Auxiliaries: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
'''E'''llipsis: | '''E'''llipsis: | ||
An auxiliary can occur in VP ellipsis, i.e. at the end of a sentence when a VP is missing. | 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 should walk home and Mary might, too. | ||
# *Pat walked home and Mary, too. | # *Pat walked home and Mary walked, too. | ||
General properties of the modal auxiliaries: | General properties of the modal auxiliaries: | ||
no inflection for 3rd singular | no inflection for 3rd singular | ||
Revision as of 12:19, 21 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 walked, 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.