Many ditransitive verbs have a passive voice form which can take a direct object. Contrast the active and two forms of the passive:
Active:
Jean gave the books to him.
Jean gave him the books.
Passive:
The books were given to him by Jean.
He was given the books by Jean.
Showing posts with label structure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label structure. Show all posts
Friday, July 20, 2007
Ditransitive verb
In grammar, a ditransitive verb is a verb which takes a subject and two objects. According to certain linguistics considerations, these objects may be called direct and indirect, or primary and secondary.
In languages which mark grammatical case, it is common to differentiate the objects of a ditransitive verb using, for example, the accusative case for the direct object, and the dative case for the indirect object (but this morphological alignment is not unique; see below). In languages without morphological case (such as English for the most part) the objects are distinguished by word order and/or context.
In languages which mark grammatical case, it is common to differentiate the objects of a ditransitive verb using, for example, the accusative case for the direct object, and the dative case for the indirect object (but this morphological alignment is not unique; see below). In languages without morphological case (such as English for the most part) the objects are distinguished by word order and/or context.
Pseudo-reflexivity
Alternating ambitransitives are not uncommon in English. In the Romance languages, such verbs are rarely found, since the same semantic concept is covered by pseudo-reflexive verbs. These verbs behave like ambitransitives, but the intransitive form requires a clitic pronoun that usually serves also for reflexive constructions. See for example, in Spanish (which uses the pronoun se in the third person):
La ventana se rompió. "The window broke."
Este barco se está hundiendo. "This boat is sinking."
Se derritió todo el helado. "All the ice cream has melted."
In the example, the verbs romper, hundir and derretir are all transitive; they become intransitive by using the pseudo-reflexive clitic, and the direct object becomes the intransitive subject.
Ambiguity may arise between these and true reflexive forms, especially when the intransitive subject is an animate (and therefore a possible agent). Me estoy hundiendo usually means "I'm sinking" (patientive first person), but it may also mean "I'm sinking myself", "I'm getting myself sunk" (agentive).
La ventana se rompió. "The window broke."
Este barco se está hundiendo. "This boat is sinking."
Se derritió todo el helado. "All the ice cream has melted."
In the example, the verbs romper, hundir and derretir are all transitive; they become intransitive by using the pseudo-reflexive clitic, and the direct object becomes the intransitive subject.
Ambiguity may arise between these and true reflexive forms, especially when the intransitive subject is an animate (and therefore a possible agent). Me estoy hundiendo usually means "I'm sinking" (patientive first person), but it may also mean "I'm sinking myself", "I'm getting myself sunk" (agentive).
Transitive verb
In syntax, a transitive verb is a verb that requires both a subject and one or more objects. Some examples of sentences with transitive verbs:
Kyle sees Adam. (Adam is the direct object of "sees")
You lifted the bag. (bag is the direct object of "lifted")
I punished you. (you is the direct object of "punished")
I give you the book. (book is the direct object of "give" and "you" is the indirect object of "give")
Those transitive verbs that are able to take both a direct object and an indirect object are called ditransitive; an example is the verb give above. Verbs that require a single object are called monotransitive. There are a few verbs that take on the tritransitive form, which requires four arguments as opposed to needing three for a ditransitive verb or just two for a transitive verb.
Verbs that don't require an object are called intransitive, for example the verb to sleep. Since you cannot "sleep" something, the verb acts intransitively. Verbs that can be used in a transitive or intransitive way are called ambitransitive; an example is the verb eat, since the sentences I am eating (with an intransitive form) and I am eating an apple (with a transitive form that has an apple as the object) are both grammatically correct.
There are languages which distinguish verbs based on their transitivity, which suggests that this is a salient linguistic feature. However, the definition of transitive verbs as those which have one object is not universal and is not used in grammars of many languages. For example, it is generally accepted in Polish grammar that transitive verbs are those which:
accept a direct object (in accusative in the positive form, and in genitive in the negative form), OR
undergo passive transformation.
Both conditions are fulfilled in many instances of transitive verbs, ex. Maria widzi Jana (Mary sees John; Jana is the accusative form of Jan) - Jan jest widziany przez Marię (John is seen by Mary). There are two types of exceptions:
verbs which govern genitive or instrumental (in both positive and negative forms) but with possible passive transformation, ex. Król rządzi tym krajem (A king rules this country; tym krajem is in instrumental) - Ten kraj jest rządzony przez króla (This country is ruled by a king).
verbs which govern accusative in the positive form and genitive in the negative form but with no passive transformation, ex. Jan ma książkę (John has a book; ksiązkę is the accusative form of książka), Jan nie ma książki (John does not have a book; książki is genitive).
