now Consider This Example

“If I were you, I would quit the job.”

Does it still follow a First Conditional?

No, not anymore!

This is not a First Conditional because it does not describe

a real or possible future condition. Instead, it’s a
Second Conditional, which is used for hypothetical or
unreal situations in the present or future. In this case, the
speaker is imagining being someone else (which is not
possible) and giving advice based on that imagined
scenario.
 Types of Conditionals

3. Second Conditional

Usage: Discusses hypothetical or unlikely situations in the present or

future.
Structure: If + past simple, would + base verb.
Example: “If I won the lottery, I would travel the world.”
Explanation: This type is used for situations that are imaginary or unlikely
to happen.
 Another Example:

Structure: If + past simple, would + base verb.

Example: “If I had a million dollars, I would travel the world.”

Now How About This?

“If I knew how to play the guitar, I would join a

band.”
Is it still a Second Conditional?
Yes, it is!
 Let’s Now Consider This Example

“If I had finished my homework, I would have gone to the party.”

Is it still a Second Conditional?

No, not anymore!

This is not a Second Conditional because it does not describe a

present or future hypothetical situation. Instead, it is a Third
Conditional, which refers to past situations that didn’t happen
and their imagined consequences. In this case, the speaker is talking
about a past situation (not finishing homework) and what could have
happened (going to the party) if things had been different..
 Types of Conditionals

4. Third Conditional

Usage: Refers to hypothetical situations in the past that did not

happen.
Structure: If + past perfect, would have + past participle.
Example: “If I had known about the meeting, I would have attended.”
Explanation: This type is used to express regrets or alternative
outcomes of past events.
 Another Example:

Structure: If + past perfect, would have + past participle.

Example: “If I had studied harder, I would have passed the test.”

Now How About This?

“If they had left earlier, they would have caught

the train..”
Is it still a Third Conditional?
Yes, it is!
 Let’s Now Consider This Example

“If I were taller, I would play basketball”

Is it still a Third Conditional?

No, not anymore!

This is not a Third Conditional because it doesn’t talk about a past

event. Instead, it’s a Second Conditional, which deals with
hypothetical or unreal situations in the present or future (being
taller) and the imagined result (playing basketball). It’s not about
something that could have happened in the past, but rather a present
hypothetical situation.
 Types of Conditionals

5. Mixed Conditional

Usage: Combines different time references in the condition and result

clauses.
Structure: Various combinations, such as "If + past perfect, would +
base verb."
Example: “If I had studied harder, I would be a doctor now.”
Explanation: This structure is used when a past condition affects a
present situation or when a present condition affects a past outcome.
 Another Example:

Usage: Describes a past situation that didn’t happen and its

consequence in the present.
Structure: If + past perfect, would + base verb.
Example: “If I had taken that job offer, I would be living in New York
now.”
Explanation: The past condition (not taking the job offer) is connected
to a present result (not living in New York). The speaker is reflecting on
how a past action could have affected their current life.
 Let’s Now Consider This Example

“If you heat water, it boils.”

Is it still a Mixed Conditional?

No, not anymore!

This is not a mixed conditional because it describes a general truth,

not a hypothetical situation. It follows the Zero Conditional
structure, which describes facts or scientific truths, not hypothetical
outcomes.
 Key Considerations in Conditional Construction

Verb Tense: The correct use of verb tenses is crucial. Different conditionals
rely on specific combinations of past, present, and future tenses to convey
meaning.
Zero Conditional: Present simple + present simple (general truths)
First Conditional: Present simple + will (real future possibilities)
Second Conditional: Past simple + would (hypothetical present or future)
Third Conditional: Past perfect + would have (hypothetical past)
 Key Considerations in Conditional Construction

Type of Condition: Understand the nature of the condition you’re

describing.
Is it a fact (Zero Conditional)?
Is it a possible future event (First Conditional)?
Is it unreal or hypothetical in the present (Second Conditional)?
Is it about a missed opportunity in the past (Third Conditional)?
 Key Considerations in Conditional Construction

