The relations between words and groups of words are expressed in terms of grammar; but we shall avoid in our discussion, as far as possible, the use of technical terms.
In our next sentence no change in grouping is necessary unless we want to make a complete change in the meaning of the language:
3. The prisoner said the witness was a convicted thief.
The apparent meaning of this sentence is its real meaning, for its language is capable of only one construction. If, however, the writer of the sentence wished to convey another meaning, he could have done so by recasting the sentence or by regrouping it by means of marks of punctuation. If we put a comma after “prisoner” we disconnect “prisoner” from “said”; and the comma gives notice to the reader that new relations for the words “prisoner” and “said” must be sought. The only other sense relations for the words are found quite automatically the moment the eye catches the next two words, which suggest to the reader a new group. When the new group (said the witness) is complete, the reader automatically cuts it off from what follows and what precedes. Thus we have, as shown in the following sentence, a new grouping and a new meaning:
3-1. The prisoner, said the witness, was a convicted thief.
The meaning of voice-changes is understood by children long before the meaning of marks of punctuation is understood; while the full value of marks is rarely understood, even by educated and cultured people.
In spoken language the meaning of No. 3 is expressed by a continuous reading with neither pause nor voice-inflection within the sentence. The reading of No. 3-1, in order to convey its meaning to another person, requires quite a different voice process, which may be represented diagrammatically:
3-2. The prisoner said the witneswas a convicted thief.
3-2. The prisonersaid the witnesss a convicted thief.