If a verb accepts an object which is not in accusative and does not undergo passive transformation, it is considered intransitive, ex. Jan handluje kwiatami (John deals in flowers; kwiatami is in instrumental). In other words, verbs with one or even two objects may also be intransitive.
Kyle sees Adam. (Adam is the direct object of "sees")
You lifted the bag. (bag is the direct object of "lifted")
I punished you. (you is the direct object of "punished")
I give you the book. (book is the direct object of "give" and "you" is the indirect object of "give")
Those transitive verbs that are able to take both a direct object and an indirect object are called ditransitive; an example is the verb give above. Verbs that require a single object are called monotransitive. There are a few verbs that take on the tritransitive form, which requires four arguments as opposed to needing three for a ditransitive verb or just two for a transitive verb.
Verbs that don't require an object are called intransitive, for example the verb to sleep. Since you cannot "sleep" something, the verb acts intransitively. Verbs that can be used in a transitive or intransitive way are called ambitransitive; an example is the verb eat, since the sentences I am eating (with an intransitive form) and I am eating an apple (with a transitive form that has an apple as the object) are both grammatically correct.
There are languages which distinguish verbs based on their transitivity, which suggests that this is a salient linguistic feature. However, the definition of transitive verbs as those which have one object is not universal and is not used in grammars of many languages. For example, it is generally accepted in Polish grammar that transitive verbs are those which:
accept a direct object (in accusative in the positive form, and in genitive in the negative form), OR
undergo passive transformation.
Both conditions are fulfilled in many instances of transitive verbs, ex. Maria widzi Jana (Mary sees John; Jana is the accusative form of Jan) - Jan jest widziany przez Marię (John is seen by Mary). There are two types of exceptions:
verbs which govern genitive or instrumental (in both positive and negative forms) but with possible passive transformation, ex. Król rządzi tym krajem (A king rules this country; tym krajem is in instrumental) - Ten kraj jest rządzony przez króla (This country is ruled by a king).
verbs which govern accusative in the positive form and genitive in the negative form but with no passive transformation, ex. Jan ma książkę (John has a book; ksiązkę is the accusative form of książka), Jan nie ma książki (John does not have a book; książki is genitive).
If a verb accepts an object which is not in accusative and does not undergo passive transformation, it is considered intransitive, ex. Jan handluje kwiatami (John deals in flowers; kwiatami is in instrumental). In other words, verbs with one or even two objects may also be intransitive.
Ambitransitive verb
An ambitransitive verb is a verb that can be used both as intransitive or as transitive without requiring a morphological change. That is, the same verb form may or may not require a direct object. English has a large number of ambitransitive verbs; examples include read, break, and understand (e.g. "I read the book," saying what was read, or just "I read all afternoon").
Ambitransitive verbs are common in some languages, and much less so in other languages, where valency tends to be fixed and there are explicit valency-changing operations (such as passive voice, antipassive voice, applicatives, causatives, etc.).
Generally speaking, there are two types of ambitransitive verbs, distinguished by the alignment of the semantic roles of their arguments with their syntactic roles.
When the subject of the intransitive form of the verb is an agent (like the subject of the transitive form), so that the verb aligns the syntactic roles S and A, then the verb is a common ambitransitive with an optional object, and the intransitive version is an unergative verb, like English eat, follow, read, win.
When the subject of the intransitive form is a patient (like the direct object of the transitive form), so that the verb aligns the syntactic roles S and O, then the verb is known as an alternating ambitransitive, and the intransitive version is an unaccusative verb, like English break, melt and sink. This means that the subject of the intransitive form corresponds with the direct object of the transitive version, so the roles are exchanged. Often depending on the linguist doing the research, the intransitive version of such a verb can be said to be in the middle voice, or to be an anticausative verb.
The term "anticausative" derives from the fact that the intransitive form of such a verb implies a deletion of the agent of causation (the reverse of a causative construction), as if the event happened by itself: when a window breaks, we know it in fact it was broken (by some person, or by some physical alteration), but the anticausative form syntactically erases the cause and also makes it impossible or difficult to refer to it (as opposed to passive voice, where the agent can usually be introduced back as an adjunct, e. g. a prepositional by-phrase in English).
