What is the meaning of verbless clause?
From you he has been absent in the spring,
When fiery-pied April dress’d in all his trim
Hath put the spirit of youth in every thing
That heavy Saturn laugh’d and leap’d with him.
Still nor the lays of birds nor the sweet smell
Of different flowers. In odor and in hue
Could make me any summer’s story tell.
Or from their proud lap pluck them while they grew;
Nor did I wonder at the lily’s white,
Nor praise the deep vermilion in the rose;
They were but sweet, but figures of delight;
Drawn after you , you pattern of all those. Yet
seem’d it winter still, and, you away, As
with your shadow I with these did play.
Is there a lighthouse or a lighthouse? 132; Sonnet 98, William Shakespeare )
I guess participial phrase is selected to say the condition of previous clause , and comma and verb-less clause is to say the reason of C. I guess so is the passage in what he stated (and he saw it). Is that right?
What are the benefits of having an open mind for a non-Nordic client?
The semicolon is editorial; in only source text, the colon is non-scientific. (No = 100). I’m sorry, it’s an educational letter.) Elizabethan pointing was (to the extent that it was anything consistent) rhetorical, not mechanical, and in any case there’s no knowing what Shakespeare originally wrote; so you can’t depend on the point to mean anything in particular.
We are being reminded that and are sentenced as fully reduced clauses with omitted verbs. Why is “were” meaning “whatever are” (from above lines)?
When you first hear the clause, you naturally parse it as an ordinary reduced relative clause, “They were… but but figures… drawn after you”
As with any independent clause , a term is only as the subject: “Behold you were the pattern of all those” and when you hear this clause and recognize the antithesis it expresses, you realize that is ambiguous. In light of what precedes it, is a relative clause with the relative pronoun that as its omitted subject; but in light of what follows it, may be understood as an independent clause with the personal pronoun which as its subject.
So you’ve got a double parsing, which may be paraphrased either as:
are they just sweet images of delight, drawn with you as the model; you the authentic original).
As they were just sweet images of delight: they drawn with you as the model, you the authentic original]
If I like something, I’ll do it!
