The following is a msg moved from elsewhere.
许老师：您好。
有一个问题想要请教您。
您在语料库研修班开始前有一个课件上面说到“If nouns are bricks, are verbs mortar?"我想要问您一下，您对这句话的理解是什么？还有，若动词是mortar，那么连词呢？
期待您百忙中的回复。
祝好。
一个学生
My comment:
'If nouns are bricks, are verbs mortar? '
The saying is a metaphorical understanding of the two fundamental word classes in language.
It does not mean that nothing is left, except nouns and verbs, in language.
When nouns are compared to bricks, and verbs to mortar, nouns are envisaged as referential building blocks, and verbs, auxiliary and main verbs alike, describe the (inter-)relations between nouns and nominal elements.
If you go beyond word level, to clausal and sentential constituency, conjunctions or connectives can serve as 'hinges' between two clauses or sentences. It is in the sense connectivity, conjunctions are similar to verbs, either as 'mortar' or 'hinge'.
Please take a saying as as saying, rather than an absolute and exclusive argument.
许老师：您好。
有一个问题想要请教您。
您在语料库研修班开始前有一个课件上面说到“If nouns are bricks, are verbs mortar?"我想要问您一下，您对这句话的理解是什么？还有，若动词是mortar，那么连词呢？
期待您百忙中的回复。
祝好。
一个学生
My comment:
'If nouns are bricks, are verbs mortar? '
The saying is a metaphorical understanding of the two fundamental word classes in language.
It does not mean that nothing is left, except nouns and verbs, in language.
When nouns are compared to bricks, and verbs to mortar, nouns are envisaged as referential building blocks, and verbs, auxiliary and main verbs alike, describe the (inter-)relations between nouns and nominal elements.
If you go beyond word level, to clausal and sentential constituency, conjunctions or connectives can serve as 'hinges' between two clauses or sentences. It is in the sense connectivity, conjunctions are similar to verbs, either as 'mortar' or 'hinge'.
Please take a saying as as saying, rather than an absolute and exclusive argument.