Cause and Effect: Clearly identify the relationship between the condition
(if-clause) and the result (main clause). The structure should align with how
realistic or hypothetical that relationship is.
Formality and Context: Conditionals can vary in formality. For formal
writing or speaking, use the full conditional structure. In casual
conversation, people sometimes shorten or simplify conditional sentences.
Mixed Conditionals: Sometimes, conditions from the past can influence the
present or vice versa. Be mindful of mixing verb tenses to express such
nuanced hypothetical situations.
Hypothetical Situations: When creating conditionals, ensure that the
hypothetical situations are clear. This is especially important with Second
and Third Conditionals where you're dealing with unreal or imagined events.
Clarity of Result: Make sure the result (main clause) is logically connected
to the condition (if-clause). The outcome should make sense based on the
condition being met.
 Conclusion

Conditional sentences are essential tools for expressing cause-and-effect

relationships, hypothetical situations, and real possibilities. Mastering
conditionals involves understanding the correct verb tenses, identifying the type
of condition, and maintaining logical clarity between the condition and result.
Whether describing universal truths, real future events, or hypothetical
scenarios, using conditionals accurately enhances communication. By paying
close attention to structure and context, we can effectively express different
layers of possibility and consequence, enriching both everyday conversations and
more formal discussions.
 Part 2:
Syntactic
Structure
 Syntactic Structures

Syntactic structures are the rules that guide how words and phrases
combine to form sentences in a language. This concept is key to syntax,
which studies sentence formation. Noam Chomsky's 1957 theory of generative
grammar suggests that all languages share universal principles, enabling
humans to create countless sentences with a limited vocabulary. Understanding
these structures allows linguists to analyze how sentence components—such as
nouns and verbs—interact to convey meaning, offering insights into the
cognitive aspects of language

But first things first….

 Syntax

What is Syntax, by the way? Syntax refers to the set of rules that govern the
structure of sentences in a language, dictating how words are combined to form
phrases, clauses, and sentences. Originating from the Greek word syntaxis, meaning
"arrangement" or "order," syntax is a key aspect of linguistic theory. It enables speakers
to communicate clearly and effectively by providing a framework for constructing
meaningful statements. Understanding syntax helps us analyze sentence structures and
distinguish between grammatically correct and incorrect forms, making it essential not
only in language studies but also in fields like computer programming and logic.

How do we analyze a syntactic structure, you ask?

 Key Components of an English Sentence

An English sentence is typically composed of grammatical units that work

together to convey meaning. The key components include the Noun Phrase
(NP), Verb Phrase (VP), and Prepositional Phrase (PP). These elements
combine to form a sentence that is both grammatically correct and
semantically meaningful, allowing for clear and accurate communication.

Let’s go through all three of them…

 Key Components of an English Sentence

A Noun Phrase (NP) is a key grammatical unit in a sentence that revolves around a
noun, which acts as the head of the phrase. The noun can be accompanied by various
modifiers that provide more detail or context. These modifiers may include:

Determiners: Words like the, a, my (e.g., the car, my book).

Adjectives: Descriptive words that modify the noun (e.g., a big house, the red apple).
Prepositional phrases: Additional information that often follows the noun (e.g., the car
in the garage).

Noun Phrases can function as the subject (e.g., The quick fox ran away), the object (e.g.,
She saw the big dog), or the complement in a sentence. They provide essential
information about "who" or "what" is performing an action, being acted upon, or
described.
 Key Components of an English Sentence

Example Sentence: “The small cat slept on the couch.”

In the sentence, the NP is “The small cat," where “the” is the determiner,
“small” is the adjective, and “cat” is the head noun.

In summary, the NP is crucial because it identifies the participants or things

involved in the action or state described by the sentence.
 Key Components of an English Sentence

A Verb Phrase (VP) is the part of a sentence that centers around the verb and
expresses the action, state, or occurrence. The main verb serves as the core of the VP,
and it may be accompanied by auxiliary verbs (helping verbs like is, has, will) and other
elements like objects, complements, or modifiers that complete or add to the meaning.