Ambitransitive verbs are common in some languages, and much less so in other languages, where valency tends to be fixed and there are explicit valency-changing operations (such as passive voice, antipassive voice, applicatives, causatives, etc.).
Generally speaking, there are two types of ambitransitive verbs, distinguished by the alignment of the semantic roles of their arguments with their syntactic roles.
When the subject of the intransitive form of the verb is an agent (like the subject of the transitive form), so that the verb aligns the syntactic roles S and A, then the verb is a common ambitransitive with an optional object, and the intransitive version is an unergative verb, like English eat, follow, read, win.
When the subject of the intransitive form is a patient (like the direct object of the transitive form), so that the verb aligns the syntactic roles S and O, then the verb is known as an alternating ambitransitive, and the intransitive version is an unaccusative verb, like English break, melt and sink. This means that the subject of the intransitive form corresponds with the direct object of the transitive version, so the roles are exchanged. Often depending on the linguist doing the research, the intransitive version of such a verb can be said to be in the middle voice, or to be an anticausative verb.
The term "anticausative" derives from the fact that the intransitive form of such a verb implies a deletion of the agent of causation (the reverse of a causative construction), as if the event happened by itself: when a window breaks, we know it in fact it was broken (by some person, or by some physical alteration), but the anticausative form syntactically erases the cause and also makes it impossible or difficult to refer to it (as opposed to passive voice, where the agent can usually be introduced back as an adjunct, e. g. a prepositional by-phrase in English).
Ambitransitivity
In most languages, there are some verbs which are ambitransitive: they can act as intransitive or as transitive. For example, English play is ambitransitive (both intransitive and transitive), since it is grammatical to say His son plays, and it is also grammatical to say His son plays guitar. English is rather flexible with regards to verb valency, and so it has a high number of ambitransitive verbs; other languages are more rigid and require explicit valency changing operations (voice, causative morphology, etc.) to transform a verb from intransitive to transitive or vice versa.
In some ambitransitive verbs, called ergative verbs, the alignment of the syntactic arguments to the semantic roles is exchanged. An example of this is the verb break in English.
(1) I broke the cup.
(2) The cup broke.
In (1), the verb is transitive, and the subject is the agent of the action, i. e. the performer of the action of breaking the cup. In (2), the verb is intransitive and the subject is the patient of the action, i. e. it is the thing affected by the action, not the one that performs it. In fact, the patient is the same in both sentences, and sentence (2) is an example of implicit middle voice. This has also been termed an anticausative.
Other alternating intransitive verbs in English are change and sink.
In the Romance languages, these verbs are often called pseudo-reflexive, because they are signaled in the same way as reflexive verbs, using the clitic particle se. Compare the following (in Spanish):
(3a) La taza se rompió. ("The cup broke.")
(3b) El barco se hundió. ("The boat sank.")
(4a) Ella se miró en el espejo. ("She looked at herself in the mirror.")
(4b) El gato se lava. ("The cat washes itself.")
Sentences (3a) and (3b) show Romance pseudo-reflexive phrases, corresponding to English alternating intransitives. As in The cup broke, they are inherently without an agent; their deep structure does not and can not contain one. The action is not reflexive (as in (4a) and (4b)) because it is not performed by the subject; it just happens to it. Therefore, this is not the same as passive voice, where an intransitive verb phrase appears, but there is an implicit agent (which can be made explicit using a complement phrase):
(5) The cup was broken (by the child).
(6) El barco fue hundido (por piratas). ("The boat was sunk (by pirates).")
Other ambitransitive verbs (like eat) are not of the alternating type; the subject is always the agent of the action, and the object is simply optional. A few verbs are of both types at once, like read: compare I read, I read a magazine, and this magazine reads easily.
In some ambitransitive verbs, called ergative verbs, the alignment of the syntactic arguments to the semantic roles is exchanged. An example of this is the verb break in English.
(1) I broke the cup.
(2) The cup broke.
In (1), the verb is transitive, and the subject is the agent of the action, i. e. the performer of the action of breaking the cup. In (2), the verb is intransitive and the subject is the patient of the action, i. e. it is the thing affected by the action, not the one that performs it. In fact, the patient is the same in both sentences, and sentence (2) is an example of implicit middle voice. This has also been termed an anticausative.
