Auxiliaries: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> | |||
<font size="3"> | |||
* Examples: may, can, will, shall, might, could | * Examples: may, can, will, shall, might, could | ||
* English auxiliaries differ from verbs in that they show the following properties, the NICE properties: | * English auxiliaries differ from verbs in that they show the following properties, the NICE properties: | ||
Revision as of 10:43, 19 April 2017
- Examples: may, can, will, shall, might, could
- English auxiliaries differ from verbs in that they show the following properties, the NICE properties:
- Negation:
A finite auxiliary precedes the negation particle not to negate a sentence.
- Pat will not walk home.
- Pat walked not home.
- Inversion:
A finite auxiliary stands at the beginning of a sentence in yes/no-questions. Will Pat walk home? Walked Pat home? Contraction: There is an idiosyncratic contraction form of the auxiliary and the negation particle. won't, can't Ellipsis: An auxiliary can occur in VP ellipsis, i.e. at the end of a sentence when a VP is missing. Pat should walk home and Mary might, too.
- Pat walked home and Mary, too.
General properties of the modal auxiliaries: no inflection for 3rd singular only a finite form Problematic cases: The verbs be and have have the properties of both verbs and auxiliaries. The support verb do is similar to be and have, but only has a finite form. Infinitival to shows many properties of auxiliaries, and is considered an auxiliary in many theories of grammar.
Previous:Determiners Next:Conjunctions