Key components of a Verb Phrase:

Main verb: The core verb that indicates the action or state (e.g., run, eat, is).
Auxiliary verbs: Helping verbs that modify the main verb's tense, mood, or aspect (e.g.,
has run, is eating).
Objects: Noun phrases that receive the action of the verb (e.g., She eats an apple).
Adverbs: Words that modify the verb by describing how, when, or where an action
occurs (e.g., He runs quickly).
Verb phrases are essential because they indicate what is happening in a sentence.
They can stand alone or be part of a larger structure involving subjects and objects.
 Key Components of an English Sentence

Example Sentence: “She is reading a book.”

In the sentence, the VP is “is reading a book.” Here, “is” is the auxiliary
verb, “reading” is the main verb, and “a book” is the object of the verb.

In summary, a VP tells us what action is being performed, when it's

happening, and often provides extra details about how or why the action
occurs.
 Key Components of an English Sentence

A Prepositional Phrase (PP) is a group of words that begins with a

preposition and ends with a noun or pronoun, which is called the object of
the preposition. Prepositional phrases function as modifiers in sentences,
adding more detail about location, time, direction, or other relationships
between elements of the sentence.
Key components of a Prepositional Phrase:
Preposition: A word that shows the relationship between its object and
another word in the sentence (e.g., in, on, at, under, with).
Object of the preposition: A noun or pronoun that follows the preposition
and completes its meaning (e.g., the box, the city, her).
 Key Components of an English Sentence
Prepositional phrases can act as:
Adjectives: Modifying a noun (e.g., The book on the table), telling which one or what kind.
Adverbs: Modifying a verb, adjective, or another adverb (e.g., He ran with great speed),
telling how, where, when, or why something happens.

Example Sentence: “The cat is under the table.”

In the sentence, the PP is “under the table”, where “under” is the preposition, and “The
table” is the object of the preposition.

In summary, Prepositional Phrases provide additional context and detail to a sentence by

explaining relationships between elements, such as where something is, when it happened,
or how something was done.
Syntactic Structure Sentence Dissection
Syntactic Structure Sentence Dissection
 How Ambiguity Occurs

Syntactic structure plays a crucial role in shaping both the form and
meaning of a sentence. While it provides a blueprint for organizing words in
a grammatically correct way, it also influences how those words interact to
create meaning. Every sentence consists of key elements like nouns, verbs,
complements, and adjuncts, and their specific roles and positions within a
sentence determine the relationships between ideas and actions.
Importantly, when the roles of nouns or verbs shift, such as a subject
becoming an object or a verb changing its form, the entire
interpretation of the sentence can change. This highlights how syntax is
not just about arranging words but about guiding the meaning and clarity of
communication. Through the framework of syntax, we can see how the
structure influences understanding, helping us navigate complex layers of
language and ambiguity, and ensuring that sentences convey the intended
message.
 How Ambiguity Occurs
Example Sentence: “The teacher told the student that she was wrong.”

Interpretation 1: "She" refers to the student

• The teacher is the subject (the one giving the information).
• The student is the indirect object (the one receiving the information).
• She refers back to the student, meaning the teacher is saying the
student was wrong.
Interpretation 2: "She" refers to the teacher
• The teacher is still the subject.
• The student is still the indirect object.
• However, she now refers back to the teacher, meaning the teacher is
admitting she herself was wrong.
 How to Solve Ambiguity
1. Rephrasing to Solve Ambiguity
Rephrasing involves restructuring a sentence to make its meaning clear
and specific. This technique is particularly useful when the original sentence
contains vague pronouns, unclear subjects, or ambiguous phrases. By adding
more descriptive words, rearranging clauses, or explicitly stating what or who is
being referred to, rephrasing eliminates uncertainty. The goal is to ensure that
there is only one clear interpretation, making the sentence more precise and
understandable.
2. Using Proper Comma Placement
Commas play a critical role in sentence structure by indicating pauses, separating
items in a list, and clarifying the meaning of complex sentences. Improper or
missing commas can lead to misunderstandings, as they might change the meaning of a
sentence entirely. By using commas correctly, you can distinguish between different ideas,
avoid run-on sentences, and ensure that the reader understands the intended message.
Proper comma placement is especially important in differentiating lists, addressing direct
speech, and separating clauses to clarify relationships between different parts of a
sentence.
 How About You Do It, Mates?