Other alternating intransitive verbs in English are change and sink.
In the Romance languages, these verbs are often called pseudo-reflexive, because they are signaled in the same way as reflexive verbs, using the clitic particle se. Compare the following (in Spanish):
(3a) La taza se rompió. ("The cup broke.")
(3b) El barco se hundió. ("The boat sank.")
(4a) Ella se miró en el espejo. ("She looked at herself in the mirror.")
(4b) El gato se lava. ("The cat washes itself.")
Sentences (3a) and (3b) show Romance pseudo-reflexive phrases, corresponding to English alternating intransitives. As in The cup broke, they are inherently without an agent; their deep structure does not and can not contain one. The action is not reflexive (as in (4a) and (4b)) because it is not performed by the subject; it just happens to it. Therefore, this is not the same as passive voice, where an intransitive verb phrase appears, but there is an implicit agent (which can be made explicit using a complement phrase):
(5) The cup was broken (by the child).
(6) El barco fue hundido (por piratas). ("The boat was sunk (by pirates).")
Other ambitransitive verbs (like eat) are not of the alternating type; the subject is always the agent of the action, and the object is simply optional. A few verbs are of both types at once, like read: compare I read, I read a magazine, and this magazine reads easily.
Intransitive verb
An intransitive verb is a verb that has only one argument, that is, a verb with valency equal to one. In more familiar terms, an intransitive verb has a subject but does not have an object. For example, in English, the verbs sleep, die, condescend and swim, are intransitive.
A linking verb may or may not be considered a proper intransitive verb.
A linking verb may or may not be considered a proper intransitive verb.
Dynamic verb
A dynamic verb is a verb that shows continued or progressive action on the part of the subject. The opposite of stative verb.
Dynamic verbs have duration, that is, they occur over time. This time may or may not have a defined endpoint, and may or may not yet have occurred. These distinctions lead to various forms related to tense and aspect.
Examples of dynamic verbs are 'to run', 'to hit', 'to intervene' and 'to go'.
This syntax-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_verb"
Dynamic verbs have duration, that is, they occur over time. This time may or may not have a defined endpoint, and may or may not yet have occurred. These distinctions lead to various forms related to tense and aspect.
Examples of dynamic verbs are 'to run', 'to hit', 'to intervene' and 'to go'.
This syntax-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_verb"
Stative verb
stative verb is one which asserts that one of its arguments has a particular property (possibly in relation to its other arguments). Statives differ from other aspectual classes of verbs in that they are static; they have no duration and no distinguished endpoint. Verbs which are not stative are often called dynamic verbs.
Examples of sentences with stative verbs:
I am tired.
I have two children.
I like the color blue.
I think they want something to eat.
We believe in many Gods...
The case contains six bottles.
This would imply that we didn't care.
In languages where the copula is a verb, it is a stative verb, as is the case in English be. Some other English stative verbs are believe, know, seem, and have. All these generally denote states rather than actions. However, it should be noted that verbs like have and be, which are usually stative, can be dynamic in certain situations. Think is stative when it means "believe", but not when it means "consider". The following are not stative:
You are being silly.
She is having a baby.
Quiet please, I am thinking.
Some languages morphologically distinguish stative and dynamic verbs, or transform one into another. Arabic, for example, can use the same verbal root to mean ride (stative) and mount (dynamic).
Propositions that are expressed in most Indo-European languages by noun qualifiers (such as adjectives) are instead expressed by stative verbs in many other languages. In Japanese, so-called i-adjectives are in fact best analyzed as intransitive stative verbs (for example, takai alone means "is high/expensive", and samukunakatta means was not cold).
Examples of sentences with stative verbs:
I am tired.
I have two children.
I like the color blue.
I think they want something to eat.
We believe in many Gods...
The case contains six bottles.
This would imply that we didn't care.
In languages where the copula is a verb, it is a stative verb, as is the case in English be. Some other English stative verbs are believe, know, seem, and have. All these generally denote states rather than actions. However, it should be noted that verbs like have and be, which are usually stative, can be dynamic in certain situations. Think is stative when it means "believe", but not when it means "consider". The following are not stative:
You are being silly.
She is having a baby.
Quiet please, I am thinking.
