Amazingly, not many people know that English grammar is not the product of grammarians/linguists. No, Sir, it was some philosopher mathematicians who have defined Grammar in the 17th century, in France. Furthermore, mathematicians worked with Grammar until the end of the 19th century. Their goal was to come up with a logic system (Grammar itself) that was "universal": exactly the same one in any language in the Universe!

That aspect means that English grammar is structured and it functions exactly the same as the French grammar, the German one, or the Chinese one.  Four hundred years later, in
LSEG4, we can assert that those great mathematicians did a wonderful job for us, and for the entire Planet!

Unfortunately, in the 20th century, it was the grammarians (the linguists) who started developing grammar (including English grammar). This is the reason a lot of new descriptive grammatical "currents" began to unfold. For example:

1. within the general current of “Generative Grammar” have appeared the theories of: “Transformational Grammar”, “Generative Semantics”, “Relational Grammar”, “Lexical-Functional Grammar”, “Nanosyntax”, “Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar”, “Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar”;
2. the current of “Categorical Grammar” has been funded on many structural theories (fairly important), as is the “Tree-Adjoining Grammar”;
3. the “Dependency Grammar” current, based on dependency relations, has sparked the following syntactic theories: “Algebraic Syntax”, “Word Grammar”, “Operator Grammar”, “Meaning-Text Theory”, “Functional Generative Description”;
4. the current of “Stochastic Grammar” was based on a few probability theories (used in programming) as were: “Neural Networks”, “The Optimality Theory”, and “The Stochastic Context-Free Grammar”;
5. the “Functionalist” current includes the theories: “Functionalist Discourse Grammar”, “Systemic Functional Grammar”, “Cognitive Grammar”, “Construction Grammar”, “Role and Reference Grammar”, “Emergent Grammar”, etc.

The point to note is, today, a decent citizen could study Grammar for one year, two, five, even for ten years, without actually learning Grammar! Sounds absurd, right? Well, the sad reality is that the linguists have turned the plain and simple Grammar [the logic and the universal one that was developed by mathematicians] into a "literary mess"—intentionally, more likely.

Anyway, the good news is, now we have "
Logically Structured English Grammar 4" [plus "LSEG4-Exercises Workbook"] to straighten things up!  


Grammatical analysis starts in Sentence Syntax with identifying 5 simple functional relations—and things happen exactly the same in any language known. Once that all syntactical functions are properly determined in Sentence Syntax, Grammar steps down to Morphology: a (local) form and structure analysis based on 10 atomic elements. [Considering other dimensions, way more complex, grammatical analysis may start in Complex Sentence Syntax first, and then it steps down to Sentence Syntax and to Morphology. Complex Sentence Syntax also works with a few universal analytical models/principles.]

In its first part, Morphology is again universal, the same one in any language known. However, there is a certain point in Morphology beyond which we do have to start with a specific Grammar: say, the English one. Now, it happens that the English grammar is one of the simplest in the entire World—if not THE simplest—therefore it is perfectly suited to become a conventional interpretative template-model of universal Grammar for any language on the Planet!

Mastering the classic and universal Grammar today, in our particularly demanding complex society, means that any learning process becomes about ten times faster! Further, a very well (self-)educated person is going to be superior in abilities to any possible competition—extraordinary, isn't it? You see, dear readers, we do have the means; the rest is up to you. [Sooner or later, everybody will have to study our books; therefore, it is best to assure yourself a good head start.]

GREEN LEAVES LThe history of grammar starts in antiquity, about 2500 years ago. However, "modern grammar" (with the Syntax part) was invented by a few incredibly intelligent French mathematicians. Particularly interesting is the fact that the author of the fundamental principle of "one grammar for all languages in the Universe" [aka "The Laws of Thought"] was Mr. René Descartes (1596-1650). Amazingly, The Laws of Thought were also the starting point of Boolean Algebra; therefore, we can enjoy today this extraordinary IT Revolution thanks, again, to Mr. René Descartes!  Even more, Mr. René Descartes is also credited as the father of modern philosophy—although not many "professional philosophers" know that, lately. Mr. René Descartes, a Scientific Titan of our Civilization, has left us the famous words in Latin "Cogito, ergo sum" ["I think, therefore I exist"].

Anyway, the point to note is that the great mathematician and philosopher René Descartes was not a "professional"; he was a . . . mercenary! Yes, Sir, a very skilled soldier of fortune, and a formidable swordsman! On the other hand, it is worth mentioning that most of the great inventors of our Human Civilization were not professionals, working in reputable institutions. It happens that intelligence has nothing to do with titles, awards, reputation, and whatevers; intelligence is totally random: it just pops up out there, somewhere  . . . or not.

