Auxiliaries: Difference between revisions

From English Grammar
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 28: Line 28:
   
   
<div align="center">
<div align="center">
   [[Determiners| &larr; Determiners]]  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;  [[Conjunctions|Conjunctions &rarr;]]
   [[Determiners| &larr; Determiners]]  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;  [[Words| &uarr; Words]]      &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;  [[Conjunctions|Conjunctions &rarr;]]
</div>
</div>
</font>
</font>

Revision as of 11:22, 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.

  1. Pat will not walk home.
  2. 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.