Some languages morphologically distinguish stative and dynamic verbs, or transform one into another. Arabic, for example, can use the same verbal root to mean ride (stative) and mount (dynamic).
Propositions that are expressed in most Indo-European languages by noun qualifiers (such as adjectives) are instead expressed by stative verbs in many other languages. In Japanese, so-called i-adjectives are in fact best analyzed as intransitive stative verbs (for example, takai alone means "is high/expensive", and samukunakatta means was not cold).
Copula deletion
In informal speech, the copula may be dropped. This is a feature of African American Vernacular English but is also used by a variety of English speakers in informal contexts. Ex. "Where you at?" "We at the store." E-Prime is a variant of the English language that prohibits the use of the copula in all its forms.
A unified theory of copular sentences
Along with copular sentences where the canonical order of predication is displayed - that is, the subject precedes the predicate - as in a picture of the wall is the cause of the riot there can also be "inverse copular sentences" where this order is mirrored as in the cause of the riot is a picture of the wall (cf. Everaert et al 2006). Although these two sentences are superficially very similar it can be shown that they embody very different properties. So, for example it is possible to form a sentence like which riot do you think that a picture of the wall is the cause of but not which wall do you think that the cause of the riot was a picture of. The distinction between these two types of sentences, technically referred to as "canonical" vs. inverse copular sentences, respectively - and the unified theory of copular sentences associated to it - has been proved to be valid across-languages and has lead to some refinement of the theory of clause structure. In particular it challenges one of the major dogmas of the theory of clause structure, i.e. that the two basic constituents of a sentence Noun Phrase and Verb Phrase are associated to the logical/grammatical functions of subject and predicate (cf. phrase structure rules and sentence (linguistics)). In fact, copular sentences show that this axiom is not adequate on empirical grounds since the Noun Phrase that cooccurs with the Verb Phrase in a copular sentence can be the predicate and the subject be contained in the Verb Phrase. Interestingly, it has been suggested that inverse copular sentences appear to play a sharp role in setting the pro-drop parameter. In Italian, for example in sentences of the type Noun Phrase verb Noun Phrase, the verb generally agrees with the Noun Phrase on the left with one exception: inverse copular sentences. One can construe minimal pairs like the cause of the riot is/*are these pictures of the wall vs. la causa della rivolta sono/*è queste foto del muro: the two sentences are one the gloss of the other with only one difference: the copula is singular in Italian and plural in English. If one does not want to give up the idea that agreement is on the left, then the only option is to assume that pro occurs between the copula and the Noun Phrase on the left. That pro can occur as a predicate must be in fact independently assumed to assign a proper structure to sentences like sono io (is me: "it's me") which can by no means be considered a transformation of *io sono, which has no meaning.
Non-copular uses
As an auxiliary verb:
To form the passive voice: "I was told that you wanted to see me"
To add continuous aspect to tenses: "It is raining"
Meaning "to exist": "I want only to be, and that is enough." "There's no sense in making a scientific inquiry about what species the Loch Ness Monster is, without first establishing that the Loch Ness Monster indeed is." "To be or not to be, that is the question." "I think therefore I am."
Note that the auxiliary verb function derives from the copular function; and, depending on one's point of view, one can still interpret the verb as a copula and the following verbal form as being adjectival. Abelard in his Dialectica made an argument against the idea that the copula can express existence based on a reductio ad absurdum (Kneale - Kneale 1962 and Moro 1997).
To form the passive voice: "I was told that you wanted to see me"
To add continuous aspect to tenses: "It is raining"
Meaning "to exist": "I want only to be, and that is enough." "There's no sense in making a scientific inquiry about what species the Loch Ness Monster is, without first establishing that the Loch Ness Monster indeed is." "To be or not to be, that is the question." "I think therefore I am."
Note that the auxiliary verb function derives from the copular function; and, depending on one's point of view, one can still interpret the verb as a copula and the following verbal form as being adjectival. Abelard in his Dialectica made an argument against the idea that the copula can express existence based on a reductio ad absurdum (Kneale - Kneale 1962 and Moro 1997).
Copula
In linguistics, a copula is a word used to link the subject of a sentence with a predicate (a subject complement or an adverbial). Although it might not itself express an action or condition, it serves to equate (or associate) the subject with the predicate. The word 'copula' originates from the Latin noun for a "link or tie" that connects two different things (for a short history of the copula see the appendix to Moro 1997 and references cited there).