ESEG: about English grammar

Despite the fact that it is, possibly, the simplest on the Planet, English grammar appears to be particularly difficult to master appropriately, for both native and ESL speakers, due to the following:

1. in each English speaking nation, grammar is taught as a local, national or regional version;
2. the pronunciation of the English words is frequently atypical, unrelated to their written form;
3. there are many words having multiple grammatical meanings;
4. there are many words having multiple implicit semantic meanings;
5. there are words having the same form, though they take different meanings, depending on the functional place they have within the sentence structure;
6. morphologic elements have regular and irregular grammatical forms;
7. there are numerous exceptions to grammatical rules;
8. English is particularly enriched by “implicit meanings”, more than in many other languages;
9. English is a particularly dynamic language.

People used to say that English  was "the international business
"—well no, not any more, dear friends. Today, for the entire planet, ENGLISH IS THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD LANGUAGE. Note that there are many good reasons behind this social-reality; two of the most important are:
    1. the Computer Revolution we live these days;
2. the fact that the English Lexicon is the richest, and the most advanced, compared
    to any other language on the Planet.

The classic/traditional and universal English Grammar comprises/incorporates the following main parts:

          1. Semantics
2. Phonetics
3. Morphology
4. Syntax
              4.1 Sentence Syntax
              4.2 Complex Sentence Syntax

          5. Orthography / Punctuation
6. implementation of direct/Indirect (literary) style


RED LEAF LNot many readers are aware about "the nature" of the English grammar (and of any grammar). First of all, Grammar is Syntax (this is, Sentence Syntax), and then Morphology. Note that Morphology alone doesn't work, due to a morphological phenomenon named "Grammar Category Conversion".

In other words, grammatical analysis starts in Complex Sentence Syntax (naturally, only when there is a complex sentence to analyze), then it steps down to Sentence Syntax, and then it moves to Morphology. In order to understand Grammar, someone needs to master Sentence Syntax to perfection! The true beauty is that Sentence Syntax is not even difficult, providing that you start learning it using LSEG4!


The words of a language are pronounced using specific sounds which are studied by a branch of Linguistics named “Phonetics”. Generally, Phonetics is a stand-alone branch, just as Grammar is. In English, however, Phonetics becomes a sub-branch of Grammar because they work together, and they are strongly interdependent.

Spoken English does not follow the written form, therefore phonetic mistakes are quite frequent. English grammar handles all mistakes, in either oral or written format, therefore Phonetics becomes automatically a subordinate branch of Grammar. In other words, Phonetics, as a grammatical branch, is one of the instruments we employ to use English correctly.

People coming from foreign languages start learning English with Phonetics. For them, the English sounds need to be translated into the sounds specific to each foreign language. Further, once the ESL speakers achieve a satisfactory degree of fluency in English, they continue relating to Phonetics in order to deepen and polish their skills. In the other side, native speakers cannot write new English words, or foreign names, without knowing phonetics. In most instances they “spell” the names in order to write them correctly; when reading, however, things are really difficult. Phonetics helps native speakers to enrich their vocabulary, and to overcome any regional/customary/atypical pronunciations.


Morphology” is a generic term used to name any form and structural analysis performed on elementary/atomic components. Morphology, as a grammatical branch, studies the words of a language grouped into the following "morphologic elements" (also named “parts of speech"):

 1. nouns
2. articles
3. adjectives
4. pronouns
5. numerals
6. verbs
7. adverbs
8. prepositions
9. conjunctions
10. interjections

The above categories of morphologic elements are the same in any language (in the Universe), and English makes no exception: only ten morphologic elements are needed to form clear/perfect sentences in any language. However, in most English grammar books there are only eight categories of morphologic elements presented: the articles are (wrongfully) considered adjectives, and the numerals are either categorized as adverbs or adjectives, or they are simply ignored.

In many grammar books there is great confusion about Morphology. A “phrase” is not a morphologic structural and functional unit, simply because it cannot be: phrases do not exist as structural units in English grammar. Many authors group a few related morphologic elements in order to form a “phrase”: for example, a noun plus its article, plus adverbs, plus adjectives. That is not a phrase, dear readers. Nouns, adjectives, and adverbs (for example) are perfectly defined atomic morphologic elements, each having a clear morphologic functionality within the sentence structure.

True, we do have phrases in Morphology that work (morphologically) as one single morphologic element: equivalent-nouns, equivalent-adjectives, equivalent-verbs (or “phrasal verbs”) etc. However, once we do identify an equivalent-morphologic element, it ceases to be a “phrase” anymore: it is just the morphologic element per se (noun, adjective, verb, etc.) and the constituent words lose their individual meanings. Again, phrases do not exist as structural units in Morphology (or in Sentence

Another source of confusion is generated by the fact that Morphology studies the “form” of the morphologic elements: that is, structural form within the sentence structure based on the desired/intended meaning, and not (necessarily) the individual form of the morphologic elements. For example, nouns are seldom used alone; they are one component in a structure, and their form is influenced by, or it influences, articles, adjectives, adverbs, other nouns, plus the predicate-verb.