Now, consider this example:

"The commander told the player that they had to repair the tank
before the next battle."

What do you think makes it ambiguous? And Why?

Is that so? Well, how can we fix it, mates?

 How About You Do It, Mates?

Now, consider this example:

"The manager told the assistant that she needs to finish the
report by noon."

What do you think makes it ambiguous? And Why?

Is that so? Well, how can we fix it, mates?

 How About You Do It, Mates?

Now, consider this example:

"Let's eat grandma!"

What do you think makes it ambiguous? And Why?

Is that so? Well, how can we fix it, mates?

 How About You Do It, Mates?

Now, consider this example:

"She found inspiration in cooking her family
and her dog."
What do you think makes it ambiguous? And
Why?
Is that so? Well, how can we fix it, mates?
 1. Structure of Predication

The structure of predication refers to how the subject of a

sentence connects with the predicate, which typically
includes the verb and any complements or modifiers that
describe the action, state, or quality of the subject. In
simple terms, predication links the subject to what is being
said about it, forming a complete statement. This
relationship is crucial in sentence structure, providing the
foundation for expressing propositions and conveying
meaning.
Predication is essential for understanding how languages
organize meaning, influencing both simple and complex
sentences where subjects and predicates may include
multiple clauses and elements. Linguists analyze these
structures to grasp how sentence components work
 For Example:

• The dog barked loudly • The car broke down on the

highway
S P S P
• She is a talented musician • John gave Mary a gift
S P S P
• They went to the park
yesterday
S P
 2. Structure of Modification

The structure of modification explains how modifiers—such as adjectives,

adverbs, and phrases—add extra information to other elements in a
sentence. Modifiers refine or clarify the meaning of the words they are linked
to, providing more depth or specificity. In syntactic terms, this structure
typically consists of a head (the word being modified) and its modifier, which
can appear before or after the head, depending on the language and type of
modifier.
Modification can involve simple relationships or more complex ones, such as
nested modifiers (e.g., "the very tall tree"). Linguists study these structures to
understand how languages use various strategies to add descriptive layers,
which often reflect differing word order rules and syntactic patterns.
 For Example:
1. Head- Noun; Modifier-noun 5. Head- adverb; Modifier-
Ex. Wisdom tooth adjective
Ex. Perfectly fine
2. Head- noun; Modifier-adjective
Ex. Beautiful girl
6. Head- noun; Modifier-
3. Head- verb (past); Modifier-
possessive noun
adverb Ex. President’s wife
Ex. Gracefully danced

7. Head- noun; Modifier-verb

4. Head- noun; Modifier-verb (“ing”) (past participle)
Ex. Talking parrot
Ex. Boiled egg
 3. Structure of Complementation

The structure of complementation refers to how certain elements—such

as verbs, adjectives, or nouns—require a complement to complete
their meaning. Complements provide essential information that helps
form a full and meaningful expression. In syntax, complements often
appear as noun phrases, prepositional phrases, or clauses that follow these
elements.
Complements vary across languages and are crucial in syntax because they
show how verbs, adjectives, and nouns depend on them to convey complete
meaning. Verbs, in particular, have specific complement patterns
(subcategorization frames) that determine whether they take direct
objects, prepositional phrases, or clauses. For instance, in "They persuaded
him to leave," the infinitive clause "to leave" completes the meaning of the
verb "persuaded."
 For Example:

1. Subject + Linking Verb +Subjective Complement

The weather is hot. (adjective)

2. Subject + Transitive Verb +Direct Object

We caught a fish!
3. Subject + Transitive Verb + Indirect Object +Direct
Object
The bank sent him a notice.