A copula is sometimes (though not always) a verb or a verb-like part of speech. In English primary education grammar courses, a copula is often called a linking verb.
The term is generally used to refer to the main copular verb in the language: in the case of English, this is "to be". It can also be used to refer to all such verbs in the language: in that case, English copulas include "to be", "to become", "to get", "to feel", and "to seem". Other verbs have secondary uses as copulative verbs, as fall in "The zebra fell victim to the lion."
For a complete list see: List of English copulae.
A copula is sometimes (though not always) a verb or a verb-like part of speech. In English primary education grammar courses, a copula is often called a linking verb.
The term is generally used to refer to the main copular verb in the language: in the case of English, this is "to be". It can also be used to refer to all such verbs in the language: in that case, English copulas include "to be", "to become", "to get", "to feel", and "to seem". Other verbs have secondary uses as copulative verbs, as fall in "The zebra fell victim to the lion."
For a complete list see: List of English copulae.
The copula in English
We can identify several sub-uses of the copula:
Identity: "I only want to be myself." "When the area behind the dam fills, it will be a lake." "The Morning Star is the Evening Star." "Boys will be boys."
Class membership. To belong to a set or class: "She could be married." "Dogs are canines." "Moscow is a large city." Depending on one's point of view, all other uses can be considered derivatives of this use, including the following non-copular uses in English, as they all express a subset relationship.
Predication (property and relation attribution): "It hurts to be blue." "Will that house be big enough?" "The hen is next to the cockerel." "I am confused." Such attributes may also relate to temporary conditions as well as inherent qualities: "I will be tired after running." "Will you be going to the play tomorrow?" but please note that a linking verb has nothing to do with these so called "Be"- verbs.(see below)
Identity: "I only want to be myself." "When the area behind the dam fills, it will be a lake." "The Morning Star is the Evening Star." "Boys will be boys."
Class membership. To belong to a set or class: "She could be married." "Dogs are canines." "Moscow is a large city." Depending on one's point of view, all other uses can be considered derivatives of this use, including the following non-copular uses in English, as they all express a subset relationship.
Predication (property and relation attribution): "It hurts to be blue." "Will that house be big enough?" "The hen is next to the cockerel." "I am confused." Such attributes may also relate to temporary conditions as well as inherent qualities: "I will be tired after running." "Will you be going to the play tomorrow?" but please note that a linking verb has nothing to do with these so called "Be"- verbs.(see below)
clausal sentence elements
A clause consists of a subject and main verb. Not all clauses function as sentence elements. Look at the two contrasting examples below.
We know that he is a fool. (SUBJECT + VERB + CLAUSAL OBJECT)
The man who is a fool knows nothing. (The clause is qualifying the man and is not a sentence element in its own right)
The clause can function as a subject, object and adverbial sentence element.
Whether he is guilty is the issue. (CLAUSAL SUBJECT + VERB + COMPLEMENT)
We know that Mr Jenner eats cabbage. (SUBJECT + VERB +CLAUSAL OBJECT)
We arrived before they left. (SUBJECT + VERB + CLAUSAL ADVERBIAL)
Clauses, whether they are sentence elements or not, are themselves composed of sentence elements. Look at the example below.
We know that he is a fool. SUBJECT + VERB + OBJECT (OBJECT = SUBJECT + VERB+ COMPLEMENT)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_element"
We know that he is a fool. (SUBJECT + VERB + CLAUSAL OBJECT)
The man who is a fool knows nothing. (The clause is qualifying the man and is not a sentence element in its own right)
The clause can function as a subject, object and adverbial sentence element.
Whether he is guilty is the issue. (CLAUSAL SUBJECT + VERB + COMPLEMENT)
We know that Mr Jenner eats cabbage. (SUBJECT + VERB +CLAUSAL OBJECT)
We arrived before they left. (SUBJECT + VERB + CLAUSAL ADVERBIAL)
Clauses, whether they are sentence elements or not, are themselves composed of sentence elements. Look at the example below.
We know that he is a fool. SUBJECT + VERB + OBJECT (OBJECT = SUBJECT + VERB+ COMPLEMENT)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_element"
phrasal sentence elements
A phrasal sentence element is any group of words which collectively serve as a sentence element, but which does NOT constitute a clause.