All morphologic elements in a sentence work together in setting/controlling the right form of one morphologic element, according to the meaning and to the morphological rules. A clear example of a structural form is the adjective: adjectives do not exist without their determined nouns. If one adjective does not have a determined noun, then it becomes a pronoun or an equivalent-noun. Therefore, “structural form” of an adjective is: the adjective plus its determined noun.


Morphologic elements take different forms and structures, and Morphology is grammatical branch needed to study them individually. However, words are also related to one another, and they have particular functions within the sentence structure. Another grammatical instrument, named Sentence Syntax, is employed to analyze the functions of syntactical elements. “Syntax” is a generic term used to name a particular type of analysis based on functionality. As a grammatical branch, Sentence Syntax helps building meaningful and logic, complex structures of words: sentences.

Based on the interdependent relational functionality, Sentence Syntax groups the words simplified into the following categories of syntactic elements:

        1. subjects
        2. predicates
        3. attributes
        4. objects (direct, indirect, and prepositional)
        5. adverbials (of time, place, evolution, manner)

The subject and the predicate are principal syntactic elements; the attribute, object, and adverbial are secondary syntactic elements.

There is great confusion about Sentence Syntax. First of all, note that the major category of "attribute" is not acknowledged in many grammar books due to . . . whatever. However, the categories of "subject-complements" and "object-complements" are presented as being “syntactic elements”, although they are in fact just particular subcategories of attributes! Even more, the “complements” do not exist as syntactical elements per se; a complement is exactly what its name suggests: a complement of a syntactic element (subject, predicate, object).

Readers beware: in Sentence Syntax we consider only subjects, predicates, attributes, objects, and adverbials; nouns, articles, adjectives, pronouns, numerals, verbs, adverbs, and prepositions do not exist in Sentence Syntax! 


The next level of grammatical analysis, a superior one, is Complex Sentence Syntax. This time the basic/atomic components are complex structures, named “clauses”, and the rules governing them are set by Complex Sentence Syntax. A complex sentence may be formed from principal clauses in coordination relations to one another, or by secondary clauses in subordination relations to one principal (main) clause.

It needs to be pointed out that a clause is a structural unit within a complex sentence; further, the term “clause” does not exist outside the Complex Sentence Syntax domain. In Morphology and in Sentence Syntax we cannot use the term "clause" because it makes no sense.

Complex Sentence Syntax is a difficult, complex, grammatical analysis; it is performed using:

       1. Analogy to Morphology (and/or)
       2. Analogy to Sentence Syntax

Still, in spite of all problems, Complex Sentence Syntax is greatly needed to shape correctly complex meanings that span on many clauses.

In many grammar books there is great confusion about Complex Sentence Syntax—and about Sentence Syntax. Never mix together Morphology, Sentence Syntax, and Complex Sentence Syntax because they are three different grammatical instruments: each of them helps in analyzing/controlling the meaning, though each has a different domain of applications, specific functions, and each works with different basic/fundamental/atomic elements.


Particularly important is the fact that no grammar book is truly finished without a thorough, sufficiently developed, Punctuation chapter. “Punctuation” is the instrument employed to make grammar work for us, in society, in our day-to-day activity. In other words, regardless of the amount of grammar we are able to control, we need punctuation in order to make grammar work beneficially for us.

RED LEAF RNote that English punctuation was and is developed “naturally”, by writers, publishers, and critics, not by some centralized academic institutions. People learn English punctuation from the books dedicated to presenting it, except most of those important books have (way too) many hundreds of pages, analyzing complex and very complex topics. Further, in order to extract the essence from such books, it takes a lot of time, and remarkable efforts—fortunately, Logically Structured English Grammar 4 did that for you.

The difference in knowing punctuation or not—let’s say, only in our daily email activity—is translated either into writing nice, correct and comprehensive messages, or in scribbling some senseless graffiti marks. You see, dear readers, the English language is particularly beautiful; however, it is only up to us to make it even more beautiful, a lot more clean, and way more profound in expression. Now, considering all these, it may be the Punctuation part in LGEG4 is “THE” most important one!


A complete grammatical reference, very easy to learn: Logically Structured English Grammar 4—as theory plus exercises!

Send your comments regarding this page using,, or
Page last updated on: February 04, 2017
© SC Complement Control SRL. All rights reserved.



Valid HTML 4.01!

Site pages valid according to W3C

Valid CSS!

Stylesheets pages valid according to W3C