4. Subject + Transitive Verb + Direct Object + Objective

Complement
He considered Myra compassionate and wise
 4. Structure of Coordination

The structure of coordination explains how two or more linguistic

elements of equal importance are connected to form a larger
unit, usually using coordinating conjunctions like and, or, or but.
The linked elements—whether words, phrases, or clauses—are
syntactically equivalent, meaning they serve the same function in the
sentence.
Coordination differs from subordination, where one element depends
on another. In coordination, all linked elements remain independent.
This structure adds flexibility and variety to sentence construction,
allowing for the combination of multiple ideas or actions without
prioritizing one over the other.
 List of Word Coordinates

And rather than not (only)... But

(also)…
But as well as either… or
Nor together with neither… nor for
Not along with both… and as
So for whether… or
both… as well as
whether… or not
 Series of the Structure of Coordination

1. Elliptical Structure of Coordination

The elliptical structure involves leaving out parts of a
sentence that are understood from the context, especially
in coordinated structures. This allows for more concise
sentences by avoiding redundancy. The ellipsis (omission)
happens when one part of a sentence is shared across multiple
elements.
Example:
Full sentence: John likes apples, and Mary likes apples.
Here, apples is repeated unnecessarily.
Elliptical version: John likes apples, and Mary likes them too.
 Series of the Structure of Coordination

Example with more complexity:

Full sentence: She can speak French, and she can speak
Spanish.
Elliptical version: She can speak French and Spanish.
• The verb “can speak” is shared by both elements in the
coordination, so it is omitted after the first occurrence.
In elliptical structures, elements such as subjects, verbs, or
objects can be omitted when they are common to the
coordinated clauses.
 Series of the Structure of Coordination

2. Split Structure of Coordination

The split structure of coordination occurs when the
coordinated elements are placed in different parts of the
sentence, usually for emphasis or stylistic reasons. The
coordination is "split" across the sentence, creating a more
complex structure.
Example:
Standard structure: I like both pizza and pasta.
Split structure: Both pizza and pasta, I like.
Here, both pizza and pasta is fronted, splitting the sentence
from the main verb like to highlight the coordinated elements.
 Series of the Structure of Coordination

Another Example:
Standard structure: We should either leave now or wait until
the storm passes.
Split structure: Either we should leave now, or we should wait
until the storm passes.
• In the split version, the “either… or” structure is separated
into two clauses, adding emphasis to the two options.
In a split coordination, the elements of the coordination (like
both, either… or) are divided in the sentence, affecting its flow
and emphasis.
 Series of the Structure of Coordination

3. Correlatives
Correlatives are paired conjunctions that work together to
link balanced clauses or phrases. These conjunctions
emphasize the relationship between the coordinated elements
and often highlight a comparison or contrast between them.
Common Correlatives:
• Both... and
• Either... or
• Neither... nor
• Not only... but also
• Whether... or
 Series of the Structure of Coordination
Examples:
Both... and:
She is both smart and kind.
• This correlative emphasizes that two qualities (smart and kind) apply to she.
Not only... but also:
Not only did he win the race, but he also set a new record.
• The correlative not only... but also draws attention to both the victory and the
record-setting.
Neither... nor:
He likes neither pizza nor pasta.
• The correlative neither... nor indicates that two things are being negated.
Either... or:
You can either take the bus or walk to school.
• The correlative either... or presents two options.
 The Importance of Conditional Construction and Syntactic Structures

Conditional constructions and syntactic structures are vital for

conveying meaning and clarity in language. Conditional
constructions express hypothetical situations or events that
depend on specific conditions, allowing speakers to discuss
possibilities, consequences, or counterfactuals.
Syntactic structures, on the other hand, determine how words
and phrases are arranged in sentences, ensuring grammatical
correctness and meaningful expression. These structures,
introduced by Noam Chomsky, show how humans can generate
infinite sentences from a limited set of rules. Both are essential
for effective communication, helping articulate complex ideas
and the relationships between actions and consequences.
 The Relationship between Conditional and Syntactic Structures

