Why is the case that the below sentence has three verbs that weren't linked with any conjunction? Also, why use the comma prior to the last clause.
I don't know exactly why this sentence is structured as it is. I assume there were reduced parts or some parts of the clauses omitted.
A pupil of Freud (named) Wilhelm Reich (proposed) a theory (construed) out of the root of Freud's libido (,) of psychic energy he came to term orgone energy.
[A pupil of Freud named Wilhelm Reich] proposed [a theory construed out of the root of Freud's libido, of psychic energy he came to term orgone energy.
Not all subordinate clauses require a conjunction.
The first verb, "named", introduces the past participial clause named Wilhelm Reich, which is directly modifying pupil of Freud in the noun phrase subject a pupil of Freud named Wilhelm Reich.
The second verb, "proposed", is the main, or matrix verb, of the sentence so it does not require a conjunction.
The third verb, "construed", is like the first: it introduces the past participial clause construed out of the root of Freud's libido, of psychic energy he came to term orgone energy, which is directly modifying "theory" in the noun phase a theory construed out of the root of Freud's libido, of psychic energy he came to term orgone energy.
There is another verb/clause within the last one, but you didn't ask about it.
The comma after "libido" appears to indicate that the two expressions of the root of Freud's libido and of psychic energy he came to term orgone energy relate jointly to the preposition "out".
