Basic word structure in English shows that a noun either be followed by a verb (when the noun is the subject) or a prepositional phrase or a time (when the noun is an object). However, nouns can be joined by additional information as part of a single grammatical unit. As we have seen with compound nouns, nouns can be formed with more than one word that describes different aspects of the noun. They can also be followed by complements which add additional information or complete the meaning of a noun, while remaining part of the subject or object’s grammatical unit.
Noun Complements
Noun complements are normally used with abstract nouns (nouns which represent an idea rather than a thing). The complement, or additional information, explains what that idea relates to. For example:
- I like the thought of kittens sneezing.
In this case, thought is an abstract noun complemented by the phrase of kittens sneezing. Combined, the noun and complement make one complete, grammatical idea; a single thought (of kittens sneezing).
Often, as is the case above, a sentence will not make sense if an abstract noun does not have a complement. This is similar to verbs which require an object; unless we know what the noun relates to, it seems strange on its own. Examples include nouns such as idea, thought, reason, criticism, belief and need.
Noun complements can come in the form of prepositional phrases, full clauses or infinitives.
- The Mayor’s criticism of his rival was unfounded. (prepositional phrase)
- She did not like thinking that they were going to have to run home in the rain. (full clause)
- The dog did not feel the need to bark. (infinitive)
Different nouns can be followed by different complements, some more flexibly than others. For example:
- There is no reason to cry.
- What was the reason for the train delay?
- I tried to think up two reasons why I hated him.
However, different nouns can require different complements, so they must be learned individually.
Word order and noun complements
Noun complements always follow the noun they add information to. As such, they fit into a sentence as part of the noun’s grammatical unit, even if the complement is a full clause.
- Barry thought that the water filter was being tampered with.
- By thinking that the water filter was being tampered with, Barry angered his boss.
- Barry’s boss listened tiredly when he feared that the water filter was being tampered with.
You may sometimes see a noun split from its complement by parenthetical information (such as an independent clause), but in this case it becomes an appositive, rephrasing a noun rather than complementing the subject.
- Barry explained his idea, which he had been thinking about for months, that the water filter was being tampered with.
This can be difficult to do correctly and clearly, as it divides the noun from crucial information, and it is clumsy if the noun complement is followed by additional information (the example above would sound confusing if we kept the final information to his boss). So try to keep nouns and their complements together!
please can you tell me why the decision to change your career is a post modifier and not a complement
Hi Selen, that would depend on the sentence, but essentially the specific difference is that a complement is typically necessary to complete the meaning while a modifier provides additional information – so if the sentence can make sense without the phrase then it’s technically more accurately a modifier than a complement (not a distinction I think I’ve made in the above post!).
Can a complement serve as the sentence’s object? As in: “It is difficult to hear.” Wouldn’t “difficult” be a complement and the object?
We’d typically take an object to be something that is affected by the verb, whilst a complement is something that modifies the subject, and with those ideas in mind they don’t really overlap. In this case, it would act as a complement because it is completing the idea of the subject, telling us what “it” is, rather than telling us what the subject does to it. Typically, the verb “to be” is going to be followed by complements, because the verb (where not used as an auxiliary) necessarily modifies the subject, rather than has an effect on an object. I hope that makes sense!
Hi
My cat’s favorite place is next to my desk
*next to my desk* is it a subject complement or a direct object
And thank you
Hi, apologies for the slow response! This is a prepositional phrase, so it is not an object (which would be connected to the verb), but rather describes the position of something, adding information to the noun.
Barry’s boss listened tiredly to his idea that the water filter was being tampered with.
(1) As written—with NO comma setting off the clause—the sentence suggests that Barry might have had MORE than one idea. The clause, though, as written, could indeed be considered a complement.
(2) If the clause were set off with a comma, it would suggest that Barry had only ONE idea. The clause, then,
could be considered as an Appositive—which might be felt as a slightly stronger declaration than a simple complement.
Am I wrong?
Hi Joey,
Yes, you’re correct on both accounts. Without a comma it doesn’t necessarily confirm he had more than one idea, but the possibility is there, while with the comma, it would emphasise that we are talking about one specific idea he had, and this was it. It’s a subtle difference but it’s essentially saying with (1) we answer ‘which idea was it?’ and with (2) we answer ‘what was the idea?’
Example from above: She did not like the idea that they were going to have to run home in the rain.
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the word “idea” is a DIRECT OBJECT. If so, then “that they were going to have to run home in the rain” would be an APPOSITIVE. You could just as well say “She did not like that they. . . .” The noun clause would then clearly be recognized as a direct object.
Hi Joey,
You’re right that the sentence would work that way, but I suppose the difference between it being an appositive and a complement here is if it is essential information, my point here being that to include ‘idea’ we need the extra information (…they they were going to…) to tell us what that idea is, which makes it a complement. Though in practice we could also have a grammatical sentence without that complement, the abstract idea wouldn’t be complete without more context.
Hi Phil,
I understand what you’re saying, logically. Since I saw that there was NO comma AFTER the word “idea,” I was inclined to think of the appositive as “restrictive,” which would inherently provide that “essential information.” I’m not a professional–in any sense, in any discipline–so I really can’t speak on grammar with any great certainty or authority. I simply enjoy the challenge, and, here in my old age, I can understand why philosophy almost always ends up at, or at least, very near . . . linguistics.
Hi Joey,
You’re certainly right there – language itself is very open to debate and our definitions and rules often twist and turn depending on purpose. Honestly I operate much the same way, merely attempting to make sense of the questions my students bring to me; it is a challenge!
Hello Phil,
I still have some confusion between complements and appositives; I hope for your guidance.