We can identify four types of phrase.
noun: these phrases have a noun (or pronoun) head. Adjectives, determiners and relative clauses may modify the noun. Noun phrases may form the subject, object, predicative and adverbial sentence elements.
the old man who lived next door (with pre and post modification)
prepositional: these phrases have the structure of a preposition followed by a noun phrase. Prepositional phrases may form prepositional objects and adverbials.
Lorna gave the book to the old man. (SUBJECT + VERB + OBJECT + PREP OBJECT)
We saw them in the evening. (SUBJECT + VERB + OBJECT + ADVERBIAL)
adjectival: these phrases consist of an adjective and possible modifiers. As sentence elements adjectival phrases are predicatives.
She was very able to write a book. (with pre and post modification)
verbal: the verbal group consists of a main verb, possible auxiliary verbs and possible adverbial particles. They only occur the verbal structure of the sentence.
We will have washed up. (SUBJECT + VERBAL STRUCTURE)
We can identify four types of phrase.
noun: these phrases have a noun (or pronoun) head. Adjectives, determiners and relative clauses may modify the noun. Noun phrases may form the subject, object, predicative and adverbial sentence elements.
the old man who lived next door (with pre and post modification)
prepositional: these phrases have the structure of a preposition followed by a noun phrase. Prepositional phrases may form prepositional objects and adverbials.
Lorna gave the book to the old man. (SUBJECT + VERB + OBJECT + PREP OBJECT)
We saw them in the evening. (SUBJECT + VERB + OBJECT + ADVERBIAL)
adjectival: these phrases consist of an adjective and possible modifiers. As sentence elements adjectival phrases are predicatives.
She was very able to write a book. (with pre and post modification)
verbal: the verbal group consists of a main verb, possible auxiliary verbs and possible adverbial particles. They only occur the verbal structure of the sentence.
We will have washed up. (SUBJECT + VERBAL STRUCTURE)
predicatives (AKA subject and object complements)
Predicatives are nominals or adjectivals which tell us more about the subject or object by means of the verb.
In the following examples the predicative is telling us more about the subject. Subject predicatives are necessary sentence elements, i.e. if they are removed well-formed sentence does NOT remain.
The bag seems heavy. (adjectival)
That man is a thief. (nominal)
In the following examples the predicative is telling us more about the object. Object predicatives are non-obligatory sentence elements, i.e. if they are removed a well-formed sentence does remain.
We painted the house yellow. (adjectival)
They elected him president. (nominal)
In the following examples the predicative is telling us more about the subject. Subject predicatives are necessary sentence elements, i.e. if they are removed well-formed sentence does NOT remain.
The bag seems heavy. (adjectival)
That man is a thief. (nominal)
In the following examples the predicative is telling us more about the object. Object predicatives are non-obligatory sentence elements, i.e. if they are removed a well-formed sentence does remain.
We painted the house yellow. (adjectival)
They elected him president. (nominal)
adverbials
The subject, verb phrase, objects and predicatives form the core of a sentence. Any other element is adverbial; it concerns the circumstances of the sentence (when, where) or relates the sentence to something else. There are four adverbials in the sentence below.
Lorna arrived (1)here (2)yesterday (3)by car (4)despite the rain.
Adverbials may always be added to a sentence, but some main verbs require adverbials for a well formed-sentence, as in the following example:
Lorna put the book onto the table.
As sentence elements, there are four main types of adverbials:
adverbial adjunct – integral to sentence meaning and can be removed leaving a well-formed sentence.
Mr Bibby saw her yesterday.
obligatory adverbial – integral to sentence meaning but cannot be removed.
They treated her well.
adverbial conjunct - linking the sentence to another, and is removable.
You thought it was true; however, I thought otherwise.
adverbial disjunct - making a comment on the sentence
Stupidly, I answered the question.
Lorna arrived (1)here (2)yesterday (3)by car (4)despite the rain.
Adverbials may always be added to a sentence, but some main verbs require adverbials for a well formed-sentence, as in the following example:
Lorna put the book onto the table.
As sentence elements, there are four main types of adverbials:
adverbial adjunct – integral to sentence meaning and can be removed leaving a well-formed sentence.
Mr Bibby saw her yesterday.
obligatory adverbial – integral to sentence meaning but cannot be removed.
They treated her well.
adverbial conjunct - linking the sentence to another, and is removable.
