Some things are better left unsaid.
This is the way I understand the sentence:
[Some [things]] = subject
[better] = predicative complement
[left [unsaid]] = predicative adjunct 1
[unsaid] = predicative adjunct 2
But I'm not sure.
Some things are better left unsaid.
This is the way I understand the sentence:
[Some [things]] = subject
[better] = predicative complement
[left [unsaid]] = predicative adjunct 1
[unsaid] = predicative adjunct 2
But I'm not sure.
This is a complicated idiom which is at bottom really not amenable to formal syntactic analysis.
Better here is not an adjective but an adverb, as in You had better [do X] or We had better [not do X], so it's not a complement but a clausal adjunct: it recommends a course of action.
Left unsaid is a participle clause "modifying" its inferred subject, Some things. In this clause unsaid is a participle employed as a complement of the verb leave; ordinarily it would be an object complement ("He left it dead", "We leave this unsaid"), but since its head clause is passive it is a subject complement. You may resolve this tension by thinking of it as a Patient complement.
The really gnarly piece is are. This is neither a copula (it doesn't mediate a predication of left unsaid to Some things) nor an auxiliary (it doesn't marry with left to govern a passive assertion). It should rather be understood as a "dummy" verb employed to provide a formal clause to which the adjunct better can be formally attached. In effect, it's the same BE that we use in cleft sentences with dummy it: "It is better to leave some things unsaid."
Your analysis seems to run parallel to mine. The phrase "better left unsaid" does seem to warrant some consideration.
My analysis starts with the question of how the verb works. "To be" can be the copula. In a similar sentence that I suspect to be comparable, that seems to be a reasonable label:
Some things are better.
In this sentence, I take the complete subject to be "some things" and I take the argument of the verb to be the subject complement. The label of predicate complement is comparable with this.
We can then examine "better left unsaid" to see whether it can function the same as the single word "better".
If "better" remains a subject complement and an adjective in the original model, then we've sufficiently explained the structure of this clause. One interpretation that retains "better" as a subject complement is that "left unsaid" is a participial phrase that directly modifies "better".
You labeled the phrase as a predicative adjunct. I imagine that we both see "left unsaid" as doing the same job that an adverb can do -- directly modifying the adjective "better". It doesn't fill a licensed slot. If that's what you mean by predicative adjunct, then I'll agree with that assessment.
I use "adjunct" to label things that modify verbs because the contrast between adjunct and argument is a useful distinction regarding a verb's dependents. That distinction is not relevant to the adjective "better". Adjectives simply don't take arguments. They take adverbial modifiers.
The verb "left" can be used in both transitive and intransitive constructions. It doesn't necessarily require any argument. If we can consider "unsaid" as an adjunct modifier of the participle "left", then our analysis is finished.
Some things are better left behind.
In this sentence, "behind" is not a participle. It's not a noun. It's not the kind of thing that can act as a verb's object. We can consider it an intransitive preposition or a strange little adverb. Either way, it's not an argument of the verb "left". It's just an adjunct.
Since we can consider the "behind" of "left behind" to be an adjunct, we can consider the "unsaid" of "left unsaid" in the same way. Our analysis is finished.
"Unsaid" is a participle that directly modifies "left" in the same way that an adverb or a preposition might, as an adjunct. "Left unsaid" is a participial phrase which modifies "better". "Better left unsaid" is an adjective phrase which serves as the complement of the subject "some things" as licensed by the copula "are".
This analysis depends on regarding "are" as the copula -- or as a linking verb, if you prefer that label. If so, then "better left unsaid" should be able to modify "things" directly as well as through the governance of some copular verb. Such an example would demonstrate that "better left unsaid" functions as an adjective phrase.
He wanted to talk about things better left unsaid.
That seems to be the case. "Things better left unsaid" is a grammatically sound and coherent noun phrase, the relationships within it are not directly governed by any external verb, and it is a suitable object for the preposition "about".
Things are left (unresolved)
what things? Some
Some things are left
left how? unsaid
Some things are left unsaid
and so, one gets:
Some things are better to be left unsaid, than to be explained
When referring to something specific
It's better left unsaid.
can be used.
I would interpret the sentence as: Some things are better when they are left unsaid. For me "better" is a normal predicative adjective (in comparative form) followed by a sub clause of time/condition. This sub clause is shortened to "when left unsaid".