Conditional constructions and syntactic structures are closely

related in linguistics, as the arrangement of clauses in a
sentence determines how conditions and consequences are
expressed. Conditional sentences, which often use "if-then"
clauses, rely on specific syntactic patterns that establish a
logical relationship between events.
The "if" clause, typically a subordinate clause, cannot stand
alone and is dependent on the main clause for meaning. The
correct syntactic structure is essential because it dictates the
type of conditional (e.g., real, hypothetical) and how tense or
modality is used, influencing the interpretation of the sentence.
Understanding this relationship is important for constructing
clear and grammatically sound sentences that convey precise
 Common Errors and Misunderstandings

Common misunderstandings between conditional

constructions and syntactic structures often arise due to
confusion over the correct placement of clauses, tense usage,
and the relationship between condition and result.
For example, learners might mix up the order of the "if"
clause and the main clause, thinking it affects the meaning
when, in most cases, it does not (If it rains, I will stay
inside vs. I will stay inside if it rains). Another frequent
error is the misuse of verb tenses in hypothetical or unreal
conditionals (e.g., using If I would instead of If I were).
Additionally, some people may not recognize that certain
conditionals require specific modals like would, could, or
might to signal hypothetical situations. These
misunderstandings can lead to incorrect sentence
 How to Correct?
To correct misunderstandings between conditional
constructions and syntactic structures, clear guidelines on
clause order, verb tense, and modal usage are essential.
First, it's important to teach that the order of the "if" clause
and the main clause does not usually affect meaning, allowing
flexibility in sentence structure.
Second, reinforcing the rules for verb tenses in different types
of conditionals—such as using the past tense for unreal
situations and the present tense for real conditions—helps
avoid confusion.
Lastly, learners should be taught to use modals like would,
could, or might in hypothetical conditionals to signal
uncertainty or possibility.
 Conclusion
In conclusion, conditional constructions and syntactic structures are
essential components of language and communication. Conditional
constructions allow speakers and writers to explore hypothetical
scenarios, possibilities, and cause-and-effect relationships, providing
the means to discuss situations that may or may not occur depending
on specific conditions. These constructions are crucial for conveying
ideas about potential outcomes, making them vital in fields such as
logic, problem-solving, decision-making, and even storytelling. On the
other hand, syntactic structures form the backbone of language,
offering a framework for arranging words, phrases, and clauses in a
coherent and meaningful way.
This structural foundation ensures that sentences are grammatically
correct and that their meaning is clear and comprehensible. Together,
conditional constructions and syntactic structures expand our ability to
express nuanced and complex thoughts, facilitating both everyday
communication and more advanced linguistic analysis. Whether in
casual conversation, technical discourse, or literary expression, these
 References
Conditional Construction
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The Grammar Book: An ESL/EFL Teacher's Course. Heinle & Heinle.
Swan, M. (2005). Practical English Usage. Oxford University Press.
Syntactic Structure
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. Mouton.
Radford, A. (2009). Introduction to English Sentence Structure. Cambridge University Press.
Structure of Predication
Bowers, J. (1993). The Syntax of Predication. Linguistic Inquiry, 24(4), 591-656.
Carnie, A. (2013). Syntax: A Generative Introduction (3rd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Structure of Modification
Cinque, G. (1999). Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Oxford University Press.
Cinque, G. (2010). The Syntax of Adjectives: A Comparative Study. MIT Press.
Structure of Modification
Carnie, A. (2013). Syntax: A Generative Introduction (3rd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Radford, A. (2009). An Introduction to English Sentence Structure. Cambridge University Press.
 References

Structure of Coordination
Carnie, A. (2013). Syntax: A Generative Introduction (3rd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Radford, A. (2009). An Introduction to English Sentence Structure. Cambridge University
Press.
Importance of Conditional and Syntactic Structures
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The Grammar Book: An ESL/EFL
Teacher’s Course. Heinle & Heinle.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. Mouton.
Radford, A. (2009). An Introduction to English Sentence Structure. Cambridge University
Press.