You thought it was true; however, I thought otherwise.
adverbial disjunct - making a comment on the sentence
Stupidly, I answered the question.
verb group
Every verb group has a main verb, which may stand alone or may be preceded by auxiliary verbs which determine the mood, tense, voice or aspect of the main verb. The main verbs determines which other sentence elements are required or permitted in the predicate, (selection restriction).
Main verbs may be classified:
copular verb: this links a subject to predicative.
Miss Gold seems happy (SUBJECT + COPULA VERB + PREDICATIVE)
stative verbs: this establishes a state not an action.
We lay in our beds. (SUBJECT + STATIVE VERB + ADVERBIAL)
active or dynamic verb: the sentence describes an action (i.e. a change of state).
Mr Jenner left the room. (SUBJECT + ACTIVE VERB + DIRECT OBJECT)
Main verbs may be classified:
copular verb: this links a subject to predicative.
Miss Gold seems happy (SUBJECT + COPULA VERB + PREDICATIVE)
stative verbs: this establishes a state not an action.
We lay in our beds. (SUBJECT + STATIVE VERB + ADVERBIAL)
active or dynamic verb: the sentence describes an action (i.e. a change of state).
Mr Jenner left the room. (SUBJECT + ACTIVE VERB + DIRECT OBJECT)
objects of sentence element
An object is an entity involved in the subject's ‘performance’ of the verb. Look at this sentence below:
Mr Bibby kicked the ball. (object)
Mr Bibby is the subject (the doer or performer), kick is the verb (the action) and the ball is object involved in the action.
The main verb in the sentence determines whether there can or must be objects in the sentence, and, if so, how many and of what type. This is called the verb valency. If the verb is transitive, as is the verb to kick in the example above, the action is ‘carried over’ and an object is required. If the verb is intransitive there is no objects, as in the example below.
Intransitive verbs (no object)
The train arrived.
The verb to arrive is intransitive. It cannot take an object.
Transitive verbs (one object)
Mr Jenner breaks the windows.
The verb to enjoy is monotransitive, and requires one object. It would be ungrammatical to say Mr Jenner breaks, unless the verb to breaksconveys a different meaning.
Ambitransitive verbs (one or no object)
Miss Gold eats a banana every morning.
The verb to eat is ambitranistive and permits, but do not requires, an object. The sentence Miss Gold eats every morning is grammatically correct.
Ditransitive verbs (two objects)
John put the book on the shelve.
The verb to put requires two objects. Neither John put on the shelve, nor John put the book are grammatical sentences, at least in English.
Object (grammar)can be direct or indirect, the latest being introduced by a preposition. Modern English does not, however, distinguish direct and indirect object for pronouns.
direct object
We threw stones.
indirect object
We listened to the radio.
objective pronoun
They advised him to open a shop.
Objects are either nominals (nouns, pronouns, noun phrases or clauses) or either prepositional phrases which consist of a preposition followed by a nominal.
Mr Bibby kicked the ball. (object)
Mr Bibby is the subject (the doer or performer), kick is the verb (the action) and the ball is object involved in the action.
The main verb in the sentence determines whether there can or must be objects in the sentence, and, if so, how many and of what type. This is called the verb valency. If the verb is transitive, as is the verb to kick in the example above, the action is ‘carried over’ and an object is required. If the verb is intransitive there is no objects, as in the example below.
Intransitive verbs (no object)
The train arrived.
The verb to arrive is intransitive. It cannot take an object.
Transitive verbs (one object)
Mr Jenner breaks the windows.
The verb to enjoy is monotransitive, and requires one object. It would be ungrammatical to say Mr Jenner breaks, unless the verb to breaksconveys a different meaning.
Ambitransitive verbs (one or no object)
Miss Gold eats a banana every morning.
The verb to eat is ambitranistive and permits, but do not requires, an object. The sentence Miss Gold eats every morning is grammatically correct.
Ditransitive verbs (two objects)
John put the book on the shelve.
The verb to put requires two objects. Neither John put on the shelve, nor John put the book are grammatical sentences, at least in English.
Object (grammar)can be direct or indirect, the latest being introduced by a preposition. Modern English does not, however, distinguish direct and indirect object for pronouns.
direct object
We threw stones.
indirect object
We listened to the radio.
objective pronoun
They advised him to open a shop.
Objects are either nominals (nouns, pronouns, noun phrases or clauses) or either prepositional phrases which consist of a preposition followed by a nominal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)