Talk:Dependent clause

== Is the example correct? ==no i do noy understnad what dependent clause is what is it?

The article starts with: "A dependent clause (or subordinate clause) cannot stand alone as a sentence. In itself, a dependent clause does not express a complete thought."

And later uses this example: "My sister cried because she scraped her knee." Is 'she scraped her knee' really a dependent clause? It seems like it can stand alone as a sentence quite well. Torc2 22:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I believe this is the dependent clause in that sentence: "because she scraped her knee." Unprompted 02:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

They must mean to exclude the conjunction ("because"), or else it would be useless even with independent clauses: "She is crying and she scraped her knee." -- the clause here does not stand on its own either unless you drop the conjunction "and." I'm not suggesting that that "because" doesn't indicate a dependent clause, only that the stand-alone test is a little faulty here. Torc2 20:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Well actually, "because" is not a coordinating conjunction in this sentence; it's a subordinating conjunction. A coordinating conjunction connects two independent clauses, which is what "and" is functioning as here. JRNorbergé 08:34, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Cannot stand alone as a sentence

I vaguely remember a teacher in high school using a word for dependent clauses used alone for emphasis. "It's so cold out!" "I'm so hungry." The only examples I can think of involve "so," but I'm not sure if it is the only case or if these are even correct examples. I can't seem to find any information on this concept. Am I imagining things? I am so confused.

"So" is being used as an adverb there, not a dependent clause. If you can substitute the word "very," "so" is being used as an adverb. Torc2 20:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)