What I gather here is that to be called a complement or an appositive, a word or a group of words must contain some essential information for the adjacent noun. Well, isn’t it compulsory for a subject complement to follow a copular verb? (at least I’ve been taught so)
In ”It is difficult to hear.”, ‘difficult’ is a complement, but what do we call ‘to hear’? It is following an adjective, not a noun.
In ” The hour to prepare lessons has arrived.”, “My brother Ali is a famous lawyer”, what are ‘to prepare lessons’ and ‘Ali’ ?
Regards.
Hi,
Yes I can see why these are confusing – to some degree it depends on how we choose to look at the sentence. I would consider the entire phrase “difficult to hear” to be the complement, because “difficult” is not the complete idea we are looking for there. Likewise, I would see “to prepare lessons” as part of the noun phrase, “The hour to prepare lessons”, because it necessarily defines it. We could break them down as word types, e.g. verb, infinitive, nouns, but in terms of grammatical function in the sentence that whole unit should comes together to perform one grammatical function. As to “Ali”, that would be an appositive, restating My brother, but again for grammatical function we could also see “My brother Ali” as the complete noun phrase.
As to the use of complements with copular verbs, that’s not a term I really use myself but yes it is what I was aiming to explain at the start of this article; I would normally group these as verbs that demonstrate states, senses and feelings – or as the article labels, abstract verbs. EDIT – As to it being compulsory that a complement follow one, indeed you are correct there, and I see that in the final examples I did indeed slip into some appositives. I’ve updated it to reflect that – there is some crossover, because essentially, as you suggested, complements and appositives can convey similar complementary information, but fit into the sentence differently depending on their relationships to a noun or a verb.
Best,
Phil
Can you tell me sir . The boy killed the snake. Wheather the snake will be object or complement.
An object, because it is being effected by verb.
Hello ! to be is a intransitive verb .but why it takes object after it.
I want to be officer
She wants to be dancer.
Here dancer and officer object of” to be verb” how is it possible ? Could you explain, please
Hi Sana,
Good question; the simple answer is that a stative verb *can* take an object if it’s something defines the subject. In this case, it is not an object that the state is being applied to as an action, it is using the job role to complete the condition, to be. Consider the following:
I am happy.
I am a dancer.
These both define “I”, though one is an adjective and the other a noun. I hope this helps!
Phil
Hi, thank you!
I am a girl.(subject complement)
But this is different
I wanted to be singer.
As we know intransitive can’t take object even if they come in the form of infinitive. Bht in the above example” to be” has object
Hi Sana,
That was my point: “to be a singer” is essentially the same as “I am a girl” in a modal form; “I am a singer” -> “I want to be a singer.”. To be accurate, in this sentence the complete verb phrase “to be a singer” is the object of the verb, “want”, representing a desire, but the phrase “a singer” is still a subject complement.
Phil
Hi, Paul,
I enjoyed your book titled, “Word Order.” Thank you for writing it.
In a case such as,
Barry explained his idea that the water filter was being tampered with,
would you regard the that-clause as being a noun clause or an adjective clause? Usually, when I see a that-clause following a noun phrase, I assume it to be an adjective clause. But, in this case, it seems more like a noun clause. I say that because the noun complement seems to be in the nature of a nominal that defines the abstract concept to which the noun phrase refers. The discussion, above, about the subtle distinction between a noun complement and an appositive further supports that notion.
When I reason about noun phrase complements in that fashion, I then wonder whether a prepositional phrase truly can function as a noun phrase complement. Might the prepositional phrase examples, above, be more in the nature of noun phrase modifiers acting adjectivally? Consider, “The Mayor’s criticism of his rival was unfounded.” There, the prepositional phrase is not telling us much about what the criticism was, but merely who the subject of the criticism was. I’m not sure.
Sincerely,
Matt Rips
Hi Matt,
Thanks for the comment. Yes, I’d follow your thinking for that phrase myself, that as it restates the concept of the idea I would say that is a noun clause.
Yes, that’s an interesting point about prepositional phrases – in general, I suppose I would see them as performing an adjective function to add information to the noun, rather than working as a noun complement; as your example shows, it is not essential information. I can’t think of an example off the top of my head where a prepositional phrase would add essential information in this way, at least not grammatically. However, contextually we might consider that the prepositional phrase is necessary otherwise we might not understand what the sentence is referring to – without any additional information or context, “The Mayor’s criticism” wouldn’t present a complete idea, while “criticism of his rival” does give us a full understanding of our subject matter, if not the specifics of the criticism. So, I suppose in this sense the definitions might bend depending on if we’re using the concept of a noun complement in a strictly grammatical sense or to help up establish whether or not the sentence makes contextual sense. (And even then we might question, at what point does a strict grammatical definition become satisfied, if it does not provide contextual understanding!) Though this gets into one of these more philosophical areas of language, where we question the nature of the definitions themselves!
I hope this covers some of what you’re asking, at least – I confess it may be something that requires a little more thought!
Phil
On the point about what structures are capable of being a noun phrase complement, we certainly are in a gray area. I concur with your analysis. The phrase “of his rival” does seem to be more like a complement than a modifier.
I 100% agree: “(And even then we might question, at what point does a strict grammatical definition become satisfied, if it does not provide contextual understanding!) Though this gets into one of these more philosophical areas of language, where we question the nature of the definitions themselves!”
The rules of grammar are, in one part, a good but imperfect effort at describing how a language is used and, in a second part, a way of regularizing how people use the language. If “we” could write the usage rules in a way that perfectly describes actual usage, those rules probably would be way too complicated for practical use.
Please keep doing what you do. It’s awesome!
Hi Matt,
Indeed, I think you’re right, and the rules are forever changing! Thanks very much, I will try and keep it up!
Phil